Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2021

The AIH Transcript For November 19, 2021

[hosts]Carol Off, Chris Howden[/hosts]

CAROL OFF: Hello, I'm Carol Off.

CHRIS HOWDEN: Good evening, I'm Chris Howden. This is As It Happens.

[music: theme]

Prologue

CH: Tonight:

CO: Feed frenzy. British Columbia's agriculture minister tells us help is on the way for farmers struggling to find food and water for their animals after the province's historic floods.

CH: Not guilty. A jury acquits the teenager who shot and killed two men during protests in Kenosha, Wisconsin last year -- a verdict our guest calls troubling but not unexpected.

CO: No longer waiting on pins and needles. Health Canada approves the COVID vaccine for children aged five to 11 — and an infectious diseases specialist in Regina says that for parents like him, it's a real injection of optimism.

CH: Head of the family. A New Brunswick woman doesn't know why someone stole a key part from a distant relative's monument decades ago -- but now that the head is back, hers feels clearer.

CO: Attracted to the flash. The late Mick Rock redefined rock music photography -- so much so that when you picture the 70s, you may be picturing one of his pictures.

CH: And... bench press. A British man has a surprise hit with calendar featuring monthly pictures of benches around his English town -- and he'll explain why it'll have you on the edge of 12 different seats.

CH: As It Happens, the Friday edition. Radio that figures if he has truly captured the beauty of benches, then he's sitting pretty.

[music: theme]

Part 1: B.C. Agriculture Minister, Pfizer Kids Vaccine Approval, Benches Calendar

B.C. Agriculture Minister

Guest: Lana Popham

CH: Farmers in B.C.'s Fraser Valley who managed to save their animals from the flood are now struggling to keep them alive. The challenge is getting food and fresh water to the animals after fields and barns were swamped with water. And farmers are also being forced to defy the evacuation order for parts of Abbotsford. When they do leave to get supplies, they're sometimes being stopped from getting back to their animals. Lana Popham is B.C.'s agriculture minister. And we reached her in Victoria.

CO: Minister, Popham, what are you doing right now to get food and water to farmers for their animals in Abbotsford and the rest of the Fraser Valley?

LANA POPHAM: So it's all hands on deck. In that way, we are securing and have secured airdrops of food and water to farmers that have been cut off, but it's also about securing food that can be eventually trucked in. We have definitely reached out to all the jurisdictions that surround us, and the generosity of Canadians and folks across the border is amazing, so we will be able to supply food to the farmers. We just have to secure our roads, and we can get it to them.

CO: Wow, securing the roads. That's… [chuckle] it's a big job, too. So when can farmers expect this assistance to arrive?

LP: Well, I have chatted with the mayor in Abbotsford this morning, and I know that there is safety checks being done currently on some of the roads that will help some of these farmers that are... are cut off get online, hopefully as soon as today.

CO: Wow! OK, now you have heard, I'm sure, many of these farmers saying they... farmers would die for their animals, and they're trying to protect them.

LP: Yeah.

CO: At the same time, there are evacuation orders in many of these places for their own safety. What are you advising the farmers to do?

LP: I don't think that any of us can really understand the pain that these farmers are feeling right now as they're being kept away from their animals. We've got animals that haven't had food and water for days. There's farmers that know they need to get back in just even to deal with euthanization issues. And so it's a desperate situation, and it's painful, but there are really dangerous situations right now with the roadways. And so, we are not encouraging farmers to cross into those dangerous areas, although we completely understand why they're doing it.

CO: But you've heard, I'm sure, from the farmers in Abbotsford who are defying those evacuation orders in order to take care of their animals? And they say they're very angry that they're being stopped by police from getting back to their farms. And so is that really the best policy that... that authorities should be doing this when these farmers are going to go through any method in order to get to those animals?

LP: Well, I think that, you know, it's understandable that the farmers want to get past those lines, but the lines are there for safety reasons. And so I think in any disastrous situation, we... we saw this as well in the fire season that we had. We... we want to make sure we're protecting the lives of folks. But farmers are trying to protect their animals. So it's a very difficult mix. And hopefully, that will start to be alleviated today. But really, the safety issues are extreme right now. We have culverts. I think there's... there's thousands of culverts right now that we don't know if they're going to be able to withstand the weight of anything. And so, we don't want lives lost. But at the same time, we understand the plight of the farmers. And so it's a difficult situation.

CO: Right. But I'm just wondering how you're balancing that? Because as one farmer who was stopped by RCMP said that it's ridiculous. It's like holding a doctor back from saving lives. What do you say to him?

LP: Well, I think that there are alternative routes that we're trying to establish for farmers. So as I said, there's... there's waterways with boats that are shuttling people back and forth. And I know that there have been many instances where the RCMP have let farmers through. And so, we're... we're trying our best in a really difficult situation.

CO: Of course. Now, you also have food shortages, shelves that are empty for people who... who want food, and you have animals that need to be supplied. So how are you balancing that? What are the priorities?

LP: So there's obviously two different lines of priorities. One thing is that our food supply is secure in B.C. we're just trying to figure out how to distribute it differently, and that's happening today. So there's some of our supply chain that looked like it was having difficulties reaching certain areas. Those are coming back online. So our food supply is secure. Our priority is to get folks food where they need them, especially in the Fraser Valley. But the Ministry of Agriculture is very focussed on trying to get water and feed to... to the livestock, and so we're doing that. We had helicopters dropping off water and food yesterday, and that'll continue through today.

CO: What's the problem with the water? Can you tell us just a bit about that?

LP: OK, so the water lines have been shut off in many local government areas. And so that normal water lines that get water to barns were disconnected. The water that's surrounding those farms is contaminated now -- the floodwaters. I did hear yesterday that some livestock was drinking that water and then perished not very long after. So there's contamination that we're dealing with. So we need fresh, clean water to those farms that are cut off. We saw many of them come back online with the local water system yesterday, and that will continue through today. But we have been working with the dairy association, the poultry association and asked them to prioritize which farms need water first. And that's... that's the list we're working with.

CO: And just finally, I know you're taking this day-to-day, but there is a forecast of a lot more rain coming next week. And so, what are you doing to brace yourself and to help people prepare for that?

LP: Yeah, we're watching that weather forecast very, very carefully. One good thing is that some of the water is being moved out of the Fraser Valley, and will be continued to be moved over the weekend. And so, as we look to maybe more heavier rain, we're hoping that we can get back to just normal quantities that is standing in... in those areas. But we're prepared, and we're watching carefully.

CO: Minister, Popham, I know you've got lots to do, and I appreciate having some of your time. Thank you.

LP: Absolutely. Thanks so much.

CH: Lana Popham is British Columbia's agriculture minister. We reached her in Victoria. For more on that story, you can go to our website: www.cbc.ca/aih. And later in the program, we'll have the story of Barkat Khan, who is wondering where he and his family will go after his home was flooded in Merritt, B.C?

[Music: Sombre instrumental]

Pfizer Kids Vaccine Approval

Guest: Dr. Alex Wong

CH: In late October, the United States approved the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine for children aged five to 11. And ever since, pediatricians and parents have been eagerly waiting for Canada to follow suit. Now, three weeks later, Health Canada has given the go-ahead for kids to get the shot. Dr. Alex Wong won't be hesitating to line up to get his five-year-old the vaccine. Dr. Wong is an infectious diseases physician with the Saskatchewan Health Authority. We reached him in Regina.

CO: Dr. Wong, when should we expect to see five-year-olds getting the vaccine in Saskatchewan?

DR. ALEX WONG: I think it's probably going to happen really quickly, Carol. We'd anticipate that the moment doses are available, I think here in the province, that we're going to start to see jabs go into arms; hopefully, you know, as early as next week.

CO: And when will you have your own five-year-old in line?

DAW: Honestly, I'm an early adopter. As most people probably know, I'm super excited to be able to get, you know, our five-year-old vaccinated. And so, he's going to be in line, I think, when it becomes available with, you know, all the other parents who are super enthusiastic. We are, however, of course, aware at a public health level that there's not a whole lot of data at this point long-term and from a safety perspective. We anticipate 50 to 60 per cent of parents are pretty much going to be wanting to, you know, break the doors down to get access to this. But a lot of parents and kids still have lots of questions about what this is all going to look like? And I think it's important that, you know, we continue to educate, that we continue to update the data and the evidence on a week-by-week basis and that we're open-minded and not mandating vaccine, I think, at this point in time, for ages five to 11. Again, there's still a lot of unknowns, and we're going to follow the safety data.

CO: I think people are listening to you, say the word a lot of unknowns and having a moment here. So, can you tell us what you mean by that?

DAW: You know, we anticipate that the data is going to suggest that this is going to be a really safe and effective vaccine for ages five to 11. The clinical trials were done with just 2,000-3,000 kids, and so there are still questions around, you know, what is the incidence rate of heart inflammation or myocarditis going to look like, for example? Based on everything that we have and everything that we know, we would anticipate that that incidence rate is going to be exceedingly low. But the point is, is that, you know, we don't have real-world experience in this space. I mean, there's literally millions of doses going into arms right now in the U.S., So we're going to see, you know, a lot more data very soon, especially with second doses, because the U.S. has recommended a three-week interval as opposed to NACI, who recommended an eight-week interval, an extended dose interval. For me personally, as an ID physician, you know, I'm confident, and I'm... and I'm excited, and I'm ready to get to our five-year-old vaccinated as quickly as possible.

CO: You mentioned myocarditis. That's an inflammation of the heart muscle. We've been hearing about that since the vaccine began. Very rare side effect, but it exists. It's also considered that it might be less of a risk if the... the double doses are further apart. Is that what you're hearing?

DAW: Yes, so... and so, there's various pieces here to suggest that the myocarditis risk is going to be exceedingly low. Because again, myocarditis is typically a post-pubertal phenomena, not a pre-pubertal phenomena. But at the same time, you know, the dose is less. It's a 10 microgram dose as opposed to the full sort of 30 microgram adult dose. And lastly, yes, there is emerging data, you know, from multiple jurisdictions, including Canada, as well as the United Kingdom, suggesting that an extended dose interval of eight or 12 weeks does seem to lead to a lower or decreased signal of heart inflammation events. And at the same time, we know how kids' immune systems work. That extended dose, that prime-boost eight to 12 weeks, is probably the optimal time frame to get the longest-lasting, most robust immune response in kids.

CO: Right. And I know you spoke to hundreds of 12 to 14-year-olds about the vaccine, and you had a virtual forum, reassuring them, answering their questions. But now you've got kids five to 11. What... What were you... what could you tell them? What will you tell them about the vaccine?

DAW: You know, we want to talk about how we believe the vaccine is going to be safe and efficacious. And how, you know, it's important to get the vaccine to protect themselves and their own health in terms of, you know, getting... preventing COVID and not getting sort of any long-term complications of COVID and preventing the spread of COVID to other individuals, including higher risk persons like their grandparents, for example, or other friends and family who might be immunocompromised. At the same time, we also acknowledge that, you know, we need to continue to follow the data closely. And, you know, that we don't believe that kids should be, you know, sort of mandated to receive vaccine or should be limited in terms of their ability to go to school or attend activities based on their vaccine status.

CO: OK, but you mentioned at the beginning that you fear... figure about 50 to 60 per cent of parents will be banging down the door to get the vaccine. That's a pretty... if it's 40 to 50 who are not doing that, that's a pretty high rate of hesitancy. And so you said it won't... shouldn't be mandated, shouldn't be segregation. How effective is this going to be in the school system if there is that low rate of vaccinations?

DAW: There's probably going to be a decent majority. Like again, whether that's 50 or 60 per cent of parents who, as you say, are super enthusiastic like myself. And then there's probably going to be about, you know, 20 to 25 per cent of parents who are kind of waiting to see, you know, what the safety data is going to look like. They're waiting for some more information. And then there's going to be probably, again, about 10 to 15 per cent of parents who are just not going to be super keen at this time. You know, the recommendations, I think from NACI, and the guidance around what this all looks like is probably going to evolve, you know, and that might ultimately change some dynamics in terms of what things look like in the future around sort of mandates and other such things.

CO: We've seen elsewhere where the vaccination rate is that low that the disease continues to spread, and it, in fact, starts spreading back to people who have actually been vaccinated. So what level of vaccination, what... what percentage do we need to see for this vaccine to actually be effective among that age group?

DAW: It's impossible to know what the exact number is going to be. I mean, even one dose of vaccine, you know, in a child is going to elicit a very robust protective immune response quite quickly. There is no sort of definitive sort of percentage around what the number looks like. Obviously, at a societal level, we would want that number to be as high as it possibly could be, like 90 per cent-plus. That is going to make a huge difference at the end of the day, both from an individual perspective in terms of preventing cases of COVID in kids and potential sort of short-term, long-term complications of COVID. But it is going to, you know, significantly limit this group of children as... as a potential vector of transmission because they are then going to be immune. And that is going to play a huge role in cutting down overall transmission in our community, as well as transmission to, again, older individuals, persons with medical conditions and immunocompromised. And that's going to again help us get eventually to that new normal. You know, where we're not going to necessarily be worrying constantly about surges of COVID-19, you know, devastating our health care systems.

CO: We will leave it there. Dr. Wong, thank you.

DAW: Thank you, Carol. Always a pleasure.

CH: Dr. Alex Wong is an infectious diseases physician with the Saskatchewan Health Authority. We reached him in Regina. And you can find more on this story on our webpage at: www.cbc.ca/aih. As I mentioned, in the U.S., the FDA's vaccine advisory committee approved the Pfizer shot for kids aged five to 11 in October. Dr. Paul Offit is a member of that committee. And, as you can hear him tell Piya Chattopadhyay on The Sunday Magazine this weekend, it was not an easy choice.

SOUNDCLIP

DR. PAUL OFFIT: Children can suffer, can be hospitalized and can die from this virus. So how do you know whether the vaccine works and whether it's safe? And this is a little nerve-wracking, I think, for our committee, and it's always an issue of how much do you know? We... we... a study was done of 2,400 children; 1,600 got vaccine, 800 got placebo. There were 16 cases of disease in the placebo group and three in the... in the vaccine group, so it means it was 91 per cent effective. But is that enough? I mean, you know, we were making a decision for 28 million children between five to 11 years of age based on a study of basically 2,400 children. Is that enough? Because I got a lot of pretty pointed emails, this understates that I honestly think I got over 3,000 emails from parents while we were making this decision urging me to do the right thing, which basically was to vote no on this because they thought it was going to be dangerous. And... and when do you know enough? And so they didn't want a study of 2,400 children. They wanted to study much bigger than that. Why didn't you do the study like Pfizer did of adults of 40,000 adults or Maddern of 30,000 adults? Why just 2,400 children? So you could do 24,000 children. In that case, there wouldn't be 16 cases of... of disease, COVID in the placebo group, there would have been 160. I mean, what price knowledge? What human price do you want to pay for knowledge?

PIYA CHATTOPADHYAY: Do you have an answer to that?

DPO: No, I think it's... it's… it's a fuzzy line.

CH: Dr. Paul Offit is a guest on The Sunday Magazine this weekend. And you can hear that at 9:00 a.m. on Sunday, 9:30 in Newfoundland.

[Music: bright instrumental]

Benches Calendar

Guest: Kevin Beresford

CH: January: bench. February: bench. March: bench. April: picnic bench. And so on. Kevin Beresford's wall calendar does what it says on the tin. It's called Benches of Redditch (And Surrounding Areas). It's not Mr . Beresford's first entry into the calendar game. We last spoke to him when he was promoting a calendar called Fast Disappearing Red Telephone Boxes of Wales. Shockingly, that edition didn't sell very well. But his benches calendar is flying off the shelves, and he is struggling to meet demand. We reached Kevin Beresford in Redditch, England.

CO: Kevin, how does it feel to see people rushing to snap up your latest calendar, Benches of Redditch (And Surrounding Areas)?

KEVIN BERESFORD: It's a strange one, I must admit. I like to take slices of the life that nobody else would bother with. And I think artists have always focussed on the mundane. Andy Warhol would just do a painting of a can of soup. Even Van Gogh would have a pipe on a chair. So I'm drawn. [chuckle] I'm drawn to the ordinary.

CO: This is benches. I mean, so what are we talking about? People sitting on benches? Or just describe what you've featured in this calendar of benches of Redditch?

KB: I've done me 12 favourite benches of my home town. And benches… aren't they brilliant? I mean, benches are brilliant! We all... we all sit on them, rest our tired feet. I've even slept with a few benches in my time! Benches, I think, benches are brilliant. And we need to appreciate the bench more. Oh sure, you must have benches in Canada. There must have been benches in Canada with all the wood that you've got available. [CO chuckles]

CO: It's true! But you, now, you're just not just having beautiful locations for your benches. You've got some pretty grotty ones too. You got one that's in front of an old chip shop on Evesham Road, [KB chuckles], and you've got some that are not so pretty. So how did... why... how did they get included?

KB: Because my covenant is egalitarian. But we level up; we level down. I don't just want to take picturesque... I like gritty. I like gritty. And I mentioned before. I like to take slices of British life that nobody else would even bother to put on a calendar. And some of those benches are on kind of space that would never, never, ever get put on a calendar, and it's kind of nice!

CO: It's... you're pointing out that... that all these places are equally boring?

KB: No, not boring! Dull, perhaps, but never boring! [CO chuckles] There's a distinction between dull and boring. [chuckles]

CO: OK!

KB: I'm a member of the "Dull Men's Club".

CO: But you're not boring.

KB: No, no! Actually, dull is the new black. [both laugh]

CO: We have spoken before about your calendars. We spoke with you when you did Fast Disappearing Red Telephone Boxes of Wales. You've done The Roundabouts of Redditch. We actually spoke with you when you were... became the chairman of the UK Roundabout Appreciation Society. We spoke with you then.

KB: President!

CO: [chuckling] Sorry! Oops! President of the UK --

KB: Also known as the "Lord of the Rings". That's my official title.

CO: [laughs] OK, so what is it... OK, so these are not boring places, but what is it about dull things that attracts you?

KB: I mentioned earlier, I'm a member of the Dull Men's Club, and we just like to celebrate the ordinary. Even Rod Stewart, who's a rock star, has a train set in his loft. Did you know that?

CO: Yes, actually. [chuckles]

KB: [heartily laughing] You should join our society. [CO chuckles] Oh, yeah, look, we don't like boring. It's our hobbies that are dull. We're celebrating dullness, yes?

CO: Just going back to your calendar, Kevin, do you have a favourite month? What's your favourite bench?

KB: Yeah. Well, just down the road here in Sanborn, and it's... it's in a beautiful village green. And we don't get that many village greens around in England like we used to. And it's... it's a circular bench. It's beautiful. It has a tree in the middle of the circular bench. And I was sitting there having an interview with national... national TV, and a lady came up from London to interview me. And she said this is such a beautiful antidote just to sit here on this bench. And I believe it, yeah? The're meditation devices, aren't they? We can reflect on... on life here when we sit on those benches.

CO: It actually is a very, very beautiful bench. What month is that -- that round bench?

KB: I feel it's in May. But you were referring to one grotty. I don't think it's was very good to use the word grotty. I like to use the word gritty.

CO: All right.

KB: And yeah, it's on a council estate in Redditch. And on the ends of each side of it, there's a pair of scissors. And when I tried to do a bit of research, I looked around, and there was a barbershop just by. And I went in there, and I said, how come this bench is here? And they said the local guy had a barbershop there for 50 years, and he had a heart attack. And so all the punters all chipped together to build that bench. Now, I love... I mean, benches are brilliant! You get a lot of memorial benches, do you not?

CO: We do?

KB: In Canada. Yeah, you've got like war memorials on a bench, I think in November, obviously. Am I convincing you here? Can you appreciate the bench?

CO: You are! What's convincing me is that you are having to print 100 more of these calendars every day because of the demand. And so --

KB: Every day, yeah.

CO: And they're a big successes. You can add this to your other success, Carparks in Britain, The Wonderful World of Jack Grealish's Calves. What... have you had any --

KB: Jack Grealish's Calves! You know Jack Grealish?!

CO: Well, no. [chuckling] I know you have a calendar of The Wonderful World of Jack Grealish's Calves!

KB: He's got the Calves of a Greek god! [both laugh] They're wonderful calves because he... he always plays in these rolled-down socks with these really dinky pads.

CO: Have you had any failures? Any flops in your calendars?

KB: Yeah, I did a roadkill calendar. I did roadkill. [chuckling] I thought it was a good idea at the time. Because, as I say, I'm walking then trying to take slices of life that nobody else would bother with. And I did roadkill, and never quite… it never. [chuckle] I've never sold one.

CO: Maybe it wasn't dull enough?

KB: But I did do a roadkill... well, it was a roadkill recipe book that drew my attention. [CO chuckles] It was a recipe book of roadkill. And I thought maybe if I did a calendar of roadkill, that might… it never came up.

CO: Kevin is wonderful once again to speak to the man who celebrates himself as the dullest man in all of Britain. So, good to have you on the show again.

KB: My pleasure!

CO: Take care.

KB: Thank you.

CH: Kevin Beresford is the creator of the 2022 calendar Benches of Redditch (And Surrounding Areas).

[Music: Slow jazz]

Part 2: Rittenhouse Verdict, New Brunswick Graveyard Statue

Rittenhouse Verdict

Guest: Ion Meyn

CH: A jury in Wisconsin has found Kyle Rittenhouse not guilty on all charges. The 18-year-old was tried in the shooting deaths of two men and the wounding of another last August in the aftermath of demonstrations in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Those protests erupted after a police officer shot and seriously injured a Black man named Jacob Blake. Mr. Rittenhouse, who is white, and other armed men, say they went to the protest in the city to protect property. Mr. Rittenhouse's lawyer argued that he acted in self-defence. The prosecution argued he acted recklessly and selfishly, provoking the initial confrontation. Ion Meyn is an assistant professor at the University of Wisconsin Law School. We reached him in Madison.

CO: Mr. Meyn, what do you make of this verdict?

ION MEYN: I am troubled, but this is not an unexpected result.

CO: Why are you troubled?

IM: Because this is a cultural moment. The jury is a reflection of where the nation is at right now. The law permits a jury to determine whether or not it was reasonable for a defendant to use self-defence in a way that put an unarmed person in deadly harm or actually led to someone's death? And in the first incident, the person had a plastic bag. So we're actually at a national discussion point where if we are describing an encounter between someone with an AR 15 and someone holding a plastic bag, we're actually seriously considering that the person with a plastic bag is posing the deadly threat.

CO: That was entered as a possible reason why he felt he had to defend himself?

IM: It was. I mean, in the sense that this person, Mr. Rosenbaum, in the first incident, chased Mr. Rittenhouse and threw a bag that arched through the air and landed with a very quiet kind of thud. And obviously, Mr. Rosenbaum continued to aggress. But when we say continue to aggress, what do we mean by that? And that's really what we're contending with in the United States.

CO: Just for people, we need to clarify this. When you mentioned Mr. Rosenbaum, Joseph Rosenbaum, he was the first man who was shot and killed by Kyle Rittenhouse on that night.

IM: Correct. And when asked... when the defence expert that didn't get to testify, but was asked during pre-trial proceedings by the prosecutor if Mr. Rittenhouse had not been armed and had then used deadly force against Mr. Rosenbaum, would that have been reasonable? And the expert said no. And I want everyone one to think about that. That in the United States, if you have a gun, you have more discretion to use deadly force against others than if you're unarmed. And that's what we are discussing in the United States right now. And apparently, this decision in the Rittenhouse trial validates that view that someone with a gun has more discretion to use deadly force against another than if that person was unarmed.

CO: The judge would not allow those who had been shot to be called victims. And also, the prosecution had to prove that Mr. Rittenhouse wasn't acting in self-defence rather than the other way around. Why is that?

IM: Wisconsin law, you know? And so when you are able in Wisconsin, in a criminal matter where self-defence is at issue, if you're able to make a good cause kind of argument, a good faith argument that there is self-defence, then the burden shifts to the prosecution to prove that it was, in fact, unreasonable beyond a reasonable doubt. So there's a burden-shifting aspect that does tend to protect the criminal defendant in the state of Wisconsin.

CO: And this is... these cases of people defending themselves are being defended to say that they use deadly force, shot somebody because they feared that their gun would be taken and used against them, there are several cases in your country right now of that nature. And so, how important was that? How key was that in this... in this acquittal?

IM: It's absolutely key. I think we are redefining or defining what the word self-defence means in the United States if somebody has a gun. If you are pointing your weapon at someone because they were coming toward you, is that self-defence, or is that actually an act of aggression? How do you feel, for example, if someone points an AR 15 at you? Are you reading that as they are defending themselves, or that you are being aggressed on? And so I think we have a real… we're at a crossroads in terms of what we mean by self-defence. And with the Rittenhouse trial, we're actually arguably expanding the scope of what self-defence means to include? For example, pointing a rifle at someone and expecting that that person will submit to your authority and calling that self-defence.

CO: You said that you weren't surprised by this verdict, given what the jury had to deal with, given the evidence was presented and the limitations that the judge put on some of the evidence and testimonies, was there another outcome? Is it... do you fault the jury with this? Or do you feel that... there was... there was really... this was inevitable that he would be acquitted on all these charges?

IM: I don't think it was inevitable. I think that what was clear here is that the evidence was developed for the prosecution in a way that would permit the jury to reasonably come to the conclusion that this was not self-defence. And the reason for that is because of the circumstances, which was this was an active kind of protest situation. There was so much video of these interactions, which is rare. Usually, if someone dies or is killed in an encounter like this, the only testimony that we have is the person who is saying that they exerted the right to self-defence. But here, we had two separate sources. We had Mr. Rittenhouse, and then we had the video. And video as to every single incident that was at issue. So certainly, the prosecution had enough evidence here, depending on one's view of what is a valid self-defence kind of position? And what we're seeing in the United States is that the video that you saw, that is self-defence in the United States.

CO: And just finally, and briefly, just what effect might this verdict have on other cases of those arguing self-defence in trials in the United States right now? I'm thinking of Ahmaud Arbery in that. And where they... the accused is also using a very similar defence. What effect is that going to have?

IM: Yeah, I mean, I think it validates the defence's position and validates the reasonableness of the actions of gun owners to interpret these situations as threats on their life. And therefore, permitting them to use deadly force. This is much more than the legal precedent. This is a societal precedent in the fact that these laws permit juries to determine what is reasonable. It is a reflection as to where we are. It is not necessarily a precedent. It maybe is more accurately a reflection of the identity of the United States right now.

CO: Mr. Meyn, we'll leave it there. And I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

IM: Thank you.

CH: That was University of Wisconsin Law School assistant professor Ion Meyn, in Madison, Wisconsin. This afternoon, a jury found Kyle Rittenhouse not guilty of all the charges against him. In a statement, the lead prosecutor said, "While we are disappointed with the verdict, it must be respected."

[Music: The mini update theme]

FOA: Scotland Menstrual Products

CH: It's the beginning of a brand-new period. After speaking with a high school student who had concerns about access to menstrual products, the mayor of Ann Arbour, Michigan, decided he wanted to make a change to municipal rules. Now, a new ordinance will require public washrooms to provide free pads and tampons. It will come into effect in January. And it follows the passage of a bill a year ago that made Scotland the first country to provide universal access to free menstrual products. Scottish member of parliament, Monica Lennon, was behind the legislation. In 2020, after it had passed an initial vote, we spoke with Ms. Lennon.

SOUNDCLIP

ML: It's an issue in Scotland because we know that period poverty exists. Too many women in ghettos are not able to afford period products when they need them. And many have used alternatives, which are not safe or hygienic. So in the last couple of years, in Scotland, we've rolled out a number of initiatives. So we now have free period products in every school, college and university. So this bill would make sure that that becomes the law. Because right now, it's a policy, so we want that to continue. But beyond that, we want to make sure for people who are not in school, who are not in education that they access free period products also.

CO: I know there was opposition to this proposal in Scotland. People who said it would be open to abuse if you're giving away free period products. And they said that people would take large quantities and try and resell them. So was there a concern that there would be some sort of I don’t know a black market for cross-border tampons?

ML: Yeah, it was one of the initial concerns raised by the Scottish Government. And I suppose ministers have to be fiscally-responsible and think about different scenarios and think about risk. But, in the end, that concern has been sort of pushed aside. And actually, it was widely ridiculed. There was a concern that people might come over the border from England and take free products from Scotland and sell them at a discounted rate. Sort of like you know an underground market for tampons and pads. But actually, the UK government — even though Prime Minister Boris Johnson is not regarded as a feminist icon — but in England, they also now have free period products in schools and colleges. And there's a task force to look at period poverty. So actually, across the UK, and Scotland, England and Wales, we're seeing a real change, a real appetite for this. It's really an issue of human dignity.

CH: From our archives, that was Labour Party member of Scottish parliament Monica Lennon, speaking with Carol in February of last year.

[Music: Jazz]

New Brunswick Graveyard Statue

Guest: Kathleen Wallace

CH: In the year 1900, a young woman named Jenny Steeves died of tuberculosis. She was just 15 years old. And decades later, her heartbroken mother erected a marble statue by her grave in the Gray's Island Cemetery near Hillsborough, New Brunswick. Over time, local legends to emerge about the beautiful but eerie statue of a teenaged girl. Some said she had rubies for eyes that followed you through the fog. Others said she would turn to look at you if you circled her grave three times. But at some point in the 1990's, someone made off with the statue's head. Rewards were offered, the RCMP investigated, but the statue stayed headless. Until this week. Kathleen Wallace and her sister are the closest living relatives of Jenny Steeves. We reached Ms. Wallace in Hillsborough, New Brunswick.

CO: Kathleen, what news did you get this week about this missing head?

KATHLEEN WALLACE: We learned that it had been returned to the graveyard, and it was on the stand beside the monument.

CO: How did you react when you heard that?

KW: Well, we were quite surprised because we really never expected we would see it again.

CO: Wow! So you have it now?

KW: Yes, I do.

CO: Well, can you describe it for us?

KW: Well, it's heavy. It weighs a lot. I have a hard time to lift it. The young fellow that's looking after the graveyard, he brought it over to us in one of those cloth grocery bags. It looks like someone took a mallet, a big, heavy mallet, and just beat it until the head came off. And there is some damage to the face.

CO: What kind of damage? What... can you describe that for us?

KW: The nose and the lips would have to be rebuilt. The eyes are OK. And one side of the face, some of the... the facial features would have to be, you know, rebuilt.

CO: And I understand there's a bit of paint on it?

KW: Yes, I think at one time it had been spray painted. When we did our initial investigation over 20 years ago, we had heard that it was in a home in Riverview. And, you know, some young kids had it. But someone went to see about it, but they weren't allowed to search the home. And so anyway, we just never thought anything more about it. We felt bad, but we realized there wasn't anything we could do. So we did offer a reward and had it put in the local newspaper. And we never heard anything from that offer. So we just kind of thought, well, probably that was the end of it.

CO: Until now.

KW: Until now.

CO: So who do you think, and why do you think, they brought it back?

KW: Well, I don't know whether it was a guilty conscience or what? But whoever brought it back knew where it belonged.

CO: We've had a story in the past about the kids who vandalized a statue. And later on, they grew up, and they just felt silly. And as grow-ups, they had to do reparation somehow. Is that a possibility?

KW: Oh, that is a distinct possibility for sure. Years ago, the graveyard... it's kind of in a secluded area. So it used to be a place where people went to drink and sell drugs and that type of thing.

CO: So maybe somebody finally grew up and realized that this is something that they had to bring back?

KW: Well, maybe that's it. I don't know. I'm glad. And we do have a relative on my mother's side of the family, their business is monuments and tombstones. So this young fellow has volunteered to fix it up for us as best as he can.

CO: This statue was a commemoration of your relative, your ancestor, Jenny Steeves. Can you just tell us a bit about her? She was only 15 years old, right, when she died of tuberculosis. What... what... what do you know about her?

KW: Well, we don't know much about her, except she spent her early childhood in the village. And when she got a little older, they had relatives in England, so they decided they would send her to school over there. And she was only over there, maybe a year or so, and she took sick. And the doctor over there advised them to send her home. So she came home, and she only lived another year or so before she passed away. So she passed away at 15 years old.

CO: And now this cemetery, the Gray's Island Cemetery, a lot of ghost stories about that statue, right? Their superstitions about it. That it had red ruby eyes and things of that nature, do you believe any of those stories?

KW: Oh no! No, we don't believe them at all. That was just, you know, folklore and that type of thing.

CO: When do you think you might have this statue whole again?

KW: Well, Mark Nelson, the fellow that's doing it, he plans to start to work on it in the spring. So it would be really nice to see the before and after.

CO: Well, you have the before picture. And so after, you finally maybe see this marble statue intact again?

KW: Yes, and we do have pictures of it before it was vandalized. But even when we were little girls, the vandalism had begun then because the fingers on it had been shot off. And then the hand was taken... one hand was taken off. My sister suggested that maybe when we do get it fixed up, we put, you know, how in some places they have a little plaque that tell the story? That maybe if we put some... like some little plaques up that told the story of the monument, that would maybe curb the vandalism a little bit.

CO: It's hard to say, Kathleen, but at least being able to have this tribute to your relative would be really nice to have it whole again, hey?

KW: Oh yes, it would.

CO: I appreciate you telling us the story. Thank you.

KW: Oh, you're welcome. I used to listen to your show a lot on the radio, and I really enjoyed it. We are great fans of CBC.

CO: Can I ask, when did you stop listening to it?

KW: [laughing] Well, I used to listen to it when I was teaching after school; I would listen while I did my schoolwork. I remember listening to As It Happens a lot.

CO: All right. Well, that's good. You can start listening again. All right?

KW: [laughing] Yes. That's what I'll have to do, isn't it?

CO: [laughing] Yes. Kathleen, thank you.

KW: Oh, well, thank you for taking your time to call, Carol.

CO: Bye.

KW: Bye-bye.

CH: We reached Kathleen Wallace in Hillsborough, New Brunswick.

[Music: The mini update theme]

Mick Rock Obit

[Music: Classic rock]

CH: Picture Iggy Pop in the '70s: vaguely feral-looking, invariably shirtless. Picture Lou Reed in the same era: androgynous, kind of dangerous. Now picture David Bowie: a sexy alien whose face was all angles, and was even more androgynous. And now consider the very real possibility that what you're picturing in all three cases is a picture taken by Mick Rock. Mick Rock -- the photographer known as "the man who shot the '70s", whose name really was Mick Rock -- died yesterday. He was 72. As he told it, the first time he found the magic in a camera, he was transfixed by the flash, and by what he saw through the lens. Mostly because he was high on acid. But when he came down, he still wanted to take pictures. He was able to make a little money by interviewing musicians and photographing them at the same time -- which is how he met David Bowie. They became friends, and Mr. Rock became Bowie's official photographer. Which is how he met Iggy Pop and Lou Reed, and took their photos -- as well as unforgettable photos of Dolly Parton, Bob Marley, Debbie Harry, Bryan Ferry, Carly Simon… all the coolest people. Who were cool partly because Mick Rock had taken their pictures.

[Music: Disco?]

Part 3: Merritt B.C. Home Lost, Climate Emergency Language Study

Merritt B.C. Home Lost

Guest: Barkat Khan

CH: Like so many others in southern British Columbia, Barkat Khan and his family don't know when they'll be going home. Mr. Khan lives in Merritt, a city about 270 kilometres from Vancouver. As you probably know, Merritt has been under an evacuation order since Monday, when record-breaking rain led to mudslides and widespread flooding, which includes the river near Mr. Khan's house. We reached Barkat Khan in Kamloops.

CO: Barkat, first of all, how are you and how's your family holding up?

BARKAT KHAN: Ah, thank God, I'm fine, and my family is fine. We are in Kamloops now. And we are in a hotel. We are OK so far.

CO: And... but you weren't OK earlier this week when you and your family had to get out. At what point did you realize that you were going to have to leave your home of Merritt?

BK: Yeah, it was around 2:30 in the morning, 2:20, 2:30 in the morning. We had a knock at the door. So I went to the door, and there was a couple of firefighter guys. They were at the door. Very nice guys. They told me that you have to evacuate right away. I didn't know what was going on, so I asked them why? What's happening? Why do we have to evacuate? He told me, he said that, well, the... the flood is coming, and you guys really have to evacuate right now.

CO: Wow!

BK: So I asked him, how much time do we have? He said, 10 to 15 minutes.

CO: You had... so you had you had 10 to 15 minutes to do what? What... your kids are asleep. You got two little girls. Your wife and your family?

BK: Yeah, yeah. So, yeah, my wife woke up at that point. And when she heard that what's going on, she packed up a couple of clothes for me and herself and the kids in one suitcase. Yeah, we just got out. We sat in the car, and we got out.

CO: And where did you go?

BK: From there, one of our friend... we met our friend. He was kind of in the same situation. We went to his restaurant. We stayed there on the benches for a couple of hours. And then some other friends, their house is… they are on the upper land. So they called us. They said, come over. Come to our place. So we went to their place. And a couple of hours after that, our phones started getting messages that the whole city has to evacuate. And I put my family in the car, and we came out to Kamloops.

CO: OK, so... and could you get a sense of how high the water was by this time? It was morning, I guess by this point. What did it look like?

BK: Yeah, I went back before coming out. I went back there, and I couldn't get to my house. All the roads were blocked off. My house is close to the river, so we were the first one to be evacuated. I couldn't get to my house.

CO: OK, so you just had to get out. What... so you just took some clothes. You left everything behind. What are you thinking about now that's in that house that you didn't get?

BK: Well, basically everything. We just came out with a couple of pairs of clothes and stuff. Everything else is there, so they must have been flooded by now. We saw some footage. The water was almost... I'm living in a complex, and I'm on the ground floor. So we saw some footage, and the water was close to... close to the windows, so everything was flooded.

CO: Yikes!

BK: Yeah.

CO: How are your girls doing. They're six and four, right?

BK: Yeah, one is six, one is four. Yeah, they're... they're OK. They miss their home. [chuckle] So we have a lot of families in this hotel. So they all have kids. So they have started a class there. So the kids, they go for two or three hours, they play, they learn, and they enjoy.

CO: But now, you can enjoy to a certain extent, right?

BK: Yeah.

CO: You're living in a hotel in Kamloops, and all your things are underwater back, Merritt?

BK: Yeah, yeah. It's... it's... it's good. It's... class is like a distraction for them, right? [chuckling] So, from time to time, they do ask when we are going to go home? When we are going to go home? So it's a... it's a kind of good distraction for them. My wife and Eva, they are doing a good job keeping them distracted and busy.

CO: You are with many other families who are in the same situation that came out of Merritt. You're staying in hotels. What... what do people need right now? What's... what's... what... what do you... what are you hoping the government starts to provide you with?

BK: We need... the main thing is accommodation. We are... we are... we are... we are paying on our own so far. But if the government could help us with accommodation and stuff, that will be really, really appreciated.

CO: But... so, are you and the others, are you worried about how you're going to pay for your stay while you wait to be able to go home?

BK: Um, yeah, it will be tough for… for all of us since nobody has jobs now.

CO And you also have a house you don't know if you'll be able to move back there any time soon?

BK: No, no. For one thing, we don't know any timeline when we will be back. And the houses are flooded, especially in our area. So we don't know what we're going to go back to. When we go back, then we will know what we are dealing with here.

CO: Do you have any idea what you're going to do now?

BK: So far, no. I have... I have... we have no idea right now what we will be doing.

CO: You know, you're sounding very calm. I'm sure you're trying to keep your... your family, your kids and your wife and everybody keep it all together. That must be hard?

BK: [chuckling] Yeah. That's right. If I lose hope and if I break down, then it will be too hard on my family. So that's why we are trying everything to keep calm and stay positive. Something good will come up. That's OK.

CO: Well, I hope that help comes, Barkat. And I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

BK: Thank you very much. Thanks for calling, and good luck, and thank you so much. Thank you.

CO: All right. Take care. Bye-bye, Barkat.

BK: OK. Take care. Bye-bye.

CH: Barkat Khan and his family had to flee their home in Merritt, British Columbia, on Monday. We reached him at a hotel in Kamloops.

[Music: Horns!]

Peng Shuai Disappearance

CH: The disappearance of Peng Shuai has become a geopolitical issue. Today the White House called on China to provide proof of the tennis star's whereabouts. And the United Nations human rights office joined in with a call for "an investigation, with full transparency, into her allegations of sexual assault." As we told you yesterday, Ms. Peng hasn't been heard from since she posted on social media about former Chinese Vice Premier Zhang Gaoli. CNN asked Steve Simon, the head of the Women's Tennis Association, how he'll square his demand for information about Peng Shuai with the multi-year, multi-million-dollar hosting deal that the association has in China.

SOUNDCLIP

STEVE SIMON: Well, we're... if anyone wants to question our fortitude behind a statement like that, they can certainly try to. We're at a crossroads with our relationship, obviously, with our... with China and operating our business over there. There's no question about it. It's something that's actually very sad because we have some amazing relationships over there and have developed some... some unbelievable programs that are really introducing the sport to a lot of young Chinese players that want to become the next Li Na, the next Peng Shuai and all of those types of things. So it's very exciting. And we've had a lot of success over there. You know, I think that when you look at this though, you... there's too many times in our world today when we get into issues like this that we let business, politics, money dictate what's right and what's wrong. And when you... as you... you reflected earlier when we have a young person who has the fortitude to step up and make these allegations, knowing full well what the results of that are going to be, for us to not support that and demand justice as we go through it. You know, we have to start as a world making decisions that are based upon right and wrong, period. And we can't compromise that. And we're definitely willing to pull our business and deal with all the complications that come with it. Because this is certainly... this is bigger than the business.

CH: That was Steve Simon, the head of the Women's Tennis Association on CNN.

[Music: Jazz]

Nunavut’s New Premier

CH: Nunavut has a new premier. P.J. Akeeagok was chosen as the next premier on Wednesday night in a vote by his peers in the legislature. At 37 years old, he is now the youngest premier in Canada. And he has a lot of work ahead of him. One of the biggest issues is the suicide crisis in the territory. A crisis which this week prompted high school students in Iqaluit to take the streets and demand action on suicide prevention. This morning, Mr. Akeeagok was asked what steps he will take to address the crisis?

SOUNDCLIP

P.J. AKEEAGOK: Hmmm, yeah. That's a very important question and a very serious question. And I just want to first acknowledge the incredible, courageous young that marched just the other day. I was so fortunate to... to listen. I was so fortunate to participate when they met at the Four Corners. And to hear the outcry of the support that they want. It’s something that really touched me. It really touched many of the members that are here. And I just want to say thank you. And I am very excited to hear that Rankin Inlet is now also in solidarity and will be doing that. And I really think it's very important that the voices of our youth, who aren’t our future but they are now, are heard. And that we've heard them loud and clear. I obviously take this very seriously. So when we are starting to prepare for the mandate, I really, truly feel there's an opportunity here for all members that have been elected to truly take mental health and suicide prevention very seriously. And I truly believe that it's going to take a true partnership leading up to it. I know there's the suicide prevention plan that was there from 2017, and I believe it's up to 2022. So we will be looking at the measurables that have been outlined there in terms of the supports that are needed. But as a new government, I really look forward to seeing the other members discussing this and ensuring that we do absolutely everything within our powers to ensure that there’s tangible results to be able to address mental health and suicide prevention. And I think that's going to be key when we start developing that mandate. So I very much look forward to that.

CH: That was Nunavut's new premier, P.J. Akeeagok, speaking with host Cindy Alorut on the CBC's Qulliq this morning.

[Music: Banjo]

Climate Emergency Language Study

Guest: Lauren Feldman

CH: You need only look to B.C. today for evidence that climate change is an emergency. But according to a new study out of the U.S., using that word to describe it may not always help. The research looked at the impact of words like "emergency" and "crisis" when they appeared in tweets about news stories. And its findings could have a chilling effect on their use. Lauren Feldman is an Associate Professor in the Department of Journalism & Media Studies at Rutgers University, and the co-author of the study. We reached her in New Brunswick, New Jersey.

CO: Lauren, what could be the problem with using terms like climate emergency? We're seeing what we think we believe to be one out in British Columbia right now. Why should we not report it as such?

LAUREN FELDMAN: Well, in a study that I had just conducted with my collaborator, Sol Hart from the University of Michigan, we showed people a series of four tweets about climate change news stories. And we randomly assigned people to see a version of the tweets that referred either to the term climate change, climate crisis or climate emergency. And we were interested in how those different terms may affect people's emotions and beliefs regarding climate change, as well as their perceptions of the news.

CO: So what did you find?

LF: Yeah, so we measured four different aspects of news perceptions, credibility of the news story, whether people thought it was fair, accurate, unbiased and trustworthy. We measured newsworthiness, whether people saw the story as important, relevant, interesting and informative. We measured trust in the news source, and then we measured something we call cognitive resistance to the news story, whether people tend to argue back against the story or see it as manipulative. And we didn't find any effect of the terminology on existence or source trust. We did, however, find small effects on perceived news, credibility and newsworthiness. Specifically, people who saw the tweets that use the term climate emergency perceived the news stories as having lower credibility and lower newsworthiness than people who saw the version that used climate change.

CO: Why do you think that's the case?

LF: Well, you know, it's hard to say just based on these results. Our guess is that people may see that language as alarmist or sensational. We also looked at people's emotional responses to the news stories. So we looked... we measured their fear, their hope. We measured their efficacy beliefs, how much they thought people could work together to address climate change. We measured their support for climate mitigation policy and their intentions to take action. And the terminology didn't affect any of those variables. So it seems to be concentrated on how they're perceiving the news itself as opposed to the issue of climate change more broadly.

CO: So now, you... you cite it specifically in your study, The Guardian newspaper, which has really led the charge in using this kind of language, calling it climate crisis, climate emergency. We spoke with the paper's head of photography, Fiona Shields, about that shift in 2019, when they decided... they also decided that they would find the... the most emotive photograph to accompany any story on climate change in order to have a certain effect. And here's some of what she had to say at the time.

SOUNDCLIP

FS: I think what we have to do is stay really close to what the science is telling us, and how our journalists are interpreting that. And if we do that, then we are being kind of accurate and appropriate in the images that we select.

CO: So when you use catastrophe for humanity instead of climate change, you feel that that is being more accurate as opposed to being sensationalized?

FS: I think, honestly, there... our journalists here do you believe that this is a catastrophe. And this is why we've changed the language. And it's also been described as a climate crisis by the United Nations secretary general. So it's becoming a kind of an accepted theme. But, again, it is based on you know the science that you know our journalists are interpreting.

CO: All right. I'm sure that's of interest to you within your study. Basically, she’s saying we are reporting the facts and we are reflecting what we are seeing about this... this climate change. So what do you make of that?

LF: Yeah, you know, so first, I want to say that The Guardian's guidelines to their reporters to use the stronger terminology was the inspiration for our study. But, you know, in response to that particular clip, you know, I agree, we are undisputedly in a climate emergency. And personally, I think journalists should call it what it is. But I think given the results from our study, it should be done with some recognition that using this terminology could decrease newsroom credibility. However, our study suggests that more important than terminology is whether the news story focuses on impacts of climate change, for example, wildfires, public health consequences, financial risks, effects on oceans, or whether it focuses on actions or solutions such as forest restoration, investment and adaptation efforts. You know, policy responses and climate protests. So in our study, in addition to varying the terminology, we also varied whether the tweets focussed on the impacts or actions to address climate change. And we found that when tweets focussed on actions, they were seen as more credible, they lowered resistance to the news stories and then the solutions-focused news tweets also increased hope, decreased fear and increased people's sense of efficacy. So that suggests that the ideal way to cover climate change is to include information about the threats and then about solutions, ways people can act on or respond to the problem.

CO: Can you appreciate that some journalists may feel that that's not their job? That their job is to give the cold, hard reality of those facts, to speak of emergency and not to be perceived as advocating any particular action or another?

LF: Right. And so I think it's certainly possible to cover the menu of actions and solutions without advocating for one or the other. You know, one of the interesting things that we found in our past research is that news stories about climate change tend to focus either on the impacts of climate change or on actions and rarely cover them together. And, you know, that might be a practical thing that you can't fit both in a single news story. But we also wondered if it was concern among journalists that they would be seen as advocates if they both covered a problem and presented a solution. But again, I think there are ways to cover solutions in ways that aren't necessarily pushing for one over the other.

CO: A lot to think about here. Lauren, thank you.

LF: Thanks, Carol. Thanks for having me on.

CH: Lauren Feldman is an Associate Professor in the Department of Journalism & Media Studies at Rutgers University. We reached her in New Brunswick, New Jersey.

[Music: Carnival]

FOA: David Fox Obit

CH: Whatever his role, David Fox was always larger than life. On the stage, the Canadian actor delighted generations of audiences and helped establish a national theatre scene. On the screen, you might remember him from CBC series including Murdoch Mysteries and Road to Avonlea. And on the radio, you might remember David Fox as "Matt Blare" -- intrepid As It Happens political correspondent through the late '80s and early '90s.

SOUNDCLIP

MATT BLARE: Welcome to the return of the sun of the dawn after the night of the living Meech Lake deal. God, will they ever leave us alone? Twelve days to go. I don't know how you plan to spend all that time? Me, I'm going to keep my feet up on the gunnels for a few days. It'll take me that long to finish my list of little white lies they want us to believe, and the ugly realities they don't want us to think about. It's all held together by the television coverage. They expect you to watch a solid week of orchestrated scrums, live specials whenever the politicians come out for air and government issue inside stories.

CH: As It Happens character Matt Blare pontificating from his parliamentary paddle boat afloat Meech Lake in 1990. David Fox, the Canadian actor who voiced Matt Blare, died last week. He was 80. Whether it was the Meech Lake Accord, the Oka Crisis, or the Gulf War, Matt Blare was our go-to, fearless, and fully fictional political pundit throughout the Mulroney era. Mr. Fox performed hundreds of sketches. He brought biting satire -- often written by former producer George Jamieson -- to life. And his colour commentary often provoked colourful comments from listeners. But whether he was ruminating on current affairs or skewering the movers and shakers on Parliament Hill -- Mr. Fox's character always added some much-needed fun and flare to the news cycle. For instance, here's Matt Blare's take on the mind-numbing numbers at work during the Liberals' anti-GST filibuster in 1990.

SOUNDCLIP

MATT BLARE: [singing] Tax me tender. Make me pay. Never set me free. Pick my pocket every day with the GST. That's the only thing they didn't report last week in the Chamber of Last Resort, an Elvis sighting. They did tell this little joke, though. What's the difference between the king of rock and roll and the average senator's credibility? Some people think Elvis is still alive. Now, I have to confess, I've enjoyed every minute of this show. If the Liberal senators hadn't decided to hijack the autumn agenda, who knows what kind of scoop I'd be working on now? Maybe I'd have to figure out how much of the GST will add to the cost of the Hibernia project. Maybe I'd have to search the Tory backbenchers and pick the up and comers who will make their marks in the next round of cabinet shuffles? Tiny talent time. Or speaking of tough searches, I could be trying to figure out what Jean Chretien will do if he becomes prime minister in this century. Instead, I get to watch the “Trough for Life Brigade” behave like fools. Compared to work, this is OK. [takes a drink] But I can't let a little fun keep me from asking questions. Like, what are these guys crazy?! As long as nobody noticed them, they could doze their way to anonymous wealth. Now, not only do they draw attention from coast to coast, they make sure everybody sees them at their worst. If they were five years old, this would get them expelled from kindergarten. But they're part of the Freedom 55 generation -- beyond the censure of mere mortals. Matt Blare, Parliament Hill. [drinks again] The hits keep coming! Hunka, hunka, burning tax since the voters left me. I found a new place to dwell. viva lost wages. Tax me tender. Make me pay till I’ve got no more.

CH: From our archives, As It Happens intrepid political correspondent Matt Blare, crooning a tune about the anti-GST filibuster. David Fox, the Canadian stage and screen actor who voiced the fictional Mr. Blare, died last week. He was 80.

[Music: Vocalization]

Horse Feeding Restraining Order

CH: It didn't feel like a joke to her, but it sure sounds like one: she looked up at him and thought, "Hey, why the long face?"

[Sound: A horse neighs]

CH: The "she" in this story is 67-year-old Margaret Porter of Leeming Bar, U.K. The "he" is Nelson, a quiet, retired fellow who was once a race horse. And is still a horse. Ms. Porter was concerned because Nelson was "sad-looking". She worried he wasn't getting enough to eat. So she began feeding him carrots. Which is… nice. Except that she had no business feeding Nelson anything. Especially after the horse's owner explicitly told her to stop. Ms. Porter did not. Even when things got nasty, and both humans called the authorities on each other numerous times. Now, the relentless giver of carrots finds herself facing more of a stick approach. Since she couldn't restrain herself, a court has intervened with a restraining order. And this is not Ms. Porter's first offence with a vegetable. In 2005, the court found her guilty of assaulting her estranged brother -- with rhubarb. Yes, rhubarb is a vegetable. Well, now that it's clear she can't beet the system, Ms. Porter won't turnip in court again. Perhaps she can spend her spare time vegging out like the rest of us. Oh, and by way of clarification: Leeming Bar is 1,805,399 average-sized carrots laid end-to-end in a southerly direction from Reading.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

CBC would like to acknowledge the support of the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund.

November 19, 2021 Episode Transcript

More Stories Like This