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 December 10, 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: It's been put off, but she hasn't. Her meeting with the Pope has been delayed, but the new Métis National Council President says she won't delay her efforts to address the Métis experience in residential schools.

CH:It took a latte effort. An employee who fought for unionization at a Starbucks location in Buffalo, New York, says organizing took months of hard work, but the result is a venti step forward.

CO: Artistic statement. The Metropolitan Museum of Art is removing the Sackler name from its galleries, because of the family's role in fueling the opioid crisis -- something our guest describes as a "conscious uncoupling".

CH: On a need to know bassist. Tina Weymouth and Chris Frantz from Tom Tom Club and Talking Heads pay tribute to one of reggae's great innovators -- the late genre-crossing bass-player Robbie Shakespeare.

CO: Dinner theater of the absurd. A food writer tells us about her meal at what she calls the "Worst Michelin Starred Restaurant Ever" -- including a course where she had to lick foam from a plaster cast in the shape of the chef's mouth.

CH: And when something's congested, unclog it. Amsterdam is so enjoying the absence of tourists these days that it's taking active measures to get rid of stores selling clogs and waffles -- and make its downtown more appealing to locals.

CH: As It Happens the Friday edition. Radio that understands the importance of going Dutch.

[music: theme]

Part 1: New Metis National President, Sackler The Met, Worst Michelin Restaurant

New Metis National President

Guest: Cassidy Caron

CH: The new President of Canada's Métis National Council is going to have to wait a little longer for her meeting with the Pope. This fall, Cassidy Caron became the first woman elected to head the Métis Nation. Her first big order of business was supposed to be a trip to the Vatican next week, as one of the Indigenous leaders seeking answers about the Catholic Church's responsibility for Canada's residential schools. That meeting was delayed because of COVID fears. But President Caron isn't short of issues to address, including a rupture that saw the Manitoba Métis Federation leave the national organization earlier this year. We reached Métis National Council President Cassidy Caron in Ottawa.

CO: President Caronn, how disappointing is it for Métis residential school survivors to have your trip to the Vatican delayed?

CASSIDY CARON: You know, it's actually, it's not disappointing. I would say it would have been disappointing if it was cancelled outright, but we have commitment from the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, as well as folks over at the Vatican who... who seek and meet with Pope Francis that this is a priority of the Pope, of the Vatican, to have these delegations sent over there. And so we have commitment that it is not cancelled, it's postponed. And with the news that it was postponed, I think there was a sense of relief almost amongst many of our delegates on the... on the official Métis National Council delegation that, you know, we can take cautious measures without losing this opportunity.

CO: Right. And when you do get this opportunity, what… what do you want the Pope to understand about the Métis experience in particular, vis-a-vis residential schools?

CC: Yeah. So just exactly that. And I think we have a wonderful opportunity provided to us through the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops to be able to do this in a way where we have the distinct Métis Nation voice. Where we have the First Nations voice through the Assembly of First Nations. And we have the Inuit voice through the ITK. And what we'll do is we'll explain to Pope Francis, so that he understands when he does make his trip over to Canada, the unique realities of Métis people. And the unique experiences of our residential and day school survivors, so that he has that understanding that there are the three Indigenous groups over here, that we have unique experiences and that we all have a story to tell.

CO: Now, when you say the three distinct voices being the Métis being one of those voices, there will, in fact, be two voices in the Métis meeting with the Pope, right? Because the Manitoba Métis Federation is sending its own delegation to the Vatican. How are you planning to address that at the heart of your organization? The heart of the Métis people?

CC: So we have commitment from the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops that the three official delegations are coming from the Métis National Council, the AFN and the ITK. And so, of course, people are aware that the Manitoba Métis Federation has voluntarily withdrawn from the Métis National Council earlier this year. And I have not been involved in the coordination of the MNF delegation in any way. However, I understand that the MNF intends to bring a different message than the one that we intend to bring from... from the Métis National Council. And we took the approach that we wanted to ensure that we were representing the diversity of the Métis Nation. And ensuring that as many stories that we can share is what we would do. We would share that diversity. We share the many voices of the Métis Nation. So we've created a delegation that is representative of that diversity. We have survivors from residential schools in the North and then residential schools and day schools in Saskatchewan. We have a male and a female elder coming with us, and we have community members.

CO: Then why do you think that the Manitoba federation doesn't feel that its experiences that in its voice will be included in that?

CC: I can't speak for the Manitoba Métis Federation, and they haven't told me the... the answer to the question that you've just asked. They haven't told me why they feel that we don't represent them.

CO: But the head of the federation, David Chartrand, says that he has no plans to rejoin the National Council because of the practices in the Ontario branch of the Métis, which allows people to simply self-identify as Métis. And that he feels that's wrong. So how do you respond to that?

CC: So that's not true. The... the... each of our Métis governments have verifiable, very strong registries that... that make sure that they vet each of our... our citizens before membership or before citizenship is granted, so that the stories that come out there, they're simply not true. And so, we have the opportunity at the Métis National Council now to have the conversation about where these concerns have stemmed from and how we want to move forward. And so at the assembly, actually the one that I was elected at, the General Assembly of the Métis National Council has directed my office at the national level to establish an expert panel where we'll bring together historians, academics, community members, knowledge keepers, knowledge holders to be able to share all of the stories of the Métis Nation to understand all sides of the story here so that we can move forward as the Métis Nation, knowing all the facts and making a decision following that. And that's an opportunity that we haven't yet had. And I very much look forward to facilitating that.

CO: You've become the head of the organization at a really extraordinary time in Canadian history. And I just was reading what the Roman Catholic archbishop of Regina said. This is Donald Bolen. That relations are being strengthened. The voices of survivors are being heard. The waves of suffering experienced at residential schools are being acknowledged in a greater way than they have ever been before. Would you agree with him?

CC: Yeah, I absolutely agree. I think reconciliation is a journey. It's one that we're all a part of, and everybody has a role to play in. And I think, you know, Canadians have been starting to engage in a conversation about reconciliation in a way that's more urgent than it ever has been. And being able to have those conversations is such an important part of educating, raising awareness and identifying ways to move forward together. And I think that's where we're at right now. I feel that there is a sense of moving forward on the path to reconciliation on all sides and inclusive of many stakeholders.

CO: President Caron, we'll be following all of this closely. And I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

CC: Great. Thank you so much.

CH: Cassidy Caron is the President of the Métis National Council. We reached her in Ottawa.

[Music: Poppy beat]

Sackler The Met

Guest: Patrick Radden Keefe

CH: New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art has sacked the Sacklers. Yesterday, the Met announced that it would be removing the family's name from a number of its dedicated galleries. That move follows a long campaign by artists and activists, urging museums and other institutions to cut ties with the family behind Purdue Pharma -- and its highly addictive drug, OxyContin. But it also comes with the apparent endorsement of the Sacklers themselves, who said they are, "passing the torch to others who might wish to step forward to support the Museum." Patrick Radden Keefe is a staff writer for The New Yorker and the author of the book Empire of Pain: The Secret History of the Sackler Dynasty. We reached him in New York City.

CO: Patrick, I understand you visited the Met yesterday. What changes did you see?

PATRICK RADDEN KEEFE: Well, all of the Sackler signage, which used to be sprinkled all over the Met, was gone. So this had happened virtually overnight. The museum was closed on Wednesday. So on Tuesday evening, when it closed, you had the Sackler name on the Sackler Wing and on various galleries. And when I went in on Thursday, it was gone.

CO: And now, this is following the decision and the announcement which caught many people by surprise that they would no longer have those names on those wings. But the Met had announced a couple of years ago that it wouldn't accept gifts from the Sackler family anymore. So why... why is this such a huge development in your mind?

PRK: Well, for a number of reasons. So what you've seen over the last few years is a kind of gradual distancing in stages that a number of institutions have taken from the Sacklers. The first phase was when you saw a great many museums and universities say we will no longer accept future funds from the Sacklers. And now, you're starting to see some of these institutions taking the name down. Many universities and museums have been watching the Met to see how it will handle this because it's such a prominent institution and one with a very close history with the Sacklers. And so the fact that the Met took this quite dramatic step, I think, may end up being a bellwether that other institutions will look to.

CO Just for the Sacklers or for others as well?

PRK: Well, that's the interesting question. I mean, I think that, you know, I've certainly spoken to people who work at museums and universities who say, hey, if we introduce an ethical litmus test for any possible donors, we may have no donors left at all. I think in the particular case of the Sacklers, you have a family that owned a company that has now twice pled guilty to federal criminal charges. And a company that many people believe helped ignite a public health disaster that has killed more than half a million people. So I think in some ways, the gravity of the... the alleged crimes here is such that for the Met, apparently, it became unsustainable.

CO: And this... unsustainable not because the Met just decided from its own ethics that they couldn't do this any longer. But because tremendous pressure, right, of many people, including what you wrote in your own book. But why do you think it took so long for the Met to take the family's names off these dedicated galleries?

PRK: I don't think these decisions are easy. I mean, I think a place like the Met is not a monolith. There's a board. There are different points of view. In many instances, when you have a very wealthy family like the Sacklers that gives a gift, but in exchange, wants its name on the building, that's not charity. That's a business deal. And so, I would imagine that there are contractual questions about whether or not the museum could do this. I think it's probably fairly significant that in the case of the Met when they announced it, they did so jointly with the Sacklers. So I don't have any personal knowledge of this, but my sense is that there was a... must have been some kind of negotiation going on behind the scenes in which the Sacklers pledged that they would not sue or try and sort of pursue a breach of contract claim against the museum.

CO: But what do you make of the fact that some spaces at the Met will continue to have the Sackler name on them? And that... that's the... the Arthur M. Sackler Gallery and the Asian wing. And then there's the Marietta Lutze Sackler Gallery in the modern and contemporary wing of the Met. So why are they remaining?

PRK: So originally, there were three Sackler brothers, Arthur, Mortimer and Raymond. And they owned a company called Purdue. Arthur Sackler was a pioneer of medical advertising. And he developed a lot of the deceptive techniques that were used to sell and market OxyContin in the 1990s. But Arthur Sackler died before the introduction of the drug. So there are some people who believe that Arthur Sackler should not be held culpable in the same way because he died before the drug was introduced. I would argue that that doesn't make him pure as the driven snow necessarily, but it's indisputable that Arthur Sackler died in the 1980s before OxyContin ever hit the market. And so, my hunch is that that distinction would be the reason that you see those two galleries continue -- one name for Arthur and one named for his second wife, Marietta Lutze.

CO There are so many prominent people who have been part of this... this campaign to see these... the Sackler name come down from the... from not just the Met, but from other places. Nan Goldin, we spoke with her two years ago, the photographer, about her own struggle with addiction, which prompted her to lobby Britain's National Portrait Gallery to turn down a $1.8 million donation from the Sackler family. I just want to play a bit of what she told us at the time, two years ago.

SOUNDCLIP

NAN GOLDIN: I was addicted to OxyContin for about four years. I was using massive doses. First, I got it from doctors, and then I went on the black market. And I was in my own personal opioid crisis. So when I got clean two years ago, I realized how widespread this problem was and that I needed to help other people. I thought, well, they live in their museums. That's what they care about. But who knows if they even care about that? It's all about reputation washing.

CO: Hmm. That was Nan Goldin speaking to us two years ago about reputations. And do you think that this is… at the end of the day, even this withdrawal of the Sackler name and the Sacklers agreeing to it, is this another kind of reputation management?

PRK: No, I would actually say. On the contrary, I mean, I think in this instance, this is a family that was very, very invested in a kind of branding project involving the family name for decades. And so, you know, one of the questions that has come up is, is this accountability? And I would say it's... it's something far short of accountability. It's a purely symbolic gesture, but one that I think when it comes to this particular family has some sting. And I should say, I don't think any of this would have happened without Nan Goldin. She was an activist, a major artist in her own right, somebody recovering from OxyContin addiction. And she really spearheaded this movement to try and shame cultural institutions to disassociate themselves from the Sacklers.

CO: And you tweeted: In related news, I need to revise my paperbacks. [chuckle] So, what revision would you make today?

PRK: Well, I mean, you know, the paperback is coming out in the spring, and there was something a little bit inconclusive about where the story ended, in part because I wondered what would happen with the Met? I thought something probably would. And in the book, I tell the whole story, stretching back decades of the family's relationship with the Met. So, I need to hurry up this weekend and... and add this little final grace note to the... to the ending.

CO: We will leave you to that. Patrick, thank you.

PRK: Thank you.

CH: Patrick Radden Keefe is the author of Empire of Pain: The Secret History of the Sackler Dynasty. We reached him in New York City. And you can find more on that story on our webpage at: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Horns!!!]

Worst Michelin Restaurant

Guest: Geraldine DeRuiter

CH: Italy. A Michelin star. Twenty-seven courses. Sounds like a recipe for a sensuous, memorable meal. And it was. But food blogger Geraldine DeRuiter's recent experience at the restaurant 'Bros' was memorable for all the wrong reasons. She recounted the bizarre experience in a review that's gone viral. It's entitled We Eat at The Worst Michelin Starred Restaurant, Ever. We reached Geraldine DeRuiter in Seattle.

CO: Geraldine, before we get into the details of your visit to Bros, what was going through your mind as you walked out of this marathon 27-course experience?

GERALDINE DERUITER: You know that the sweet release of the evening. [both chuckle] It was... it was lovely to be outside. To be in the night air. And then the realization hit me that every other restaurant and eatery in Lecce was closed, and so we wouldn't be getting food that night. [CO laughs]

CO: OK, so the best part of it was that it was finally over, as though they'd removed a knife from your thigh, and you could actually get on with your... your existence, right?

GD: I mean, yeah, the best part of it was that it concluded.

CO: [laughing] All right. So among the many things, and there's just so much. I've seen photos, and it's going to be hard to do justice to many of these parts of these 27 courses. But one of them, I understand you had to lick the foam out of the chef's mouth cast in plaster. What was that like?

GD: Sorry, I just closed my eyes, and all I could see was the plaster cast, so you'll have to give me a minute as I recompose myself. [CO laughs] Yeah, that experience was incredibly vulnerable. First of all, I thought that they were going to bring us spoon. And my particular plaster cast, the foam was... was dribbling out of the corner of the chef's mouth. So that just had a particular sort of aesthetic to it that just added to the entire vignette. You had to… you had to slurp it out. And at some point, I think I accidentally made eye contact with a friend of mine across the table while I was doing that. And that brought our friendship to a new level that I wish we had not reached. [CO laughs] That was unfortunate.

CO: Can you describe some of the other courses?

GD: Yeah. Well, I mean my favourite course, and by favourite, I mean the worst ones that we experienced. I've been describing it as the meat molecule course. What happened is they brought by plates, and then they came by and they... they swirled sauces onto the plate, and it was a very, you know, beautiful display. And I anticipated when this sort of tableside presentation happens that something will be plated. [chuckling] And someone came by with an eyedropper, and they proceeded to squirt a sort of jelly onto the sauces. And they said this has been infused with meat molecules.

CO: [laughing] Are you serious?!

GD: I could not make that up if I tried. [CO chuckles] And then they walked away. A friend of mine at the table said, those are two words you never want to hear together: [CO laughs] meat and molecule.

CO: But... now, when you say the waiter walked away at that point, what... did you have any interaction with the servers to question them about any of this?

GD: I have endeavoured so many times to have a human connection with them in multiple languages, and I failed. I do not know if that is part of the experience of dining there?

CO: It was... I understand there's one incident when they brought a dish that they described as rancid ricotta, tiny fried cheese balls, right?

GD: Yes! Yeah, which actually, I mean, say what you will about the place. I don't know what this could possibly mean? The rancid ricotta is one of the better courses. [both chuckle] So... but I did… I did try and clarify repeatedly in both Italian and English. I was like, well, surely, surely there must be an error in translation? Because we don't mean to say that this is rancid? And he said no, rancid. And I said, well, do you mean, perhaps aged or fermented? And then I switched to Italian. Is there another word here that perhaps we need to be using? And he said rancido. And I was like, oh, OK. Understood.

CO: OK, now... but I guess I don't know what's worse? The description of these meals or my understanding this... this even the portions were extremely small?

GD: Yeah, you know, it kind of becomes delightful. I mean, here's the thing, I'm not going to complain about small portions. And so when a meal is not great, and then you're complaining about small portions, [CO laughs] I'm like, where... at what point of absurdity have we reached? I think it was just it was such a symphony of bizarreness on so many levels that endured and just kept going. It was an Energizer Bunny of disaster.

CO: Now you... your review that you wrote about this is not kind, but very funny. And you've... there's been a response. The restaurant has issued a statement in response to your review, which is about as bizarre as the dinner. And it has a crude drawing of a man on a horse. And it says that there are some paintings of horses that are very good art, but they're just ordinary. [GD stifles a chuckle] They're what you'd get anywhere. And then there are... there's, I guess, what looks like abstract expressionism. I mean, so it's avant-garde, but does that mean it's not art? That's the question that the Bros is putting to you, I suppose?

GD: Once I step away from the hilarity of it, I do believe that he is making a rather legitimate statement about the nature of... of art inherently. But where that takes us to is, is food inherently art? And if so, what role does the patron play in that? And can we completely disregard the patron if we are a chef? I will say when I read his response. I could not have asked for more. Honestly, in terms of theatre, this has been well worth the price of admission. [CO chuckles] It's been incredible.

CO: You got a very large and satisfying serving of theatre. And... and a very funny article about it. So thank you for that, Geraldine.

GD: Thank you.

CO: Bye.

GD: Bye-bye.

CH: Geraldine DeRuiter is a travel and food blogger. We reached her in Seattle. And if you'd like to see more on that story, and read Geraldine's original review, go to our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Jazz]

Amsterdam Made Less For Tourists

CH: It must have been rough growing up in Disneyland in the 50s. One year you're enjoying the quiet life on Main Street, USA, hanging out with your neighbours like Cinderella and Winnie-the-Pooh. And the next, the place is overrun with gawking tourists, treating your community like some kind of amusement park. Amsterdam knows what that's like. Before the pandemic, the Dutch city saw a major spike in tourism. Millions of outsiders taking selfies in the Red Light District, and talking to statues after overdoing it in cannabis cafés. And during that period, the downtown filled up with stores selling touristy junk like clogs and waffles. Well, pandemic travel restrictions have opened Amsterdam's eyes. In April of this year, Mayor Femke Halsema co-wrote a letter to the city's Assembly that read, in part, "We do not wish to return to more bustle, our retinas have a sharp image of the Amsterdam city center at its best: freedom-loving, lively, original, and with room for everyone who loves it." So the city has just announced a new program. It will give financial assistance to nonprofit organizations, to help them buy up touristy waffle-and/or-clog stores, and convert them to affordable housing, or businesses that might actually be of interest to Amsterdammers. It's an admirable stance. And if you're going to de-touristify your downtown core, this is the way to do it. Get right down to business -- no more waffling.

[Music: Ambient]

Part 2: First Starbucks Unionized, Robbie Shakespeare Obit

First Starbucks Unionized

Guest: Caroline Lerczak

CH: Yesterday, a group of Starbucks workers in New York State made history. Their shop -- on Elmwood Avenue in Buffalo -- is the first Starbucks in the United States to vote to form a union. And another location near the Buffalo Airport could be next. Caroline Lerczak is a shift supervisor at that Starbucks. She was also an organizer with the union campaign. We reached her in Buffalo.

CO: Caroline, you were in the room when those votes were counted yesterday. Describe the moment you realized that one of the locations had voted to unionize?

CAROLINE LERCZAK: It was honestly... it's indescribable. The joy, the relief, the excitement. I felt all of... all of the things. And it was really just the most incredible experience to be surrounded by the people that we've gotten so close with and just celebrate all of the hard work that we put in it. It felt so sweet to get that one taste of victory.

CO: Why do you think it worked? Because there's been other attempts to unionize at Starbucks in your country?

CL: I think part of the reason it worked so well was the timing. You know, as we know, there's been a lot of, like, staffing issues around the country. And that's played an impact on, you know, us feeling like we're not as disposable.

CO: Uh-huh. But, at the same time, there were three votes held, right, at Buffalo Starbucks locations. One of them didn't vote to certify. They… they voted it down. So why do you think that's the case if that's the mood?

CL: So that store actually has a little bit of a trickier, I guess asterix [chuckle] after it. So there were a couple of votes that were missing from the election. So there has to be an investigation specifically with the Camp Road store to see what happened with those votes.

CO: OK, but we're talking about three different locations, right? One of them, you work at the one near Buffalo Airport. And that is still pending those results, right? That's still being challenged?

CL: Ours is technically pending at the Genesee location. We do have 15 yeses and nine nos, so we do have a majority. The only thing that we need to resolve are the seven challenged votes, but we are pretty confident that the NLRB will hear our case out because those partners don't actually work at our store. So we view the Cheektowaga and Elmwood stores both as a win.

CO: OK, but there's one other one that... the Camp Road store, I guess, is still --

CL: Correct.

CO: That vote... they voted against unionization, right?

CL: Right. There's still a little bit more that needs to be investigated over there. But as of right now, they have a "no" vote.

CO: Right. Now, you've worked at Starbucks for years. What convinced you that the workers needed a union?

CL: Honestly, as soon as I heard about it, I was on board. I think really, the thing that I guess was so appealing about it was that we were coming together as partners, as hourly workers who have similar experiences at our workplace, to really try and have an impact and a voice in our working conditions in the future. And I think that's really why it took off, and it did as well as it did.

CO: Starbucks is one of those companies that represents itself as a progressive employer, has done so for decades and says it gives generous benefits. Has argued that a union isn't necessary.

CL: Right.

CO: So what are the conditions that led you to feel... and others to feel that you needed a union to represent you?

CL: I think the biggest push for everyone really was working through the pandemic as frontline workers. You know, our concerns and our voices about what was going on in our stores when the pandemic started, it didn't always feel like the company was listening to us. There was a point in which Starbucks kind of gave an ultimatum to partners that, you know, you can return to work or you can quit. You know, no more like leaves of absence. Specifically, I know that there was a partner that was thinking of coming back. She was a cancer survivor, and she was faced with that choice to come back and work during the pandemic or to lose her job at Starbucks. And she chose to quit because she wasn't comfortable being exposed.

CO: Starbucks, though, put up a pretty serious campaign to... to... against unionizing, right? Can you tell us what happened? What kinds of experiences you had there?

CL: Yeah. So some of my direct experiences, I attended two listening sessions. So this fall, I was actually able to sit down with Roseanne Williams, Deanna and Alison, who are all pretty high executives at Starbucks when they came into Buffalo and sat down with us in, like, three on five groups, just small groups to talk to us about the union and tell us that they wanted us to vote no. And, you know, it was really intimidating because when you're an hourly partner [chuckle] and like the... the president of Starbucks North America is sitting five feet away from you, telling you that she wants you to vote no. Like, it's definitely a little bit of a power difference.

CO: So why were you able to stare them in the eyes [chuckling] and defy what they wanted you to do? What gave you that courage?

CL: I mean, knowing that it was a secret ballot definitely was comforting in the end. But I also think that, like, sticking this out and standing in solidarity like, clearly we were making a big mess for them by doing this. And you know, that's why they sent these people out here. So why not make it… [chuckle] make it worth their while, I guess?

CO: So this is the first one in the United States. Canada had a unionized Starbucks in the summer in Victoria, B.C. Do you think this is a sign of the times? I mean, not just that the pandemic has brought this... these issues to the fore, but that there is a mood? There's a shift in favour of more workers rights, more labour rights?

CL: Oh, absolutely. And I think it spans just, you know, workers rights. I think that these last couple of years, we've seen that some of the largest demonstrations of solidarity, you know, amongst groups of people. And I think it's been really, really powerful to see all of the change that can occur from these meaningful groups of people getting together and working towards something.

CO: Do you think there will be more Starbucks that... that unionize?

CL: Oh, absolutely. I hope there will be. I think that even if people don't immediately recognize the benefits of a union, at the end of the day, you are able to have more of a say in your, you know, workplace. And I think that that just by itself goes a long way.

CO: Caroline, we'll leave it there. And thanks for speaking with us.

CL: Thanks so much.

CH: That was Caroline Lerczak in Buffalo, New York. In a statement to the CBC, Starbucks wrote that it will "continue to focus on the best Starbucks experience we can deliver" and said it respects the process and is "grateful" to workers who exercised their right to vote.

[Music: Electronic]

Legault Talks To Kids

CH: A class of eight-year-olds isn't François Legault's usual audience. The Quebec premier spends more time talking to staffers and reporters. But today, Premier Legault was asked how he'd explain something to a Grade 3 class -- the Grade 3 class that was taught by Fatema Anvari until last week. We talked to Ms. Anvari last night. She told us that she'd been ordered to stop teaching that class because she wears a hijab. Which is prohibited under a law that Premier Legault passed. It forbids public officials from wearing religious symbols. Here's the question Global's Raquel Fletcher put to Premier Legault.

SOUNDCLIP

RAQUEL FLETCHER: I know you have a particular fondness for Quebec kids. How would you explain this situation to the kids who are very upset to lose their teacher?

FRANCOIS LEGAULT: OK. First, the school board should have not hired this person in the first place as a teacher given Bill 21. And I want to remind everybody that the Bill 21 became a law in June 2019. OK? It was voted democratically by the National Assembly. I think it's a reasonable law, a balanced law. And only it wasn't a proposal of the Parti Quebecois, but in our law, only employees in positions of authority, including teachers, should not wear religious symbols while on duty. At home, in the street, they can do what they want. And Quebec has made the choice of secularism, and I think it must be respected.

CH: That was Quebec Premier François Legault, responding to Global's Raquel Fletcher.

[Music: Slow piano]

The Shepherd Promo

CH: By now, you have to think that all the elves in Santa's workshop have had at least one Zoom meeting about the supply chain issue. Maybe you've heard? Christmas trees, lumber, cars, furniture, video game consoles -- you name it, there's probably a shortage. It seems like nothing is immune from COVID's impact on the global supply chain. Which is why everyone is scrambling to make sure they've got all their holiday necessities in order. And it's probably why we've seen a spike in emails and calls to Talkback asking about one As It Happens holiday staple.

CO: As Harold Seaglynn in Victoria, BC wrote: "I'm arranging a get-together (three fully vaccinated people) to sit in the living room and listen to your annual broadcast of The Shepherd, while warming ourselves to a small blaze in the woodstove, and sipping some nice warming drink. Am I correct in assuming it will air at the beginning of the show on Dec. 24th? Thank you so much, and... 'Happy Christmas'."

CH: Thank you, Harold. And to all the others who wrote or called. And yes, it is made from the rarest materials, but we ordered in plenty of time -- so our annual broadcast of Fireside Al Maitland's reading of Frederick Forsyth's The Shepherd will air this year on Christmas Eve -- Friday, December 24th.

[Music: "Genius of Love" by Tom Tom Club]

SINGER: No one can sing

Quite like Smokey, Smokey Robinson

Wailin' and skankin' to Bob Marley

Reggae's expanding with Sly and Robbie

SINGER TWO: I said, oops, your mama said, uh

Oops, your mama said, uh

Oops, your mama said, uh

Robbie Shakespeare Obit

Guests: Tina Weymouth, Chris Frantz

CH: That's the 1981 hit "Genius of Love" by Tom Tom Club. As you just heard, the lyrics include the line, "Reggae's expanding with Sly and Robbie" -- a reference to the hugely influential reggae musicians, drummer Sly Dunbar and bassist Robbie Shakespeare -- who died this week, at the age of 68. The two men were known as "The Rhythm Twins". They played a fundamental role in reggae's evolution as players and producers. And they worked with a who's who of international artists from Mick Jagger and Bob Dylan to Sinead O'Connor and No Doubt. Tina Weymouth and Chris Frantz lead the band Tom Tom Club to this day and were founding members of Talking Heads. We reached them in Fairfield County, Connecticut.

CO: Tina and Chris, first of all, I'm sorry for the loss of your friend.

CHRIS FRANTZ: Yes, we didn't know he was ill. To be honest, we hadn't seen... seen Rob for several years. But there was a time when we saw each other every day because we were both doing a lot of work down at Compass Point Studios in Nassau, the Bahamas. We with Talking Heads and also with Tom Tom Club, and Robbie and Sly with Grace Jones and Black Uhuru and Joe Cocker and Ian Dury. Just... I mean, I don't think Robbie even knew how many records he played on. [CO chuckles]

CO: We just played a bit of Tom Tom Club's song "Genius of Love". And those lyrics about Sly and Robbie. But there's more to the story than that, isn't there? So I just want to play a little bit more of "Genius of Love", and then we'll talk about it.

[Music: "Genius of Love" by Tom Tom Club]

CO: Tina, what part did Sly and Robbie play in that song?

TINA WEYMOUTH: They did join me and Chris for the handclaps.

CF: Four people clapping. [chuckling] Chris and Tina, Sly and Robbie. The engineer, also a Jamaican named Stephen Stanley, said, do it again, do it again. [CO chuckles]

TW: You know, our hands were so sore after four takes. I mean, it was a half an hour of hand clapping. And very, very… [chuckle] right on hand clapping. The best... I mean, that was the only thing David Byrne ever asked us about our album is how did you get those handclaps? [CO laughs] OK, so you know, [chuckles] this is the weirdness of our careers.

CO: How did Robbie Shakespeare... how did he react when... did he know you were going to have those lyrics in there about him and Sly?

CF: They loved it, didn't they, Tina?

TW: Yes, they did. [laughing]

CF: And Robbie loved the song. I remember he said, bus it straight to Paris because he thought he thought… he thought this is something that French people would like very much. And in fact, they did. [laughing] He was right.

CO: Tina, can I ask you, as a bass player, what made Robbie Shakespeare's playing so special?

TW: Oh, well, Robbie was unique. And I think... I think like for me, as for me, he had a great drummer to play with. But Robbie was, you know, extraordinarily hardworking. I think that, you know, he... he studied... in school, he did study some classical music. So he was... he kept a very clean, beautiful tone. And serious. He was a very serious person. And he... he just worked all the time. And he loved it. I mean, he just loved playing. And he did have a good sense of humour. But mostly, he was serious about music. And he was... he was a great inventor. I mean, he wasn't just a bass player, he was a composer and a producer and an arranger. And so much so that, you know, he had to really be guarded about how... how he... he would be recompensed. He knew his worth. And I think it's just... just tragic right now. I can't imagine what Sly Dunbar is going through because if it happened to me that I lost my Rhythm Twin because, you know, they were called The Rhythm Twins, if it happened to me, I would never get over it. [chuckling] I don't think... I would have to change my entire life to something else because I don't know how I would make music without my... my Rhythm Twin.

CO: You must have known him... well, you did because you had... you mentioned you had a home in Nassau in the Bahamas, where Compass Point Studio was.

CF: Yeah, we lived in the same building. Chris Blackwell of Island Records, who also owned the studio, built an apartment building, creating a sort of artist colony. And Tina and I got an apartment there, but also Sly and Robbie, as well as at one time, Grace Jones and Tyrone Downey from The Wailers. And one time even, Sean Connery was living in the building [chuckling] until... until he was sort of driven out by Joe Cocker's [CO chuckles] fanboy antics. [laughing]

CO: Oh my gosh! This is a whole other chapter. But... I mean, and I would love to explore that. But I just... I just want to ask you about... because you saw Robbie then, in his downtime. And just maybe both of you tell us a little bit about what was he like?

TW: Well, serious and hardworking, I mean, no... you know, no fussing around. He really got down to work, and he did it every day.

CF: He was a big eater at one time. [TW chuckles] He loved, loved his food. But he, as far as I know, neither he nor sly ever smoked any... any herb or snorted anything or anything like that. They were... they were very sober people. But they did like to eat.

TW: Yeah.

CO: [chuckle] Tina, is there a story? Is there some moment? A time that you... you remember about an experience with Robbie that you can share with us?

TW: I think once I bought a leather sort of newsboy cap with... with room for the big hair and everything, and I brought that down as a gift for him. And he didn't even... he didn't even take off his hat to try it on. [chuckle] I think he knew right away that it wasn't going to fit his head, but he was just so grateful because it was, I guess, the intention. He would figure out what to do with it. [chuckle] But... but it was this. It was this really nice leather cap. And... and... and I think he... he knew that I was saying, oh yeah, I recognize you. You're a bad boy. [laughing] And he... and he was. I mean, he... I think there was a certain amount of shyness to him. And you know, I'm a shy person also. And even though I'm a performer, it's because of love of music that I get out there. But... and he did too. And I think there was a shyness that some people would see and take as a kind of badass meanness, toughness. [CO chuckles] And of course, you know, in Jamaica, you kind of have to be. But... but it was the shyness. And so, he was... he took his time to get to know you and... and to, you know, develop trust. He didn't sit around talking the talk. He just walked the walk, you know? He just wanted to get... get the... the stuff done. And, I mean, even James Brown found out how tough he was.

CO: Well, how did James Brown learn how tough he was?

TW: Well, because James Brown, you know, he wanted 100 per cent of all the songwriting.

CF: In a nutshell.

TW: Yes.

CF: James wanted to own the song, and they wanted a piece of the song because they had helped create it. And so, when... when he demanded that he would own all of the material, Robbie walked out. He said, you play it yourself. And he walked out.

TW: Yeah.

CF: And that was that.

CO: Chris, if you could talk to Robbie Shakespeare right now, and tell him what he meant to you and to the world of music, what would you say to him?

CF: Well, I would just… I would simply say, Robbie, you're unlike any other. You're... you're unique unto yourself, and many of the songs that you've played on are... are completely unforgettable. And you have achieved greatness. And that's what I would say.

CO: Tina and Chris, I appreciate talking to you and hearing about this... this great bassist. And thank you so much for joining us. Thank you.

CF: Thank you, Carol.

CO: Bye, Tina.

TW: Bye, carol

CH: Tina Weymouth and Chris Frantz lead the band Tom Tom Club, and were the rhythm section in Talking Heads. We reached them in Fairfield County, Connecticut. They were remembering Robbie Shakespeare, who died this week at the age of 68.

[Music: Ambient]

Part 3: Hamilton Superfan, Toronto Delivery Robot

Hamilton Superfan

Guest: Eva Quildon

CH: Since she moved to Hamilton, Ontario from Trinidad and Tobago years ago, Eva Quildon has been a diehard fan of the local Canadian Football League team, the Hamilton Tiger-Cats. And this Sunday, the 82-year old will be in the stands at this year's Grey Cup game, cheering on her hometown team. Her kids and grandkids have hopped on the bandwagon too. And whether the Ticats win or lose the championship game, Sunday will be a special milestone for her family. We reached Eva Quildon in Hamilton, Ontario.

CO: Eva, how are you preparing for Sunday's game?

EVA QUILDON: Well, my… I'm sitting down, relaxing because I've done a lot of Grey Cup stuff until now. We’ve been out of on the streets. You know, we’ve been bar hopping. And you know, my friends and I, whenever we go downtown, we go to the different areas, conservative areas. We visit different places before the game. And this time, I'm just sitting down relaxing.

CO: Do you remember the first time you went to a Grey Cup?

EQ: Oh yes! The first time I saw a Grey Cup was in ‘72. But the biggest one I ever went to is in ‘99.

CO: Wow! But do you remember when you first went? I mean, you're from Trinidad and Tobago. I mean, there are people who are born in Canada who would not have the strength to sit in the cold [chuckling] for a Grey cup game. What was it like for you when you went there in the 70s?

EQ: Well, the thing about it is I... when I came to Canada… I came on September 68 and I sat up in the high benches and it was freezing. [CO chuckles] I didn't enjoy the game at all. I was only waiting to have a hot cup of cocoa and get myself, you know, warm. And I thought, If this is what it's all about, I don't think I'm going to enjoy it. And then, on ‘72, I did go and watch the parade. They had a parade in Hamilton. What was so amazing is the marshal. He was Lorne Greene. I was telling everybody he's --

CO: Lorne Greene was the marshal of the parade in ‘72, in Hamilton!

EQ: And he was waving for everybody. I thought he was was waving for myself. But he was waving for everybody. And, you know, after seeing him on and Bonanza as a star and then coming and seeing him live, you would think, wooooow this is a real coincidence. So it was one of my lucky days.

CO: Now, you are very active with the Ticats. You’re in the Cat's Claw Fan Club. How did you get involved with that? What was it that... what drew you to football?

EQ: Well, that's the whole point. A friend of mine, he gave me a ticket to go to see a game with his, with his parents. Yeah. So I said, All right, I'll go. And then we sat down. And next to... on the other side of the seats, there is this bunch of women and men, you know, grown-up, my age and hollering and shouting and their face painted, they had the number of the players in the clothing, and they had the pom-pom and the shack-shack. And, you know, their screaming and hollering. And I look over there and I said, boy, these people are enjoying themselves. Why can't we enjoy ourselves like that? And the friend that I was with, he say, well, why don't you join them? The Cat Claws? We are all part of it, but we, you know, we sitting on this side. We sitting on that side. So I was introduced to that, and most of the people there, they... they taught me how to facepaint [CO chuckles] because they wanted people to facepaint. So we had a bus. We do bus trips, used to do bus trips to Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal.

CO: All of them... so you're following the Ticats all over the place?.

EQ: Yeah.

CO: Do the players… do the players know who you are?

EQ: Yes, most... most of them know who I am. Yeah, because even... this... these are the age of my grandchildren now. [chuckle] They even get… Speedy, he threw us a ball the other day.

CO: This Sunday, this Grey Cup, is pretty special, right? Because it's the anniversary of something in your family. Can you tell us about that?

EQ: My... my children came in 50 years ago. They came in ‘71. And on the 12th of December, which is where the Grey Cup is playing. Because we never have Grey Cup in this month. We always have it in November. So they... they said to me, Mom, you know, we... we... we landed this about the 12th. We're making it… we're going to celebrate it anyway. They’re going to celebrate their 50th year in Canada. And then when they heard about the date, they thought, oh my goodness, this is kind of special. So they all five of us, five of them, I have tickets to the game, the Grey Cup.

CO: Oh, that’s great!

EQ: So that's where they're going to celebrate it now.

CO: [chuckling] And so… but now, you arrived in 1968 without them, right?

EQ: Yes, I did, yeah. They came three years after.

CO: You came for work?

EQ: Yes. My husband came up before, and I came up. Between going back and forth, back and forth to visit them, they landed here in... in ‘71.

CO: Wonderful. But you came... you want... you came to work as a nurse.

EQ: Yeah, um-hmm.

CO: But you've had quite... you've done quite a lot since you've come because you have won all these awards. You got the John C. Holland Award.

EQ: [chuckling] Yes!

CO: The Queen Elizabeth the Second Diamond Jubilee Medal and Hamilton Senior of the Year.

EQ: Yeah! I’ve been so busy in the community. Yes, we did a lot of things here. Because it was something that embedded in me that people need help. We all need help. We all need to know who is who or how to live in Canada.

CO: So what does this anniversary of 50 years in Canada... what does it mean to them?

EQ: Well, it means a lot. And they... they... they... they put... they put a book together and they put all the things that they... that they enjoy in Canada. So that's why when this came up, they say, well, this is another thing that they're going to have this as part of the beginning of the next book.

CO: [chuckling] Well, do you think that they're your family and their anniversary? Do you think that's going to bring the Ticats some luck?

EQ: Oh, lots of luck! Lots of luck! Don’t want to be keeping my fingers crossed like that right away. [chuckling]

CO: Well, do you think the Ticats actually need luck?

EQ: Yes, they do. [CO chuckles] We all need luck. We all need a piece of luck.

CO: But you'll have all your kids with you?

EQ: Yeah, yeah. They all staying up with us for Sunday.

CO: That's so lovely. Eva, I hope it's a great day for you.

EQ: Yeah! I hope so, too. I hope so, too.

CO: All right. Take care.

EQ: Thank you very much for calling.

CO: Bye.

EQ: Bye.

CH: That was Hamilton Tiger-Cats superfan Eva Quildon. We reached her in Hamilton. Linda Wood Edwards will also be at the big game in Hamilton this Sunday. She's been making an annual pilgrimage to the Grey Cup from Edmonton for 25 years, no matter where it's held. But this year, she's making her first solo trip since the death of her husband, Brian Edwards, this summer. Ms. Wood Edwards spoke today about how their shared love of football brought them together.

SOUNDCLIP

LINDA WOOD EDWARDS: Well, Brian passed away suddenly in July, just sort of as training camp was getting going. Looking forward to a new season, new name. And he was suddenly gone, so.

MARK CONNOLY: Yeah, I'm so sorry for that, Linda. Our condolences. Now, how did your love for the Grey Cup lead to the two of you getting married?

LWE: Well, I grew up in kind of a CFL family, and Grey Cup was a very big deal in our house. Bryan and I connected over our mutual admiration for Dan Kepley.

MC: Oh!

LWE: The famous 42 hall of famer.

MC: Right!

LWE: Best linebacker ever. And that's really how we connected, and even had a 42 on our wedding cake, so.

MC: Really?!

LWE: [chuckle] yeah.

MC: That's nice. Yeah, Kep was a... he was a good football player, that's for sure. So I understand the first Grey Cup you two shared together was also in Hamilton back in ‘96?

LWE Actually, I was on my own for that one, but I had just started dating Brian.

MC: Ahhh!

LWE: And he lent me his... his beloved Edmonton green and gold Parka so that I would be, you know, visible flying the right colours in the city. And that parka got stolen at the Spirit of Edmonton party.

MC: Oh no!

LWE: And I was never able to replace it, so I had to marry him.

MC: [laughing] Oh, well, you know what are you going to do?

LWE: It worked out OK. It worked out OK.

MC: Now, have you been running into people while you've been there and reminiscing about Brian with them because of that?

LWE: Oh, absolutely. And the fans and friends from all teams, there are so many versions of Brian Edwards, Esponader, Elkonador buttons people from different cities have made and brought. And so, he is being memorialized on every conceivable coloured jersey you can imagine.

MC: Yeah.

LWE: So, there's a lot of love out here. I feel very well supported by the CFL Fellowship. That's what we call our community.

CH: Longtime football fan Linda Wood Edwards speaking with Mark Connolly, host of CBC's Edmonton AM.

[Music: Spanish guitar]

Stretchy, Washible Batteries

CH: They're light, stretchy, and bounce back into shape, even when they get wet. And they remain surprisingly powerful. I'm not describing a pair of spandex shorts; I'm talking about a new kind of wearable battery created at the University of British Columbia. Professor John Madden and his team of engineers at the school's Advanced Materials and Process Engineering Lab have created what could be the first flexible and washable battery. He explained what they've done and how they put their battery through the wringer.

SOUNDCLIP

JOHN MADDEN: Well, imagine a battery that's maybe a little larger than a coin cell that you can grab in your hands, stretch to twice its length, twist and throw in the washing machine and it'll still work.

GLORIA MACARENKO: So how did you even start going about creating this?

JM: Well, we've been working on wearable sensors in the lab. And a lot of wearable sensors, there's a lot of interest in being able to, for example, take samples of sweat and figure out, OK, what are blood sugar levels? Or are you at risk for a disease? And we'd like to be able to put that and maybe integrate it with clothing or put it on a patch next to the skin. But you really don't want that to feel awkward, or you know you don't want a hard coin cell battery sitting next to your skin. And if it's in your clothing, you'd like to just be able to throw that in the washing machine. So we turned our attention to making a battery that could be wearable and yet, safe and unobtrusive.

GM: Well, and what were some of the challenges along the road?

JM: Well, one of the challenges is that batteries are put in a case for a reason, and one of those reasons is that they dry out if you don't have that covering. And the other reason is they tend to swell up. So we had to have something inside that it was OK if a tiny part of it came out. And yet, would be stretchable and bendable. And so, finding the right case was a big part of the challenge. And then making it all stick together once you have that right case was another part of the challenge.

GM: How does it complicate things when it... when it has to be washable? And not just in the water once, but like washable many times?

JM: Yeah. Well, you think about plastics that allow things to be bendable, and usually, they also have a thin metal coating. Like, you can get a potato chip bag it will have a thin aluminium coating to stop the breathing in and out of materials. Now, if you want to make that packaging also stretchable, you can't have that metal coating anymore. So what we've done is find a rubbery material that also doesn't let very much of the water that's inside the battery come out. And then we've tested it, and we were even excited to see that we can throw it in the washing machine with soap and other clothes and still, enough for the contents were kept separate from the wash that it will still work.

Speaker 2: UBC engineering professor John Madden speaking with Gloria Makarenko, host of On the Coast.

[Music: Ambient]

Toronto Delivery Robot

Guest: Ignacio Tartavull

CH: A vote next week by Toronto city council could mean the end for some couriers named Geoffrey. Not human Geoffreys though. I'm talking about pint-sized, pink delivery robots named Geoffrey that run errands and travel on sidewalks in downtown Toronto. The city's accessibility advisory committee is calling for the bots to be banned. They say they're a hazard for people with low mobility or vision, seniors, and children. Now the creator of those bots is temporarily taking them offline. Ignacio Tartavull is the founder of Tiny Mile. We reached him in Toronto.

CO: Ignacio, your robots aren't banned yet, so are you taking them out of service?

IGNACIO TARTAVULL: We really care about the safety of everybody. We have been doing deliveries for two years, and we've done over 100,000 kilometres. We haven't had a single accident or incident. The reason we're taking them out is because we want to give space to authorities and to everybody in the community to come to our office, to see our robots and to see how safe they are.

CO: What did they look like and what do they do?

IT: They’re basically a robot which is a small pink box that moves at walking speeds on sidewalks and can do or run errands for people. and the main advantage is the cost. Most restaurants and things alike, they pay a large commission to companies like Door Dash and Uber Eats. We charge no commissions, so we are commission-free. And we only make an income from customer tips. And so it's super affordable. And that means that people and community can now use this service and depend on this service to get things like medications and meals.

CO: How many of these do you have?

IT: So we have only 10 robots in circulation. And so we're a small start-up. We're really in our infancy.

CO: But how many do you plan to have?

IT: Our plan was really to to get up... maybe up to 100 robots.

CO: and, like, how far do they go? Are they just like a neighbourhood or do they... are they driving around a large area?

IT: So we operate in all in downtown Toronto. And so if you need medicines or if you need a meal or something alike, most likely you'll have... you have an option within a kilometre. And so most of the deliveries we’ve done are under one kilometre.

CO: Just out of curiosity, does anyone ever rob the goods that are on these robots?

IT: [chuckling] No, no, no. That hasn't happened.

CO: [chuckles] I have many questions about your robots, but let's just stick to the issue at hand, which is that the city is considering banning them from the streets. And the reason for that is that they're small and they move around and they could be hard to see for some people, right?

IT: We don't know. And so the reason we took them off the street is because, one, to understand what the efforts are. And we have been receiving overwhelming messages, positive messages, from the disability community saying thank you for delivering medications to me. Thank you for delivering hot meals. I don't need to rely on my family anymore to support me. I can be independent, but we understand that accessibility is complex and there are people of all abilities. And so we're really open to feedback and see what we can do so that we can keep benefiting the accessible community and everybody, everybody within that community.

CO: Right. But it is a minority because there are people who have disabilities who regard these as hazards, right? Because if you're in a motorized wheelchair, you could... you could have, I guess, a collision with one of these. If you are sight-impaired, you can trip over one of these. If you are not moving at the speed of normal walkers, you could be... you could collide with one of these, right? Isn't that possible?

IT: While we've been operating for two years and we haven't had any accidents or any reports like this. And so we have encountered thousands and thousands of people on missions that you have mentioned. And so we always stay away and move around them and so on. We haven't had any... any people tripping on any condition so far. The city usually do reports and a study before making a decision. And so what we think is that the city should do the normal process and really study this deeply.

CO: What is it you want to show the city about how these operate? I mean, why that they're safe? Why they won't run into people or trip them?

IT: First of all, they're inherently safe in the sense that they weigh only about 20 kilos. So the weight of a toddler. And they move at walking speed. And so even if it were to collide into you, which hasn't happen, it really feels like a dog maybe hitting you. Like, it wouldn't cause any bruising.

CO: How can you avoid people? How does it... how does it circumvent pedestrian traffic, for instance? How is that possible?

IT: The robot is not autonomous. And so we use something very similar to Zoom. And so there's a person with a joystick. And that person can see through the camera robot, everybody, everything around. And so you basically navigate the robot around you. And so these are very different from the other million real obstacles in the sidewalk. So you'll see a lot of construction or some cones and benches and chairs. There’s like so much on the sidewalk that it's so easy to trip over. And so something that's so small and can actually avoid you, it's kind of the... the smallest of the problems.

CO: So you want the city to study them, you want them to see and what do you think you can prove? What's the argument and what's the demonstration that you think you can give that would make the Toronto City Council change its mind about this?

IT: What I'm saying here is that there’s a community of accessibility and elders who have been benefiting from getting medications and hot meals at a really low cost. ANd have provide them with more independence. I'm saying that we're grateful of the environment. And I'm saying that we're removing cars from the streets and therefore, reducing death rate and accidents and injuries. And so there's a huge amount of benefits to society and no drawbacks. And I spoke with many councilors this morning, and what they all say is they see the benefits and they... they see the inevitable that in the future, these robots will be making Toronto better. And so the real issue here is if we get banned, given that we're in a small start-up, we'll go out of business. And then a year from now, they're going to be allowed. And a company from the States is going to come. And this company might not care about accessibility as much as we do.

CO: And if they do decide to ban them, you have all this investment. This... this will be a big blow to your business, I guess... well, it’ll be the end of your business.

IT: It will be. So I've been working a lot of hours a week for the last two years, and we're a team of 15 people. And we all care deeply about accessibility, about helping the elders, about the environment. And this will be…. we basically don't have money to go to another city. And so this will be the end of our business.

CO: Ignacio, we will leave it there and we'll see what Toronto decides to do about your robots. Thanks for speaking with us.

IT: Thank you.

CH: Ignacio Tartavull is the founder of Tiny Mile, the company behind a fleet of small delivery robots in Toronto. That's where we reached him.

[Music: Indie rock]

New York New Voting Measures

CH: Next municipal election, New York City is going to have to print a lot more ballots. Yesterday, the city council there voted to allow noncitizens to vote in local races, as long as they have a green card, or the legal right to work in the United States. That means hundreds of thousands of new voters will be able to have a say in how New York is run. Here's Councilman Francisco Moya, voicing his support at yesterday's meeting.

SOUNDCLIP

FRANCISCO MOYA: To me, this is a very personal vote that I take today. I'm the proud son of Ecuadorian immigrants. I have the distinction of being the first Ecuadorian-American to ever be elected to public office, not just in the state of New York, but in this country. And that would not have been possible without the hard work and effort of my parents. Voting is a very important tradition in our household. We always go vote as a family, and there's always been one family member that's never had the opportunity to vote for their son. And that's my mom, who’s right here. And this is going to be for the woman that has given me the opportunity to be in elected office. And this one is for my Ma, and for about 900,000 immigrants that have truly made a difference in the lives of so many here in New York. I proudly vote I. This is for my beautiful mother, who will get to vote for her son.

CH: New York City Councilman Francisco Moya. City council there has just voted to allow non-citizens to vote in municipal elections. That makes New York the largest city in the U.S. to enfranchise non-citizens. They’ll be allowed to vote starting in 2023.

[Music: Instrumental]

Tesla Video Games

[Sound: Pacman sounds]

CH: Here's a fun -- thing! Come on, get -- we just got this sweet new upgrade in the studio. And now I can play my games while I'm on the air. And no … one will be … any the…look out -- NO --

[Sound: Pacman dies]

CH: Aw, man. I lost again. Solitaire is hard. And you know, actually, doing two things at once is hard. Or actually doing two things at once is easy -- but doing either of them well is not. That's why the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in the U.S. is looking into a complaint filed by an Oregon Tesla owner. The man was alarmed to realized his 2021 Model 3 made it possible for him to play video games or surf the internet -- while he was driving. In a car. That was on. And moving. So I guess you could be driving through traffic on the extremely solid road while driving into other cars in a video game. And in constant danger of forgetting which is which. It's not entirely clear whether the gaming-while-driving capability is a feature or a bug on the part of the car company. Regardless, Tesla isn't any points with safety advocates. Because they have bigger concerns than a computer crashing.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

December 10, 2021 Episode Transcript

More Stories Like This