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 2022

The AIH Transcript for May 18th, 2022

ROBYN BRESNAHAN: Hello, I'm Robyn Bresnahan.

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

[Music: Theme]

Prologue

CH: Tonight

RB: No safe haven. In the wake of a racist mass shooting in Buffalo, Canada's Public Safety Minister says this country is far from immune to the kind of racist violence that's making headlines south of the border.

CH: Fed up. Two young children were hospitalized in Tennessee when they couldn't get the nutrition they needed -- and the doctor who treated them tells us the country's ongoing baby formula shortage is the greatest crisis of his career.

RB: Breaking news. Russia says it's shutting down the CBC's Moscow bureau, in retaliation for the Trudeau government's ban on its state-controlled network, Russia Today. Our correspondent there says the real victim will be the truth.

CH: Crash course. New research says women are more likely to end up trapped in their vehicles after an accident. And our guest hopes paramedics and car manufacturers will follow the roadmap her study lays out.

RB: Going out on an extra limb. Science suggests three-legged animals don't exist. But our guest is tripling down on the claim that one parrot's beak makes for a rare exception.

CH: And… the light at the end of the tunnel is the end of the tunnel. New research shows that LED lights are extremely effective at attracting and ensnaring scallops. A breakthrough that's getting glowing reviews from environmentalists.

CH: As It Happens, the Wednesday edition. Radio that assumes the scallops find those arguments shellfish.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: Marco Mendicino Racism, Moscow CBC Bureau, U.K. Car Crash

Marco Mendicino Racism

Guest: Marco Mendinino

CH: Marco Mendicino says Canada is not immune to the kind of hatred that led to Saturday's mass shooting in Buffalo, New York. Mr. Mendicino is Canada's Minister of Public Safety. He's been talking about the murder of 10 Black people by a young white suspect who appears to have been motivated by white supremacist paranoia and a trumped-up theory called 'The Great Replacement.' And Mr. Mendicino says that, in the aftermath, Canada must do more to address racism and gun violence. We reached Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino in Ottawa.

RB: Minister Mendicino, what do you mean when you say that Canada is not immune to the kind of thing that we saw in Buffalo on Saturday?

MARCO MENDICINO: I mean, that's the kind of hatred and anti-Black racism that informed the senseless and brutal murder of innocent African-Americans last week is a challenge that we face here in our own country. And we've seen it in communities like Quebec City, where five years ago, we saw a number of Muslims gunned down while they were praying at a mosque. We've also seen it in London, where we're approaching the one-year anniversary of a Muslim family that was run over, tragically and shockingly. And having had the opportunity to meet with both of those communities and speaking with their leaders, I know that there is still much pain, much anguish, and much trauma as a result of those… those awful acts which were informed by… by hatred and racism. And we in Canada have a long way to go to confront that reality, but we will do it together.

RB: You have promised to do more to address gun violence and racism in this country. What needs to be done?

MM: Well, first and foremost, as leaders and as fellow Canadians, we have to call it out. And we have to be clear-throated and unambiguous in underlining acts of racism. And the act in Buffalo was an act that was driven by anti-Black racism. In London, it was an act of Islamophobia. In Quebec City, it was an act of Islamophobia. We've seen gun violence at other places of worship like synagogues, where those are acts of anti-Semitism. So it begins by calling it out. When it comes to dealing with gun violence specifically, it is in my mandate to take more action to get deadly guns like the AR-15s out of our communities. And so, we're absolutely steadfast in our resolve to do that.

RB: Minister, you say we need to call it out, but I notice that you have not used the term white supremacy. Why not?

MM: Well, absolutely. And this is… this was an act of anti-Black racism, which was driven by an ideologically-motivated extremist rhetoric of… that is associated with white supremacy. It is… it is… it is a harsh reality that exists not only in the United States, but indeed in Canada and around the world. And it's important that we understand that that there is a connection between rhetoric and violence. Words matter. Words can incite. Hatred can lead people to violence. And that includes some of the kind of grotesque violence that is associated, sadly, with guns that we've seen in Canada as well. And that's why we have to take action.

RB: But do you feel that there are systems within even the Canadian government that are contributing to this white supremacist theory behaviour?

MM: Well, you know, for example, in the manifesto and I think from last weekend, and elsewhere online, when you see conspiracy theories like The Great Replacement theory, it does give fertile ground to more hatred, more fear-mongering, and more violence.

RB: Because quite recently, one of the organizers of the Ottawa truck convoy, Pat King, he was an outspoken proponent of the White Replacement theory espoused by the Buffalo shooter. I mean, what does the treatment of that convoy say about how seriously Canada's law enforcement agencies take white supremacism?

MM: Well, indeed… indeed, he was. And I have now, on several occasions, spoken out very publicly that the spark behind the so-called Freedom Convoy was, at its core, ideologically-motivated rhetoric and extremism, including the statement that you just made, including other statements that he and other leaders of that illegal blockade, like the only way this is going to end is with bullets, is partially what drove and incited thousands to our borders and to the nation's capital, where the community was laid to siege. And so, I think we need to be very clear-eyed about what that threat represents to our community and to our country.

RB: Can I get you, Minister, just to give us a tangible example of... of what has actually changed in terms of prevention since the London, Ontario targeted attack in June 2021 on a Muslim family? Since January 2017, since the mass shooting at the mosque in Quebec City?

MM: Well, since that time, the Government has hosted a number of sumits focused on hate and racism based on… on the kind of extremist rhetoric that we've been discussing. So there were two summits, one on Islamophobia and the other on anti-Semitism, which have led to a number of concrete recommendations being implemented by the government, again, to amplify the need to call it out, but equally, to invest tangible resources in partnership with communities, to raise awareness, to promote education, to fight against disinformation. And those programs have been and will continue to be rolled out.

RB: With all due respect, Minister, I'm hearing a lot of intention but not a lot of examples of concrete action. I mean, what about combating hate online through social media?

MM: Well, there is another example there in that we have very much online legislation that is being discussed and engaged by my colleague, Minister Rodriguez. And in addition, I would point out to you that when I have seen tweets and posts on social media that have been driven by hate, I am among the first to be on there calling for those tweets to be addressed, taken down where appropriate. And it's just another reminder that, yes, government has to show leadership in this space. But we also need social media to live up to and to abide by the rules that promote safety and to call out abuse and hatred. And so, we have been proactive. We will continue to be proactive. And we will make that kind of tangible, concrete progress that the situation and these circumstances demand.

RB: Minister, thank you very much for your time today.

MM: Thank you very much for having me.

CH: Marco Mendicino is Canada's minister of public safety. We reached him in Ottawa. And you can find more on that story on our webpage at: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: indie rock]

Moscow CBC Bureau

Guest: Briar Stewart

CH: Vladimir Putin is kicking the CBC out. This morning, Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that it would be closing down the CBC/Radio Canada bureau in their country and yanking the visas and accreditation for our journalists. A ministry spokesperson said the move was retaliation for Canada's ban on the Kremlin-funded media outlet RT. But in Ottawa, this afternoon, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau suggested there might be another motive.

[sc]

JUSTIN TRUDEAU: Responsible journalism, sharing what's actually going on with citizens, is a deep threat to Vladimir Putin and his illegal war and his authoritarian tendencies. Canada will always stand up for a free, strong, independent press, doing its work of challenging and revealing what's going on in the world. It's unfortunate but not surprising that he's trying to shut down strong journalistic institutions. Canada will continue to support the great work of journalists here in Canada and around the world.

[/sc]

CH: Briar Stewart is the CBC's Moscow Correspondent. She's been reporting from outside Moscow since March, when Russia began restricting reporting on the war in Ukraine, but her colleagues have remained there. Today, we reached her in Kyiv, Ukraine.

RB: Briar. How did you find out the news today?

BRIAR STEWART: Well, actually, we got a phone call. My producer, Corinne Siminoff, did from the Foreign Ministry, but it was kind of after the fact because they had made this announcement live during a streamed news conference. And so, around the same time we got the call, we were getting a lot of messages from people who had said we heard the news. Are you okay? And it did come as quite a surprise because we are out of Russia right now. And we did need permission to return to Russia. And we were just kind of granted that permission the other day. So, to get news today that they were closing the bureau and pulling the accreditation did come as a shock.

RB: A Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Maria Zakharova, said today that, quote, In essence, CBC has turned into a propaganda mouthpiece that distributes fake and dubious materials concerning our country. What's your response to that?

BS: You know, it is really kind of just the latest in a very disturbing trend, this kind of path that Russia has been going on. It started even before I arrived. I just arrived at the Moscow bureau at the end of August. And, you know, they were already expelling some foreign journalists, labelling, you know, local journalists that were independent foreign agents. But things got significantly worse at the end of February once Russia started to invade Ukraine. The language that they've been using, we've been trying to, you know, do different interviews with people in Russia. You know even topics that are kind of more innocuous. And… and we talk to people, and as soon as they find out we're Canadian, they say, oh, you're from an unfriendly country, we can't talk to you. So, to hear Maria Zakharova say that it isn't surprising. I mean, we obviously don't agree with it, and we stand by our journalism, but it is kind of just the latest push against any kind of critical and independent journalists in Russia.

RB: How often would you get access or interviews with Russian government officials?

BS: You know, it would depend. And I would say our access became less and less over the time that I was there. They do have… they would have press tours every so often where they would invite you along on different things. And CBC was getting fewer and fewer invites. And, you know, just talking to government officials is one thing, but even just talking to regular people became significantly harder. And then, after the invasion, things just got worse. We were trying to do a story on sanctions, kind of the widespread impact of it. And one of the kind of, you know, ironic things was that in Russia, there's a big demand for Botox and lip injections and lip fillers. And because of sanctions, these products were not coming to Russia. So there was a run on the Botox clinics. A Botox clinic we spoke to said, yes, absolutely. Come down. Next day, they called back and said actually, you know what, we reconsidered because you're from an unfriendly country. We just, you know, don't want to talk to you. So, I mean, when you have people in those situations saying no, you can only imagine how difficult it is to talk to people when the subject is very contentious.

RB: What would you say to a listener who might think, well, if nobody's going to talk to you, if they consider you an unfriendly country, then what's the value in being in Russia?

BS: Some of the best interviews that you get, and I'm sure you know, this is when you… you end up connecting with random people on the street or in a cafe, and you… you hear people's opinions. Throughout all of this, people still did want to voice their opinions. And I have to say, like, as… as fearful as the environment is right now, and as strict as it is with these… these laws, these fake news laws, there are still some people that… that want to speak up. And by not being there, you can't connect with those people. And when you're not there, you're not… you're not able to read the environment or read the room. So, you are disconnected from it. And… and… and I have been for a number of weeks now because after they did put these fake news laws into place, we weren't sure how that was going to affect our journalism. We didn't want to have to censor ourselves, steer clear of words like war and invasion. We weren't willing to do that.

RB: Russian officials also said that this move is retaliation for Canada banning Russian state broadcaster RT. What do you make of that argument that this is simply tit-for-tat?

BS: Well, I think that's part of it, but it's hard to argue that that is the whole reason because the European Union has banned RT and there's a lot of European broadcasters still operating in Russia.

RB: How long have you been given to shut things down?

BS: That part is unclear. We don't get the sense that it's going to be an awful lot of time. And there's a lot of questions about just how do you… how do you pack up a bureau? What do we do with all of our equipment? And most importantly, what does this mean for our local staff? You know, we have a CBC bureau there, a Radio-Canada bureau. We have local staff that have just been instrumental in helping us operate. And what does it mean for them now? Because they cannot work for CBC anymore. So that's kind of really where thoughts are at the moment.

RB: Where are you going to go now?

BS: That part is still a little bit up in the air. But what we do know is we're going to be reporting on Russia still. I mean, now is the time when what's going on in Russia it's more important than ever, frankly. And even if we're not there, we're going to keep covering the story as best we can.

RB: Are you at all worried about your safety or the safety of your Russian colleagues?

BS: Certainly not for my safety. I think throughout this whole process, we were very worried about our Russian colleagues. But I will say, in terms of what we're… what we're seeing, that the threat to journalists who work for Russian publications, like independent Russian publications, that is really who the Russian government has been going after. And so far, they have not gone after any foreign… foreign journalists or journalists working for foreign companies with these laws. But absolutely, having staff still in Russia, it is a big concern.

RB: Briar, thank you for making time for us today.

BS: You're welcome.

CH: Briar Stewart is the CBC's Moscow Correspondent. We reached her in Kyiv, Ukraine.

[Music: Ambient]

U.K. Car Crash

Guest: Dr. Lauren Weekes

CH: When most of us get behind the wheel, we're probably thinking about the quickest route, or our to-do list, or why there are more ads than music on the pop stations. But when Lauren Weekes drives, she's thinking about much more serious concerns. She's a consultant anesthetist at University Hospitals Plymouth in the U.K. and also an air ambulance doctor. She and her colleagues have just published research about the differences between how men and women are affected when they're in a car crash. We reached Dr. Lauren Weekes in the town of Chudleigh, near Exeter, England.

RB: Dr. Weekes, what kinds of things do you think about when you get into a car?

DR. LAUREN WEEKES: Well, I do think about the same things as everyone else. But I'm also thinking about is this car going to protect me as well as it does my husband? That's a key theme, really, of this paper that I've been involved in. And the results have been absolutely fascinating.

RB: And when did you start thinking about that?

DLW: It came about as a result of some conversations with my colleague Tim Nutbeam, who is the lead author of this paper. He's done a lot of work about motor vehicle collisions and entrapment and extrication and all those kind of things that happen when a severe car crash occurs. I was talking to him about the gender data gap as a result of reading Caroline Criado-Perez's book, Invisible Women, about how the world is designed around the average adult male and not females. Tim subsequently went and read the book as well and decided to apply the principles to the research that he'd already been involved in. And that's when he asked me to be involved in looking at the data about entrapment motor vehicle collisions.

RB: It seems like one of the main findings is that women are more likely to get trapped in a crashed vehicle. Do you have any idea why that might be?

DLW: We've got some ideas. We can't tell from our dataset the exact reasons, but there are a number of possible explanations. Number one is that our female trapped car occupants were older. That might make them less mobile. It might also be that the car safety systems don't work as well for women as they do for men. We looked at the research around things like crash testing. And crash test dummies are based on the default adult male. They do have a female crash test dummy, which they use in the European crash tests, but this is simply a scaled-down male model. So it has male pelvic and hip geometry and is more representative really of a 12-year-old girl rather than an adult woman. In addition, there are biological reasons, such as the fact that women are more prone to osteoporosis, bone thinning. They also lose muscle mass more quickly than men as they get older. And they have sex hormones that contribute to things like their ligaments being more flexible.

RB: I just want to take one of those things that you said about the car safety systems and the crash test dummies. I mean, that seems like a pretty easy fix to make more female-oriented crash test dummies?

DLW: You would think so. However, they are phenomenally expensive, and it's not just simply a dummy that sits in a car. They have all kinds of data collection devices within them. And actually, starting from scratch with the crash testing process isn't easy or indeed cheap. So, it might require some form of legislation or some kind of collective agreement within the automobile industry that… that… that's what needs to happen. And some of that work has already been… been done in creating female-accurate crash test dummies.

RB: You also found the kinds of injuries are different between the sexes. Can you tell us a bit more about that?

DLW: Yeah, for me, this is the most interesting bit because it feeds directly into my clinical practice. So I now know if I attend a motor vehicle collision in my air ambulance role that, if there is a female who is trapped, she's more likely to have a pelvic fracture than a man would. She's more likely to have a spinal fracture than a man would. Whereas the men are more likely to have chest and head, and facial injuries. So, it just starts you thinking from the beginning really about what injuries your patient is likely to have. And some of that is related undoubtedly to car safety systems. The women had a much higher rate of cervical spine fractures. So the fractures at the top of your neck. And we know that those are often caused by either a side impact or a whiplash-type injury. Those safety systems to prevent those injuries have been designed for men with those male crash test dummies.

RB: So all of this combined, what does this mean for the overall medical outcomes? Do women or men have higher mortality or serious injury rates in a car crash?

DLW: So, when you look at our paper, the overall rate of death for the men who are trapped was higher, but that is because they were more injured. Once you account for things like the age of the person and how frail or unwell they were, to begin with, actually, there wasn't a particular difference in mortality. But as I say, what it does mean is we can start to look at how we prevent injuries differently in men versus women. And also how we treat those patients once an accident has occurred. For example, you know, there are specific interventions that we can make to help treat pelvic injury or spinal injury or chest injury. And if we suspect those injuries from the start, we can be more attuned to looking for them.

RB: What do you want the car industry to take away from all this?

DLW: Well, I would obviously love it if car safety for occupants was equitable for men, for women, for children, for people of different sizes and shapes. You know, I'm not naive. I know there's a cost implication for that. But I think, you know, an anatomically, biologically-correct female crash test dummy as part of all the routine crash tests that they do, you know, front impact, side-impact, etc., would be a really positive start.

RB: Dr. Weekes, good to talk to you today. Thank you.

DLW: No problem. Nice to speak to you.

CH: That was Dr. Lauren Weekes in Chudleigh, England. She co-authored a study which was published this month in BMJ Open.

[Music: Light rock]

Scallop Disco

CH: Scallops are full of fun surprises. For example, I grew up pronouncing their name scah-lop. But I understand that on the East Coast it's pronounced scaw-lop. Hey, to each their own. Except for me, because my boss has ordered me to say scaw-lop, even though both pronunciations are totally acceptable. Like I said, fun surprises. And here's another surprise. A major breakthrough will completely revolutionize scallop fishing, and it came about completely by accident. Here's marine scientist Dr. Rob Enever.

[sc]

JAMIE OLIVER: So, guys, I want to show you a brand new dish on the new Jamie’s Italian menu. It's really light. It’s beautiful. It's a starter. It's down here. Have a little look. It's the pan-seared scallops, okay?

[/sc]

CH: I’m sorry, that was not Dr. Enever. That was Jamie Oliver, who about to describe one of his scah-lop dishes. Oops: I mean scaw-lop. I guess I got confused, since he -- a professional chef who understands how to pronounce his own dishes -- said scah-lop! What a mix-up! Anyway, as I was saying: this week, Dr. Enever and his team published a paper about their experiments using LED lights as bait. Which have led to an illuminating discovery: the lights don't really attract lobsters or crabs -- but their brightness seems irresistible to scallops. Which are evidently not all that bright themselves. Now, that is great, because catching scallops with light would be far easier on the environment than dredging, which is the most common and the most damaging method. And all it took was the invention of what Dr. Enever describes as a "scallop disco". I pronounce that… a success. Now, here’s Metric with “Dead Disco”.

[sc]

PAUL GIDNEY: I'm Paul Gidney. I'm a scallop fisherman from Digby, Nova Scotia.

MAN: Enjoying a meal. And they say, yeah, I have scallops. It was great. And, you know.

MAN #2: The scallop fishery… I mean, it's a… it's a success story in terms of…

WOMAN: I said, well, why do scallops have so many eyes? And he said, because they don't have necks, of course.

WOMAN #2: French fishermen ramming British boats in what's being called the latest chapter of the scallop war.

WOMAN #3: Scallop, scallop, scallop, scallop. It's scallop.

[/sc]

CH: [conniving chuckle] Oops. How did that happen? And either is fine.

[Music: Hip-hop beat]

Part 2: Baby Formula Doctor, Parrot Beak Walking Research

Baby Formula Doctor

Guest: Dr. Mark Corkins

CH: Being the parent of young children is always stressful. But right now, being the American parent of young children who need formula is exponentially harder. Last week, we heard from a mother in California who's desperate to get her hands on specialized formula for her baby, who has a rare genetic condition. Store shelves in many parts of the United States have been cleaned out because of a number of issues with supply. Since then, two children in Tennessee with a bowel condition have been hospitalized because their families couldn't find the formula they could digest. Dr. Mark Corkins treated the two patients -- a toddler and a preschooler -- at Le Bonheur Children's Hospital in Memphis. That's where we reached him.

RB: Dr. Corkins, how were these two young children? How are they doing now?

DR. MARK CORKINS: They're doing pretty well. Actually, there's… one's out of the hospital. And the one that is in is doing much better.

RB: What about their families? It sounds like this has been a really stressful time.

DMC: It's extremely stressful. And it's stressful even for the… to be honest with you, the patients that aren't in the hospital because you've taken something that a lot of them are doing very well on, and now they have to swap out. And there's a lot of unknowns.

RB: Mm-hmm. Can you tell us a bit about these… these two kids? Like, when they came to you and… and you saw them, what was the situation?

DMC: Well, these are kids we follow chronically. Now, these are kids with a specific medical issue. They have something called short bowel syndrome. They have less intestine than they're supposed to. And there's different reasons that kids develop this. Sometimes they've had to have surgery for some reason, and so they don't have enough intestines to really digest and absorb, like, quote/unquote, normal people would. And so, the formulas we use in those kids, especially the very short kids, we tend to use ones that are amino acid-based. You know, amino acids are what, put together in a chain, make a protein. These kids, when they're bowel's short, they don't have time to break down the chain to absorb the amino acids. They just need to absorb them directly. And those… we have formulas that are amino acid-based. But the problem is 80 per cent of them were made by Abbott in the factory that got recalled. And then the 20 per cent of the market from other companies had to try to cover all these patients. Well, of course, there wasn't enough. And basically, we're running… we're running out of those formulas. He tried some other formulas. Some of the very short kids, some of them, frankly, ended up in the hospital to… to be supported by some I.V. fluids because they got dehydrated because they weren't able to tolerate the other things we had tried.

RB: And without getting too… too technical, Doctor, but what was happening within their little bodies that they couldn't absorb these other types of formulas?

DMC: Well, their intestines are too short. You know, when you're out of amino acid-based formulas, what you usually… what we try is what we call peptide-based formulas, little pieces of protein. And some of the kids who… their intestines are not as short, they did okay with that. They… you know, they're able to break down one or two bonds and absorb the amino acids. These kids were both extremely short intestines. And the one that's doing better, to be frankly honest, the reason they're doing better is because yesterday, the hospital got one of the alternative amino acid-based formulas. So we have the kid back on an amino acid-based formula. Wallah, the kid's doing better.

RB: You have been quoted in the New York Times as saying that this is the worst crisis you have experienced in your medical career. Is that accurate?

DMC: It is. It is. It is absolutely accurate. This is like a crisis. When you literally can't get the tool you need for the problem. If you think about it, we know what the problem is, and we've had a way to treat these kids. And then, all of a sudden, you take my tool away. This… this is… [chuckle] it's upsetting. That's a mild word for it. It's sad. It makes me a little angry. A lot of emotions.

RB: And where's that anger directed?

DMC: [sigh] That's a good question. And maybe that's why I'm not fuming angry. [sigh] You know, they had to recall the formula. It was contaminated. The FDA did what they're supposed to do. They are supposed to maintain safety. And so, they needed to recall that format because there were infants reported infected, and they had two deaths. So they needed to recall that formula. So, I can't… can't be angry at the FDA. I could be angry at the company, I guess. Maybe they should have been more careful and cleaned a little better. But, you know, [sigh] I'm human enough to realize contamination is a big problem when you're trying to make something this clean for infants with difficulty. It's one of those I guess I'm angry at the situation, but it's frustrating.

RB: Hmm. Is there a monopoly on this one type of… of formula? I mean, is it available globally? Like, are there other countries that are making it?

DMC: Well, they had 80 per cent of the market. So they don't have a monopoly, but they had the monopoly… well, 80 per cent for North America because the Canadian folks are also having the same difficulty. There are ones that are made in other countries. They would have to do the vetting process, though, required by law, to be able to get into the U.S. And that's, again, to protect our infants.

RB: Mm-hmm. You have said that these two children that you have treated, they're doing better now. But you've also said that you're worried about the long-term impact on growth and brain development.

DMC: Absolutely. Well, even the ones that seem to be doing very well. All right, you know, the ones that they're not… you know, they're not having a high stool output. And so they seem to be able… you know, their bowels are not as short. And so, they're able to digest those pieces of protein and get the amino acids, and, you know, their outputs are not high. But what if the amino acids were better absorbed and they were getting better amino acid intake? And what if my growth isn't as good as it could be? Because, you know, the… infancy is the most rapid period of growth and development, including the brain in our entire lifespan. What if it could be better? What if it's less than it should be? And I have that worry. It's one of those kind of, you know, back of my mind worries that you know, we're not going to know for a while. We may never know in a way because we don't know what the potential is. You know, we don't have something to compare it to, but I have that worry.

RB: Doctor, thank you very much for taking the time to talk to us today.

DMC: You're welcome. My pleasure.

RB: Take care. Bye-bye.

CH: Dr. Mark Corkins is a pediatric specialist at Le Bonheur Children's Hospital in Memphis.

[Music: Vocalization]

FOA Shoal Lake Water

CH: It's been less than a year since people in Shoal Lake 40 First Nation first turned on the tap for a glass of clean water. For 24 years, that wasn't possible. That's how long the community was under a boil-water advisory, until a brand-new water treatment plant was built in the fall. And yesterday, the First Nation was given an award by The Ontario Public Works Association, for building the province's best small drinking water system. That system was made possible thanks to Angelina McLeod's father and uncles, who fought for an all-season transportation link called Freedom Road. In September, when the plant opened, Ms. McLeod spoke with Carol about what it meant to her.

[sc]

AM: I think there's a lot of hope for the future because now, nobody has to get, like, worried about their health and wondering about... because we get sick from the water. Many people have got this stomach problem. It's called H pylori. I have that myself -- a problem where I have to take antibiotics, strong antibiotics, a lot. And a lot of people have, like, skin problems from the water. So I think our mental and physical health will improve a lot more with clean drinking water.

CO: What effect did it have growing… for you growing up in the Shoal Lake 40 First Nation when you... you when you found out that other people who didn't live on your First Nation actually could drink water out the tap, didn't even... didn't even think about it?

AM: Um, I had some... some really… [beginning to cry] I suffered a lot of depression growing up, like lots, just feeling that I was less than. Like, feeling like, oh, the world doesn't care about Indigenous people. Like, you know? Like, First Nations people, they think we're garbage. And I just felt like I didn't want to be Indigenous at the time. So, I just wanted to be treated equally, and like everyone else in the world, because I'd seen, like, when I went to the city, I was like, wow, everybody has water, drinking water, and they have, like, they can take a bath and shower whenever they want. And I didn't grow up that way. I can only... maybe I was lucky enough to have a shower, like, maybe once every two weeks. That's because of my Uncle Harvey. Because he was the custodian at the school, and they had showers there. He would let my dad take the keys, and he would let us shower there, so.

CO: Good heavens! As you learned the entire story of what had happened, that your community was cut off, didn't have road access because of the aqueduct, and it was to give clean water to Winnipeg that you didn't have. I mean, what... what impact did that have on you when you got the whole story?

AM: I felt a lot of anger and a lot of [sigh] just, like, everything was unfair. So, learning more about what happened to us and what we were going through because I was just a kid when I went through all that stuff. So I didn't really think too much about it until I moved away and I got my Grade 12. I went back to school, and I got my Grade 12. And then I went to university. And that's where I started learning more about the injustices against Indigenous people. And learning about that just made me want to do something about it, fight harder and raise my voice. I was so shy before. Now, I'm just like... like, I even put a megaphone to Brian Bowman's face one time [both chuckle]. That's how angry I felt all the time. And I just wanted the community to not go through what we went through. I want them to have a better way of life. Like, better... they're going to have clean drinking water, and they're going to have nice housing soon. And everything is coming together because of Freedom Road.

[/sc]

CH: From Our Archives, that was Angelina McLeod speaking with Carol in September, about Shoal Lake 40 First Nation receiving a new water treatment plant. That plant was just named Ontario's best small drinking water system.

[Music: Ambient]

Parrot Beak Walking Research

Guest: Michael Granatosky

CH: You may not be able to think of an animal with three limbs. And that's because they typically don't exist. But scientists now know of one animal that's increased its number of key appendages by 33 per cent -- by getting creative with one of its body parts. A new study shows the rosy-faced lovebird -- which is a type of parrot -- uses its beak as a third limb to climb. Michael Granatosky is an assistant professor of anatomy at the New York Institute of Technology and one of the authors of the study. We reached him on the road between Maryland and Delaware.

RB: Michael, describe for our audience how exactly these parrots use their beaks as a third limb?

MICHAEL GRANATOSKY: Yeah, it's… it's an interesting phenomenon, really. And it's totally weird in the animal kingdom for… for these animals to do that. First, you know, for an animal to figure out odd uses of its different body parts is just crazy. It's really rare. We see it in things like kangaroos that use their tail as a fifth limb. Spider monkeys that use their tail as a fifth limb. But to our knowledge, it's the first example of an animal that actually uses its head to climb on these vertical surfaces. And you can imagine this if you think about a little inchworm that's crawling along as it's going upwards where it has, you know, its back legs on the bottom and its front legs on the top. These parents are moving in a very similar manner where they anchor their back legs and then stretch their beak really far to then pull themselves up and then use the hind legs to scurry behind them. So it's just a really weird form of locomotion. And surprisingly, you know, for anyone who's had a pet parrot, they've seen this a million times. I have a parrot at home. And when he's tired of dealing with me, he just finds his way back to his cage, crawls up the wall and goes right back in. But trying to go into the scientific literature to find examples of this and understanding of this kind of movement, it just doesn't exist. So we're really happy that we're able to work on this project.

RB: As we speak, Michael, I am watching a video of a parrot that is climbing up a wall, and it is like sinking its beak into the wall as it climbs. Is it using it as a lever to get up?

MG: Yeah. So this is actually… this is some of the things that we're still investigating actively. This is the first paper where we really describe this behaviour and try to actually assess whether it's really supporting a significant portion of body weight. And that's exactly what it's doing. So, you can imagine a couple of different scenarios that this animal may have moved. Like one could have been. It just sunk in there like a hook, used that at its head more to stabilize. But what these animals are doing is they are put in almost all their body weight. I think it's around 70 per cent when they pull up there. So, it's… it's a significant portion, and they're just scratching themselves up those walls, yes.

RB: So, the fact that it's using its beak as… it's kind of almost doing a pull up. I mean, I don't know what beaks are made of, actually. [both chuckle] Can they get stronger? Are these parrots' beaks actually getting stronger now that they're using their beak as a third limb?

MG: Yeah. So, this is actually something that we wrote about a little bit in a paper because we try to draw a lot of parallels to what humans would be able to do. So if you think about this, right? This would be a human, like, pulling almost the equivalent of its entire body weight by its jaw and neck musculature. For comparison, most bodybuilders, you know, can only lift about 34 per cent of their body weight. So not that much compared to these parrots. The thing to remember, though, is parrots also have adapted their beaks for really, really strong biting to break into things like strong fruits and nuts. So, the amount of force that they use for biting into things is a lot more than they use for actually locomotion. And, you know, certainly, in the lab, we have the scars to prove that. They can get a little bit bitey when they don't want to participate fully.

RB: [chuckling] So when it came to actually doing the research, how did you conduct it?

MG: So most of this project is based on something called the force plate, and you can imagine that as a very, very fancy bathroom scale. When we step on a scale, it doesn't immediately give us our body weight. What it does is it actually wiggles for a little bit. And that's not your scale telling you to exercise more. What that is, is that you stepping onto the scale itself and actually having acceleration. Force is mass times acceleration. The difference between your bathroom scale and our force plate is that our force plate records in three directions. It reports in that sort of vertical plane that's most of body weight, but also how much it propels or brakes the animal. And then also its side-to-side movement. So, the trick was really trying to figure out how to orient that force plate in a vertical plane and collect the type of data that we needed and really isolate out the individual forces.

RB: What conclusion have you come to of why these rosy-faced lovebirds have evolved this way?

MG: This is the big, wide-open question, actually, that we're still trying to investigate. You know, there are so many different strategies for how an animal can climb vertical substrates. So you can imagine, like, a rock climber using its forelimbs or a squirrel using its claws. Parrots, it seems, just found a totally different strategy that no other animal really honed in on yet.

RB: What do you think of now when you look at your pet parrot?

MG: [laughing] You know, I'm constantly amazed at what they can do. So, parrots as a group, and I guess birds as a group in general, have always been portrayed as bird-brained, right? Not particularly intelligent. But when you actually look at the cortical morphology and the brain anatomy of parrots, in particular, they rival primates for their intelligence on how they can figure things out, how they can just solve problems. So, every time I see my parrot, like, want to get something or get to somewhere, it's just constantly astounding how he could do it.

RB: Now, Michael, please don't laugh at this question, but as someone who has tried rock climbing fairly unsuccessfully before, I could have used another limb as I was trying to scale up a wall. [chuckling] Why don't you think that humans have used another limb, whether it be their noses or something else, to try to help them in difficult situations?

MG: Well, I guess I promised I wouldn't laugh at the question, but no. [both laugh] So, you know, we are quadrupeds, right? And, so we are taking advantage of the same neural programs and pathways that things like climbing primates actually use when they climb up walls. So, we use a four-limbed pattern to do so. So it's just totally different strategy in the way these parrots have figured out. I wouldn't recommend, though, climbing with your head. I don't think it would end particularly well.

RB: That's great advice to end on. Thank you very much, Michael. Great to talk to you.

MG: Have a great day. Bye.

CH: Michael Granatosky is an assistant professor of anatomy at the New York Institute of Technology. He spoke to us while travelling between Maryland and Delaware.

[Music: Experimental]

Urvashi Vaid Obit

CH: As Urvashi Vaid put it, social justice wasn't just her job -- it was a life sentence. One she spent fighting for freedom until her death on the weekend at age 63. Ms. Vaid was born in India and moved to the United States as a child. And while much of her activism was centred around LGBTQ issues, it was sparked a long time ago by her involvement in the anti-Vietnam war and anti-apartheid movements. Long before intersectionality was a mainstream idea, Urvashi Vaid saw her fight for freedom encompassing sexuality, gender, race and class. In the late '80s and early '90s -- when the AIDS epidemic was at its worst, Ms. Vaid led the National Gay and Lesbian Taskforce. And she was outspoken. When then-U.S. President George H.W. Bush belatedly addressed the AIDS crisis in 1990. She interrupted his speech, yelling and holding up a sign that read, "Talk Is Cheap, AIDS Funding Is Not." In the years to come, Urvashi Vaid would continue to pressure the U.S. administration to do more. At one point, by protesting at the National Republican Convention in 1992.

[sc]

URVASHI VAID: People need to understand that that the gay community is… is motivated and angry and out in the street demonstrating because we have been so profoundly affected by this health crisis in this country. Now, I have lost too many people to this disease. Dear friends of mine. Dear colleagues. Incredible leaders. And I've had enough. And I'm not going to put up with George Bush's stonewalling. And that's what that march on Monday was about. People who've had enough of stonewalling. And no, we can't spend more, but they find money for any little pork-barrel project in the congressperson or members district. And they find money for B-2 bombers. And they find money for all sorts of projects. But they will not adopt the fight against AIDS as a national priority. It's a lie what the Bush administration is saying about AIDS, that they're doing enough. It's an outright lie. A couple of concerns that are important to us are ending discrimination based on sexual orientation. We don't want special rights. That's not… never what the gay and lesbian movement has advocated. We want equal rights. We want equal justice under the law. We would like to not be fired from our jobs for being who we are. And we would like to live in peace alongside the rest of society. That is what we want. And… and the other piece of what we want, which is going to be, frankly, harder to get, is respect. I don't think that's so outrageous or outlandish, but I think it's going to be harder to get because there's a lot of disagreement in society, there's a lot of tension. People have a lot of conflict about how to deal with sexuality in this society. There's a lot of disagreeing, opposing viewpoints. Now, I believe in democracy, and we live in a pluralistic society, and I believe in it, and I'm committed to it. And that's what I'm fighting for. I'm fighting for the space to live my life freely and in peace. Now, to some people, that's… that's a threat. To some people, that very act of allowing me to live as an open lesbian. Allowing me to work as a lawyer as an open lesbian is threatening. I just… I don't think… you know, I think that's the fundamental tension that we're going to have to resolve over the next four or five years in this country.

[/sc]

CH: That was activist Urvashi Vaid speaking to a reporter. Ms. Vaid died on Saturday. She had been diagnosed with breast cancer. She was 63.

[Music: Electronic]

Part 3: Afghan Man Killed, Musk Twitter Latest

Métis National Council/Prince Charles

CH: When Cassidy Caron meets Prince Charles this evening, she's expecting a lot more than a handshake and royal small talk. The President of the Métis National Council says her members want a message delivered to the future king. And she's going to be echoing calls for a residential school apology from the Royal Family -- after delivering a similar message to Pope Francis earlier this year.

[sc]

CASSIDY CARON: When I see Prince Charles this evening, I do hope to let him know that the Métis Nation is here to support the royal family's continued learning and their understanding. They're listening to survivors and the true history of Canada and invite them to walk together with us in the spirit of truth, justice, healing and reconciliation. Because for the royals to acknowledge the fullness of that shared history and apologize for the monarchy's role within it would be very meaningful to many, including many of our survivors.

ISMAILA ALFA: I understand it was a residential school survivor who suggested that you do this. Tell us about your conversation with them.

CC: Yeah. So, in the planning for our journey over to the Vatican a few months ago, we were having different conversations about, you know, the different ways that the Metis Nation is already moving forward, how we are doing the work of healing and rebuilding and the different ways that other individuals can play a role in that. And it just in passing in one of those conversations, a survivor did mention, you know, after we meet with… with Pope Francis, I do think we should have the same conversation, with the Queen, with the Royal Family. And… and talk about the different ways that we can work together to… to move forward.

IA: What have survivors told you about what an apology would mean to them? An apology from the royals, particularly Queen Elizabeth the second?

CC: In the same way that the pope is the head of the Catholic Church, the Queen is the… the supreme governor of the Church of England, the Anglican Church. And, you know, that is a… it's a symbolic and a ceremonial role that she holds. And it is the Archbishop of Canterbury who kind of does the practical steps here on the ground now. But with the Queen holding that role, you know, it could be really important for her to make it clear to the archbishop that reconciliation is a priority within her future for the vision of the church. And that can go a really long way to creating lasting action and meaningful change.

IA: How receptive do you think Prince Charles is going to be to your message?

CC: I think quite receptive. You know, from what I've seen from their trip out east yesterday, it seems as though they are listening and that they want to listen. And they want to learn and understand. And our… our governor general, Mary May Simon, has… has called for similar ways of moving forward, that everybody has a role to listen, to learn, to truly understand and acknowledge the history here in Canada. And from what I'm seeing, it seems as though the Royal Family who is here is being receptive, and they are listening, and they do want to learn more.

[/sc]

CH: Cassidy Caron is president of the president of the Métis National Council. She was speaking to Ismaila Alfa, host of Metro Morning.

[Music: Vocalization]

Afghan Man Killed

Guest: Farouq Samim

CH: Yama Naseemi and his family were desperate to get out of Afghanistan to safety in Canada. They had been waiting for months for their asylum application to be processed. And the 24-year-old university student had recently applied for visas for them to escape to a temporary haven in Pakistan. But shortly afterward, he was killed -- shot near his home in Kabul. That account -- first reported in The Globe and Mail -- comes from an advocacy group called Operation Abraham. It's helping vulnerable Afghans -- including the Naseemi family -- seek refuge in Canada. Farouq Samim is a volunteer with the organization. And we reached him in Ottawa.

RB: Farouq, what have you learned about how Yama Naseemi died?

FAROUG SAMIM: First of all, this was a very devastating and heartbreaking news to me. He was one of the applicants to become a refugee in Canada, not because of him, but because he was the brother of a female judge who was endangered since the Taliban took over the country. And Yama, what a… what a… what a precious soul we lost. What a poor soul we lost. He was 24 years old, in his last year of computer science and his only sin, his only fault, was he was the brother of a female judge who worked under the previous establishment against those that committed atrocities, against women rights, against those that they were against the values that Canadians fought for in that country. Twelve hours before he was killed, he had submitted a visa for Pakistan to move to Islamabad with his family because they were in danger, not knowing that the Taliban would come and pull him out of his residence and shoot him and kill him, you know? And this was heartbreaking for the family first and for our whole group. If we had done our job and we got this family to the safety, and if the bureaucracy helped us and if we brought the family to Canada, this would have been prevented.

RB: What evidence is there that it was indeed the Taliban who was responsible for his death?

FS: Well, nobody can carry a gun other than the Taliban themselves right now. And there has been constant threats to the family in the past. Their house has been searched more than once during the house search operation by the Taliban. Yama had received threatening calls from numbers that they introduced themselves from the Taliban government. And more than anything, nobody can carry a gun other than the members of the Taliban.

RB: What do you make of… of the fact that they went after Yama? And, I mean, presumably, it could have been whoever answered the door in his family. But if they were after his sister, why do you think that they went after him?

FS: Well, there are a lot of details to come still. But as far as the information that we have, they showed up at the door, and at the time, the sister was at home. In that part of the world, you know that the male members of the family are, you know, protecting the families. And then, they just get him, pull him and tell him, you know, we need to talk with you. And a few blocks away from his residence, he is shot in the forehead and killed.

RB: What's become of his family?

FS: It's… you know, the family had been in constant move from a location to location to be safe. And they're still doing that. Not only about this family, but the whole group of 96 people, now 95 with Yama, lost from our group. This was heartbreaking for me to lose this young soul, this poor soul, and it's devastating for the whole group. But we're still working very, very hard. The rest of the family, the rest of the group, are in danger. I've been trying to voice this to the… to the system, to the bureaucracy that, please, find us a way and process these cases for these people to come to Canada. We don't want to report somebody killed before you take a decision. And this is like a moral imperative, you know, to help these people. And I don't know why this system is taking that long?

RB: We did reach out to the immigration minister's office about this, and they told us that they would not comment on Yama Naseemi's case specifically. And they sent a statement which reads in part, the challenges in Afghanistan are different than any other resettlement initiative. Afghanistan is controlled by the Taliban, a terrorist entity under Canadian law. Canada has no military or diplomatic presence, and our usual international partners are not able to provide logistical support or arrange travel. End quote. What do you say to that?

FS: We do not have support inside Afghanistan. We can get people across the border to where the Canadian High Commission, the closest Canadian High Commission in Islamabad. And Operation Abraham has been behind evacuating over a thousand precious lives from Afghanistan. Most of them went to the United States. Just a few, a handful, came to Canada. And those people are in safety because of the civic efforts, not because of some sort of a system. And we can bring these families to Pakistan, to Islamabad or to somewhere safe that then the Canadian government do not have such an excuse to say that they do not have diplomatic relation. With the issue as the group, the rest of the group visa in Islamabad, we will bring them to Islamabad.

RB: You come from Afghanistan, Farouq. And this is all very personal to you. Why do you continue to do this work?

FS: Well, I have lived in that country, and I have lived under the iron fist of this brutal regime when they first took over the power and the country. I know how brutal they are. They have not changed at all. And I feel obligated to help those that they fought for the same values as we Canadian do, and we did in that country. And we fought in that country. And that's our obligation. And it's my personal obligation to help as many people as possible.

RB: Farouq, thank you very much for talking to us today.

FS: Thanks, Robyn, for having me.

RB: Bye-bye.

FS: Bye.

CH: Farouq Samim is a volunteer with Operation Abraham, a group working to evacuate vulnerable Afghans to Canada. He was in Ottawa.

[Music: Uke!!!]

David Milgaard State Funeral Petition

CH: In many respects, David Milgaard's life changed Canada. And Jolene Johnson wants his funeral to reflect that. As we told you earlier this week, Mr. Milgaard died on the weekend. He spent 23 years incarcerated for a rape and murder that he did not commit. And when he was finally freed, he spent the rest of his life advocating for justice for others. That's how he met Jolene Johnson. She is a private investigator and the president of the National Risk Management Group. She's started a petition asking Ottawa to hold a state funeral for David Milgaard.

[sc]

JOLENE JOHNSON: I think it's important because Canada needs to do right by him. Not only was he incarcerated for crimes that he didn't commit, he was a very strong advocate for Canadians wrongfully convicted. We need to send him out in a… in glory and show his family that we cared about him and the work that he did. He has advocated for years for a national commission to do inquiries in relation to wrongfully convicted. And I just think that, you know, Canada needs to do right by him.

MARCY MARKUSA: I was looking at your… your petition with some 50 supporters, but I'm also noting people writing in their reasons for signing. So, comments like David deserves… deserve no less. He was a lovely, gracious man who never gave up. He and his family deserve a special send-off. People echoing some of the things that you've shared. And finally, one more here. The comment says I would like to see this man now honoured the way he deserves to be. The government should step up. How did you come to know David Milgaard?

JJ: So, initially, I was working a case in relation to another matter. An individual had written a claim that David… that they had represented him as a lawyer. And I had reached out to David, and I turned… it turned out that that wasn't the case. And then, about a week later, he contacted me and asked if I would do a case that he had gotten a husband calling him regarding Odelia and Nerissa Quewezance, two Indigenous sisters that were wrongfully convicted of second-degree murder in the small town of Kamsack, Saskatchewan. And I worked alongside with David on that matter. He was just an amazing man. And I'm just devastated that he's gone. I'm shocked. I think it's a tragedy to Canada. I think he means to Canada never give up. You know, if you're in jail for a crime that you've never committed, make sure you're heard. And there are people, and advocates like Milgaard was that will listen.

[/sc]

CH: That was private investigator Jolene Johnson speaking with Marcy Markusa, host of Information Radio in Winnipeg, about a petition to give David Milgaard a state funeral.

[Music: Sombre guitar]

Musk Twitter Latest

Guest: Ann Lipton

CH: He already controls the outer space space -- and a good chunk of the car industry. But recently, billionaire Elon Musk has had his eye on another big prize: the acquisition of Twitter. He aggressively bid to buy the company, offering $44-billion for it. And that offer that was accepted by Twitter's board. But now, the notoriously fickle businessman seems like he's having second thoughts. Twitter's stock price has fallen far below what Mr. Musk offered for the company. And so, he has been on Twitter, poking holes in his own deal. Mostly by demanding that the company establish exactly how many fake accounts exist on the platform. Ann Lipton is a professor of corporate governance at Tulane Law School. We reached her in New Orleans, Louisiana.

RB: Professor Lipton, is it clear to you that Elon Musk even wants to own Twitter anymore?

ANN LIPTON: No, it's not clear. I mean, he's definitely suggesting that he either doesn't want to go through with the deal at all or at the very least, he wants to do it at a lower price. I mean, he hasn't said either of those things explicitly, although he did say, like, he’s placing those things on hold, which isn't really a thing. But definitely, everything he's doing now suggests he regrets the deal that he signed.

RB: In strictly business and legal terms, can Mr. Musk go back on the deal at this point?

AL: No, not legally. Legally, he has a pretty firm contract that requires him to go ahead with it, even if Twitter made misstatements about its number of spam accounts. The deal doesn't actually allow Elon Musk to back out on those grounds. The deal would require not only that Twitter have misstated its spam accounts, but that the misstatement was going to have some kind of really dramatic long-term effect on its finances. And we just have no reason to think that's the case.

RB: I mean, his behaviour on the platform has been quite something in recent days. He responded to one tweet from the Twitter CEO with a smiling poop emoji.

AL: Yeah.

RB: [both chuckle] I mean, what do you make of these antics?

AL: He's making it very clear that even though Twitter may have the legal upper hand here, that Musk can make their lives very, very difficult if they choose to press ahead with the agreement as signed. So, I mean, just all of these, you know, disparaging remarks about the company, about the employees are actually damaging Twitter as a company like worsem than before he even made his offer. So, he's really making it clear just how much damage he can do to them, even if they have the legal right to force him to close the deal.

RB: As you mentioned, his stated concern since the stock price dropped has been the number of fake accounts on the site. He says the deal can't proceed unless he gets a clear number on the amount of these spam accounts or bots as they're known. Is there any validity to this argument?

AL: I mean, no. I mean, again, the merger agreement itself says that even if Twitter misrepresented the number of accounts, that is not a basis on which to back out on the deal unless there's an additional showing of a fairly dramatic financial effect, which has not been shown. Beyond that, it's not obvious that Twitter did misstate the number of accounts because it always said in its SCC filings it was not sure that it had the number correct. Musk announced when he was taking over the company that he was doing it in order to clean up the spam. And then, refused the opportunity to do due diligence, which means that like before signing, he did not take the opportunity, which he could have taken, to review Twitter's internal, you know, information to determine whether the spam counts were accurate. I mean, all of… so all of this… just it's not a basis for backing out of the deal. And it doesn't… and it suggests that it's not his true concern.

RB: What do you think his true concern is?

AL: Well, I mean, it's really hard to say. I mean, it's not about Twitter stock price dropping. That is a function of the kinds of things that Elon Musk does. if Elon Musk says, I am charging full ahead with this… with this deal, Twitter stock price is going to go up to $54.20. It's hard for me to know exactly what he's thinking. He's obviously a very mercurial sort of guy. But among other things, the Tesla stock has dropped quite a bit, which means that his wealth is now diminished. He may be having second thoughts about tying this much of his wealth up in Twitter. He originally said that he wanted Twitter essentially for political purposes because he wanted to make it a free-er speech platform. But then, he got a lot of investors in to come with him. And he's made them some fairly dramatic promises about increasing Twitter's profitability. And it's not clear that he can do that. So, he may be having second thoughts about that as well. It's really hard to say.

RB: Do you think this is a ploy to get Twitter at a lower price?

AL: I think it's either a ploy to get Twitter at a lower price or a ploy to get out of the deal entirely. And to show Twitter just how much trouble he'll make if they try to make a legal case out of this.

RB: It kind of feels like he's starting a dumpster fire on a company that he wants to own. I mean, what sense does this make to you? [laughing]

AL: They only sense it can possibly make is if he's trying to make a point to the Twitter board itself about what happens if they try to enforce the agreement as written. But then you're right. And he's sort of playing with fire because he's got his own investors and they're watching him tank the company. And if he ends up having to buy it for some reason, that's not very good.

RB: If you're sitting in Twitter's boardroom right now, what do you do?

AL: They’re trapped. And part of it is they kind of saw this coming and they didn't heed the warning signs. I mean, they signed this deal incredibly quickly. They didn't shop the company to other buyers because they thought there weren't any other buyers. And maybe that's right, but they certainly didn't make an attempt. They knew that he was fairly erratic. I mean, that's why they originally resisted the offer, but they signed the deal anyway. And now, they're kind of stuck with something that was predicted. Quite frankly, nobody really thought that Elon Musk was going to go through with it.

RB: What kind of conversations have you been having with your students about this story?

AL: I mean, they're just absolutely fascinating. It's marvellous because I was teaching mergers and acquisitions when this whole saga began. We were like just tracking it through. So Musk files these forms that indicate that he has a five per cent stake in Twitter… or… or a nine per cent stake in Twitter. And I had taught the students about the forms, and I got to show them, and here are the Elon Musk forms. And then Twitter adopted a defensive measure in case he wanted to do a hostile takeover, known as a poison pill. And we had just learned about poison pill. So I got to talk about poison pills in the context of the Twitter saga. So, I mean… and the students were absolutely fascinated. They got to watch what we were learning come to life.

RB: So, Elon Musk has been a gift to your teaching then?

AL: He's an absolute gift to M&A professors everywhere. I mean, first of all, suddenly everyone's interested in things we have to say. But more generally, I mean, he will be a classroom example in mergers and acquisitions in corporate law and contracts for years to come.

RB: You're a big Twitter user yourself. Have you thought whether or not you're going to stay on the platform if Mr. Musk takes over?

AL: Yeah, that's… that's a really interesting question. I mean, I'm not planning… if he goes through with it, I'm not planning on, like, you know, closing my account that day. Let's just say that the kinds of things he said that he plans to change about the platform don't sound very attractive to me. So, I'm not sure if I will find it to be a particularly, you know, interesting and useful and engaging place to remain if he closes. But I'm kind of taking a wait and see.

RB: Professor Lipton, great to talk to you. Thank you.

AL: Thanks. Bye-bye.

CH: Ann Lipton is a professor of corporate governance at Tulane Law School. We was in New Orleans.

[Music: Disco]

FOA: Battle Of Alberta

CH: It's been 31 long years since a faceoff of these proportions. Fire versus fuel. North versus south. Calgary versus Edmonton. The showdown begins tonight, with the kickoff of an NHL conference semi-final series that pits hockey fans against each other in a Battle for Alberta. It's the first time the Flames and Oilers have faced off in the postseason since a famously brutal seven-game series back in 1991. At the time, CBC Radio spoke with people at a bar in Red Deer, where fans of both teams co-exist in about equal measure.

[sc]

BRETT HARRIS: So… so, what's the line for here?

WOMAN: Well, it's dividing the bar right in half. Edmonton Oilers are on one side and Calgary Flames are on the other side. And [chuckle] I guess we cheer which team we want.

MAN: It keeps us apart, too.

WOMAN: Yeah. [laughing]

MAN: During the games, we don't… either. I’ll stay home and watch it and she goes out or vice versa. We don't like to watch it together.

WOMAN: Yeah.

BH: So you guys are sitting on the Calgary Flames side here. Does that mean you're… you're cheering for the Flames?

MAN #2: No. tonight, I'll be over there. [chuckling]

BH: How about you?

MAN #3: I’ll be over there tonight.

MAN #4: I got a lot of hope in the Flames. They can do it. Three straight. Not a problem.

[/sc]

CH: From our archives, Flames and Oilers fans from Red Deer, Alberta speaking with the CBC's Brett Harris the last time the two teams met in the playoffs, in 1991, it turned out Calgary could not do it -- falling to Edmonton five - four in Game Seven. A result Oilers fans hope their team will be able to replicate in this series. Here's what a few fans of both teams had to say in the lead-up to tonight's puck drop.

[sc]

MAN: Well, my… my prediction, actually, is that the Oilers for sure are going to move ahead in the series. I have a lot of faith in Oilers, of course. You know, I've lived in Edmonton for quite a number of years and, you know, I also go to Calgary, I'll be attending the game in Calgary. So, you know, I'm that confident.

COLTON HUTCHINSON: You'll be in enemy territory.

MAN: Yeah, yeah. I'm that confident that I'm going to go into the arena with my Oilers jersey and I'm going to cheer on my… my Edmonton Oilers.

MAN #2: We’ve been waiting since the nineties for this. So.

ELIZABETH WITHEY: Yeah, seriously.

MAN #2: It's about time. I waited my whole life for this.

EW: I was going to say, were you even alive in 1991?

MAN #2: I was two years old.

EW: You were two years old. But you've heard legend of it?

MAN #2: I have. I have.

EW: What do you think the city is going to be like on Wednesday night?

MAN #2: Pandemonium. Something we haven't seen in years.

WOMAN: Super excited. And it's going to be wild.

EW: It's going to be wild?

WOMAN: It’s going to be wild. It's going to be good to have this kind of Canadian battle in hockey again.

EW: Okay.

MAN #3: I’m an Oilers fan, so --

EW: Sorry, sorry, sorry. What did you say?!

MAN #3: [chuckles] I'm in Oilers fan.

EW: Oh, my gosh! How's that going for you?

MAN #3: I'm excited.

EW: Yeah?

MAN #3: Definitely a little bit nervous, but really excited.

EW: Well, what's it like being an Oilers fan in Calgary?

MAN #3: Oh, it makes you like them even more.

EW: Really?! Why?!

MAN #4: Just a lot of friends and everybody's really excited and the rivalries and a lot of fun, so.

EW: How long have you been a Flames fan?

MAN #4: Since I’ve been in Calgary, which is not long ago. Nine months ago, I came to Calgary.

EW: That's okay. You were committed from Day One, right?

Speaker 4: It was… It was the first thing I bought was a flames jersey was the first thing I bought since I've got to Calgary. [chuckling]

MAN #5: It's going to be a long series because we're all going to enjoy it. I've been watching them since… the Oilers, since 1979 when they first came. And every single battle in the mid-80s was great. Looking forward to it. It’s 31 years, right? So, I was a mid-20s back then, so I'm looking forward to it. It's going to be great for the cities and the economy.

WOMAN #2: I think we're going to crush Edmonton.

EW: What do you expect the next week or two to be like in Calgary?

WOMAN #2: Oh, it will be lit up. It will be so much fun.

EW: And then, I mean, do you even dare to think beyond this round?

WOMAN #2: One game at a time, one period at a time, one shift at a time.

EW: Okay, that's good life advice.

WOMAN #2: [both laughing] Thank you.

[/sc]

CH: Oilers and Flames fans, speaking with the CBC's Colton Hutchinson and Elizabeth Withey ahead of the Battle of Alberta tonight.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

May 18, 2022 Episode Transcript

More Stories Like This