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 Current Transcript for July 21, 2022

Host: Duncan McCue

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

SOUNDCLIP

I lost my house, my history, everything. It's only thanks to God that we were killed.

DUNCAN MCCUE: 19 people did die. Hundreds lost their homes, and thousands were left without clean drinking water after the 2015 Mariana Dam disaster in Brazil. Victims are suing international mining giant BHP for more than $6 billion. Years later, can they get the justice they seek in a British court? That's in 30 minutes. And then.

SOUNDCLIP

Half a million insect species could be lost to us by the middle of this century. I mean, it's catastrophic losses.

DM: In just a few decades, we could lose large populations of bees, butterflies, fireflies and many other insects. And us humans are to blame. How do we live in a world where bugs are disappearing and can we save them? That conversation in an hour. But we begin with preparations for the papal visit. I'm Duncan McCue, sitting in for Matt Galloway. This is The Current.

[Music: Theme]

Preparations for the Pope’s visit, and the expectations among Indigenous communities

Guests: Neil McCarthy, Falen Johnson

DM: In just three days, Pope Francis arrives in Canada. He has described the trip as a penitential pilgrimage. He's expected to deliver a historic apology to survivors and their communities on the site of a former residential school in Maskwacis, Alberta. The apology is something many indigenous people have been seeking for years. But putting together an event of this magnitude in a matter of months has been a challenge. And with some insight into that, I am joined by Neil McCarthy. He is a spokesperson for the papal visit. Good morning.

NEIL MCCARTHY: Good morning, Duncan.

DM: Pope Francis is expected to arrive in Edmonton on Sunday morning or organisers ready.

NEIL MCCARTHY: Yes, we are. You know, it's a huge undertaking. And obviously we're working on a papal visit with a much shorter time frame than than most. Usually there's 12 to 18 months. The plan we're trying to do this in the four months. So there's all hands on deck for sure. I've just been part of a group that's been travelling with some Vatican officials to do advanced work and a final look at all the sites. And Iqaluit, we started on the weekend, Quebec City and now we're in Edmonton. So we're we're ready to go.

DM: You imagine that the papal visits, I mean, they're usually planned over a period of years, but this one has been put together in four months. Has that been enough time for you to to do the proper consultation with survivors and indigenous communities?

NEIL MCCARTHY: Well, I think we all agree that we would have liked to have more time to do some of those things. We're trying to accelerate that process as much as possible. You know, when we went with the Indigenous delegation to Rome in March, the Holy Father spent four hours listening to their stories and hearing their truth, and he came back and said, I want to come in July. And when the Pope says he wants to come, we try to obviously accommodate that. He's got some health challenges. And so I think he also wanted to try to come to this country and this land to be here as soon as possible. And so, you know, we're working hardwith all the various partners across the country to try to do as much as we can to get those that want to be there at the events with the Holy Father.

DM: So what are some of the biggest challenges that you face then?

NEIL MCCARTHY: You know, it's a huge logistical undertaking, obviously. And you're not just planning one event. You're planning, you know, in many ways about ten or 12 events over the course of the time that the pope is here. And so they're different. Every event looks a little bit different. You have a mass at Commonwealth Stadium where you've got fixed infrastructure and seating. And so, you know, they're accustomed to large crowds. And then you've got some other events, you know, gathering at Maskwacis or if you're looking at locsin and we're getting people in and out in a reasonable amount of time and being able to do that safely, recognising that there will be many elders and, you know, knowledge keepers that will be part of the gatherings and wanting to make sure that we do that well. And obviously things like the elements when you've got outside events are a little more unpredictable. So trying to make accommodation and making sure people know to, you know, prepare themselves accordingly if there's rain forecast or warmer days, things like that. So those are the things we want to make sure that people can get in and out safely, I think are the biggest priorities for the team.

DM: You mentioned that you want to get as many residential school survivors as possible there. There has been some criticism from Indigenous leaders about how those tickets for events have been allocated. Chief Bobby Cameron of the Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations told CBC this week he didn't have a clue how those decisions were being made. How are organisers deciding who to invite?

NEIL MCCARTHY: Well, this is part of the challenge, I think, just in working with so many different Indigenous partners across country. You've got national Indigenous organisations. Some local communities don't necessarily have a relationship with those groups. And then you've got the local groups and you've got those that may not have a connection to any. And so we've been trying to reach out as much as possible to to all the different. I know that there were conversations with Bobby after he expressed some of those concerns, you know, and trying to to just get the word out to people that, you know, anyone who wants to attend, we want to be able to accommodate that. We've been putting out those messages. We've been having individual conversations and trying to do just as much outreach as we can, recognising that it is a short timeframe and there are some challenges associated with that.

DM: We saw that some free tickets to the Pope's event at Commonwealth Stadium in Edmonton started showing up on on ticket reseller sites for pretty large sums of money. How are you dealing with that?

NEIL MCCARTHY: Yeah, that's really unfortunate that, you know, someone would feel that they need to resell free tickets for, you know, a visit from the pope. It's really focussed on healing and reconciliation, but it's not unusual where we see other, you know, people visits around the world where similar sort of things happen. We've been in touch with some of those ticket resellers and some of them have actually voluntarily taken them down, working with Ticketmaster to make sure that they do everything from there and on the security side too, to prevent that from happening. We're going to have another block of tickets that's released tomorrow for Commonwealth Stadium as a final block of tickets. So if people haven't been able to get some yet, they should go to papalvisit.ca 10:30 Mountain time tomorrow and there will still be some tickets available. So we want to get as many people there who would like to be there, obviously.

DM: Obviously a lot of the survivors that are going to be there are elderly. A lot of these events are taking place outdoors. What kind of efforts are in place to make sure they're safe and okay?

NEIL MCCARTHY: Obviously, things like hydration, you know, food, we're making preparations for that. And the reality is, too, that some people may not feel that it's going to work for them in terms of making the track or being able to do that for a longer day, that sort of thing. And so we do have, you know, live streams that are going to be available through the papalvisit.ca website. And we've got more than 12 indigenous languages. That will be a live stream for the events as well as, you know, English, French and some other languages as well. So we're trying to make it as accessible as possible, both for people who are going to be with us on site and also those who may prefer to travel to watch or tune in from home.

DM: What about mental health supports? This will be quite emotional, I imagine, for some.

NEIL MCCARTHY: At every site, there will be mental, cultural, spiritual support workers that are there. And we've been working in close partnership with the government on that. And there's a whole team that's actually travelling and moving from event to event that will be present and with the spaces identified for those who may feel that they need that support and we want to make sure that that's there for them and it's certainly been a consideration through the period.

DM: You've talked generally about infrastructure, but let me talk specifically about roads. I mean, the roads to Maskwacis, [unintelligible], they had to be paved to accommodate everyone. There are some people who are expressing frustration. I took a papal visit to get that done. What do you say about that?

NEIL MCCARTHY: Yeah, you know, and we're grateful to the partners we've been working with, both at the federal side, provincial and municipal. Everyone's been very cooperative. You know, part of what we're trying to do here is if there are infrastructure improvements and enhancements that are being made, they're not things that are I mean, obviously there's fencing or there's, you know, portable toilets and things that you have to bring in just for the time that pope is there. But but the key infrastructure projects, paving roads and things like that will be a benefit to the community for years to come. And yeah, in many cases, you know, it would be nice to see that it's already happened. But in talking to some of the indigenous partners that we've been working with, they've said, you know, we appreciate the fact that this is getting done and things like accessible ramps or, you know, pathways for people who are in wheelchairs or have other challenges to to to walk, mobility, things like that, that they'll be able to use those spaces for years to come. And hopefully that's a legacy of the papal visit as well.

DM: Well, I've got you here. I want to ask you about the $30 million that the Canadian bishops pledged in September for for healing initiatives for residential school survivors. When will indigenous communities see that money?

NEIL MCCARTHY: Well, there was an announcement earlier this week. five million of the 30 has already been raised and the first set of going out the door projects in Saskatchewan that have been approved. There's a board of directors, indigenous based board of directors that are going to be reviewing applications for the projects that come in. And they'll be a couple of times they will review and they will allocate funds so that the money is starting to flow and people are able to in their community, apply for some of those projects. So that was a priority to, you know, obviously get the money in, get the money flowing and start to have those projects funded.

DM: That $5 million already exceeds the earlier pledge that was made in the 2006 settlement agreement that raised only four million and a couple of million dollars got eaten up in administrative costs of that settlement. So why should indigenous communities believe that this $30 million promise is going to be sincere and will all move to indigenous communities and survivors?

NEIL MCCARTHY: Well, I think the fact that five million is already in the bank and going out the door is a sign that there's a real commitment to do things differently. You know, there's been pledges from different faith communities across the country to feel that we are going to meet that goal. It's not a target as it was our best efforts campaign as it was the last time that was done. It's a firm commitment that we've made to say this is going to happen. So I think we're going to see the fact that in, you know, just a short period of time, probably, but six months, that that five million has been raised is a real commitment to say that things are going to be different in terms of the way this is approach this time. And we want people, obviously, to be able to access those funds, look at the projects and make sure they're flowing into indigenous communities so that that work will continue.

DM: Why is it different now?

NEIL MCCARTHY: You know, I think there's obviously the benefit of of looking back at what's been done in the past. But, you know, if you look at that previous campaign, it was a portion of funding commitments that were made by the church. And so two out of the three funding commitments were made to 25 million and the 29 million gifts in-kind. And then the best efforts campaign was the third component. And so right now we're looking at a kind of a new approach in terms of saying we're focussing on this over a five year period. You've got, I think, bishops and dioceses who are a little more engaged this time around. And there's a process where we've got those indigenous partners who are on the board, people like Chief Willie Littlechild and Great Nicholas, who are really going to be able to ensure that the work gets done. So we're trying to work together, new approach and learn from the past and move forward.

DM: And Phil Fontaine, the former chief of the Assembly of First Nations, was on the show yesterday and he talked about how this apology should be the beginning of a process, not the end. What do organisers hope is going to come out of this visit?

NEIL MCCARTHY: Yeah, I think we all agree that it's not as if the Pope comes and there's an apology and everything's done. That's- no, not at all. If this is a significant chapter in a long journey and we saw that, you know, just in recent months with the indigenous delegation that went to Rome, Holy Father spent four hours listening to their their stories, hearing their truth. And then, you know, in a very short order said he's coming here. And this will obviously be an historic moment and a very significant moment. But it is one part of the journey. And so I think, as Phil has said, you know, this is this is a long journey and it's a lengthy, lengthy one. But we're walking together and obviously making sure that, you know, the pope's visit here in the next few days is going to be a significant part of that journey. And people feel differently. You know, we have some people that have said they want to be able to forgive me if other people that have said it's we're not there and there's much more work to be done. And so we're trying to respect the space that everybody is coming from. But, you know, from our perspective, there's a lot more work to do for sure.

DM: Thank you for the update.

NEIL MCCARTHY: Thank you. Thanks for having me.

DM: NEil McCarthy is a spokesperson for the papal visit to Canada and we reached him in Edmonton. All next week, The Current will be providing in-depth coverage of the Pope's visit. Falen Johnson will be our correspondent. She is the host of Buffy, a new CBC podcast about singer Buffy Sainte-Marie. Co-host of The Secret Life of Canada and she guest hosted unreserved last season. Falen Johnson joins me now from Montreal. Sekoh. Hello.

FALEN JOHNSON: Sekoh, Duncan.

DM: Duncan We're just a few days away from the pope's arrival. What are you hearing from indigenous communities about their expectations for this visit?

FALEN JOHNSON: Well, you know, I think there is a pretty big spectrum of feelings and expectations. You know, there are a lot of people who are really desiring this apology feel. They feel like it's going to be very meaningful for them. But then there are a lot of people who are wholly against it. You know, I've I've heard it called a photo op by some, but there's also a portion of people who are kind of trying to be respectful, you know, because while it might not be meaningful for them, they realise that it is meaningful for survivors and they want to make space for survivors to be able to receive this apology in whatever way is meaningful to them. But, you know, there is a sentiment that apologies are nothing new in indigenous country. You know, we have the Anglican Church apology in the nineties for their participation in residential schools. Stephen Harper in 2008, you know, and we had the papal apology earlier this year. So some of the sentiment that I'm hearing is really around action. What is a deeper, more meaningful commitment? What does the apology change?

DM: We just heard from Neil McCarthy about some of the challenges that organisers are facing and how they are grappling with them. What's your sense of how things are coming together in Indigenous communities?

FALEN JOHNSON: Well, I think there definitely is some confusion about what is happening, where and when. You know, for some people who are travelling and there's confusion about how they're getting there. They've been survivors who have been asked to attend and who are excited to attend, often don't know how they're attending. They just know they've been invited. So that's been a bit confusing for some people. And it is it's an event that's been put together extremely quickly. You know, we all know that. But it does feel like a bit of a scramble for some people. You know, and I feel like it's the hope is that the people who really need to be there, who want to be there, you know, get to be there in a way that that is safe. I know I know that Neil mentioned some of that safety some of that safety stuff, because some of our communities are not don't have the same infrastructure as a city like Edmonton or Quebec.

DM: You're going to be covering the papal visit for The Current all next week. What what are you going to bring and bring to us?

FALEN JOHNSON: Well, I'm going to be attending the apology at Maskwacis and getting some reaction and reflection from survivors and intergenerational survivors there. I'm going to be going to the mass at the Commonwealth Stadium and, you know, going to gauge the feeling there. You know, I've heard some concern from people in the indigenous community about how some of these events are feeling, maybe a little bit more celebratory and less apology based. So, you know, I think there's some curiosity on seeing how much this apology will hold throughout all the events. Will this will this turn into a celebration of the pope's visit? Or will all events really hold that core that I think a lot of people are looking for of an apology? I'm going to be heading to Quebec City as well, and I'll be attending the pope's address at the Citadel, where many are going to be gathering at the plains of Abraham to hear him speak. So, yeah, I think one thing that, you know, I definitely am very curious is to see if this if the apology is at the centre of this visit.

DM: What about after the visit and an apology? What are you hearing? Some of the key things that that indigenous communities are looking for in terms of action?

FALEN JOHNSON: Well, I think it is. You know, what? What next? What next is the big question. And I think it's the important question for a lot of people. I think, you know, again, Neil mentioned some of this and you touched on a bit of this, which is, you know, this money was raised for the papal visit so quickly. So there is a question about, you know, these things are achievable, right, giving our communities infrastructure, you know, paving our roads. That is all something that people are like, okay. So if this is a possibility, if this is a possibility, this quickly, why has it taken so long? Why our communities do not have drinking water. Still, it's achievable. Clearly it's achievable. But why does it take a visit from The Oope to achieve some of these things? A lot of people are really interested in the tangibles. They want to see support for health care, mental health care supports, language supports, you know, all the things that residential school took from us. They want to see money put towards those things and supports put towards those things.

DM: I spoke yesterday with Phil Fontaine about the papal bulls. And many have been calling Buffy Sainte-Marie, who has as called to rescind the series of papal bulls and the doctrine of Discovery. Why is that important?

FALEN JOHNSON: Yeah, there's been a lot of talk about people, bulls and the doctrine of discovery. And I think it's really interesting because I think for a lot of people, the people bulls and the doctrine of discovery. This is a new language for us. And I think it's you know, a lot of indigenous people are having to you know, I always think that we kind of have to be lawyers in a bit of a way to understand a lot of the agreements that have been placed on top of our existence. So the papal bulls go back hundreds of years and they were decrees issued by the pope to do things like, you know, excommunicate a perceived heretic or, you know, enact the crusades and these decrees from the pope. They also allowed and gave permission to explorers to claim indigenous lands in the name of European nations. So lands that weren't inhabited by Christians were seen as, you know, as seen as uninhabited as terra nullius. And so these bulls still exist. They are still there. They are still a factor, I think, for a lot of people. And they are viewed as ground zero, really, for the dispossession of indigenous land. So a lot of people want to see these rescinded. But what does that mean exactly is sort of a bigger question. What does it mean to to rescind papal balls, to rescind the doctrine of discovery? I think in a lot of ways what it will do is put some pressure on the federal government to have to acknowledge that. And then the question is what happens next? But some people see this as more of a symbolic move. You know, there is some discussion around it not actually changing anything. You know, it is treaties on in Canada, in our indigenous territories are often, you know, are often broken, have not been honoured. So there is some discussion around rescinding the papal bulls might not change anything. It might just be more of a symbolic move.

DM: A last word from you, Falen. I mean, you're looking forward to next week. What what do you think? Just generally people are hoping comes out of this time, this moment?

FALEN JOHNSON: Well, I mean, many from the indigenous delegation that went over to Rome in the spring were were shocked to see a lot of our cultural items held by the Vatican. Many of us, many people, many people in our community want to see those items returned. And that seems like a really easy first step. The other thing is the records that the church holds on the residential schools, you know that that information could be invaluable for people and people helping to find their their relations and their relatives. And but, you know, more than that, I think that the records that the church holds there, it has it has information about the clergy that could help us hold people accountable, you know, who took part in abuses that that are people suffered at residential schools and day schools.

DM: Looking forward to your coverage next week, Falen.

FALEN JOHNSON: Thanks, Duncan.

DM: Falen Johnson is the host of The Secret Life of Canada and a new CBC podcast about Buffy Sainte-Marie. And you can hear her coverage of The Pope's visit next week on The Current. The CBC News is next. And then this 2015 disaster in Brazil was triggered by a tailings dam failure, a dam partly controlled by the global mining giant BHP. The collapse unleashed toxic waste along hundreds of kilometres of waterways and left thousands of people devastated. In six minutes. How victims are coping and who's being held accountable seven years later? I'm Duncan McCue. And you're listening to The Current.

Survivors fight for justice over devastating 2015 Brazil dam collapse

Guests: Jonathan Knowles, Tom Goodhead, Christine Couman

DM: Hi. I'm Duncan McCue and you're listening to The Current.

[Music: Theme]

DM: Still to come, climate change, pesticides and habitat loss are killing millions of insects. In just a few decades, the world could lose entire species of bugs. What we can do to save them. And just about a half an hour. But first, seeking justice for one of Brazil's biggest mining disasters.

[Music: Theme]

DM: In November of 2015, a dam in the Brazilian city of Mariana collapsed, submerging dozens of homes and toxic waste.

SOUNDCLIP

Speaker 2: The Fundao dam burst open. It had been protecting the town from millions of cubic metres of water which were drawn out of the ground in an iron ore mine. And a tsunami of toxic mud killed 19 people, including 13 employees of the mining company Samarco. It polluted the Rio Doce River for over 600 kilometres.

DM: For years, victims of the disaster have been calling for accountability against the international mining company BHP, which co-managed the dam. Now a court in the UK has agreed to hear their $6 billion lawsuit. Jonathan Knowles is a British national who moved to Brazil to live with his Brazilian wife and he's one of the plaintiffs in the case. We've reached him in Yorkshire, England. Hello.

JONATHAN KNOWLES: Hello. Good morning.

DM: Good morning. Over 600 kilometres of polluted water. What did that look like?

JONATHAN KNOWLES: Well, from the ground, it just looked like a muddy soup. But I've seen pictures from satellites and out to space and it's absolutely catastrophic.

DM: Can you take us back, Jonathan? What was that moment like for you and your family when you realised that the dam had collapsed?

JONATHAN KNOWLES: Well, in the moment, the first news that we got, we weren't actually aware of the consequences. All we knew that we would be without water, really. So the first thing we did was just went about trying to save as much water as we could do.

DM: You were given some notice and then you had to wait for for the the the the the sludge to come down the river. Is that right?

JONATHAN KNOWLES: That's correct. It was about approximately about 11 hours.

DM: So you were waiting 11 hours. What did you expect?

JONATHAN KNOWLES: Yeah, well, we didn't really know. We were told it could be a tidal wave and it could involve a small amount of flooding. But because I lived on a hill, we -- for ourselves weren't that bothered because we knew it would be pretty much impossible to reach that high.

DM: So what happened when that wave hit you?

JONATHAN KNOWLES: Well, we went down to the river to have a look, and we saw these kind of [bull] tidal waves of sludge and debris coming down and coming down the river. It. You know, it sounds a little underwhelming to start with. It was the second day that was horrific.

DM: What was like on the second day?

JONATHAN KNOWLES: The second day was just from one side of the river to the other side of the river: dead fish. It was just a mat of dead fish. It was just yeah, dead fish. It was incredible.

DM: And describe that for me. I mean, what went through your head when you see all these dead fish?

JONATHAN KNOWLES: And I was absolutely it was like something like, I don't know, unbelievable. I didn't know you could have that many fish in the river. There seem to be more fish than there was water.

DM: And then in the days and weeks, did did you realise the impact on human health?

JONATHAN KNOWLES: Oh, it was huge. It was huge. It's when you suddenly realise how important water is, you can't function without water. It's washing your food, washing your teeth, cleaning your hair. Businesses need water for just about everything they do. The whole economy came to a standstill.

DM: Your community was cut off at that time. Did did you get any help from the mining company or the government?

JONATHAN KNOWLES: Eventually we started to get bottled water, but we had to queue for that in the midday sun and in that area, we're talking in the mid-thirties.

DM: How many people was this impacting?

JONATHAN KNOWLES: Well, the population in that town there, I believe, is about one and a half million or something like that. But I believe there's about 22 million people affected altogether.

DM: And how did the company communicate with you in the in the days and weeks after the collapse about compensation or assistance?

JONATHAN KNOWLES: Personally. None at all. Zero.

DM: You didn't get any. You didn't have any discussion with them? Did they have? Did they post public notices?

JONATHAN KNOWLES: And not while I was there. I left fairly shortly afterwards because my business went bankrupt and I ran out of money.

DM: You tell me about that. I mean, there were a lot of people whose businesses were impacted. What happened to you?

JONATHAN KNOWLES: Well, I was selling a valve that saved money on the water bill. So if you didn't have water, you -- you didn't have a water bill, obviously, you don't, you don't want to buy my product. And mine was a fairly new business, and I'd only just paid off the the initial investment. And so I didn't have a lot of money in reserve and within three months I was penniless.

DM: So you had to move back to England and all being penniless. I mean, obviously it had a huge impact on you.

JONATHAN KNOWLES: Yeah. Yeah. Well, it split up the family. I lost my house, a roof over my head, my house and my total possessions came down to a suitcase.

DM: And have you recfeived any compensation at all?

JONATHAN KNOWLES: None at all.

DM: The legal wrangling over this has been going on for years. What's that been like for you?

JONATHAN KNOWLES: Oh, well, it's like living in a no man's land. I can't move forward quickly enough. I'm rapidly reaching retirement age, and I'm really, really worried I'll never have a roof over my head again.

DM: So what does accountability look like for you then, Jonathan?

JONATHAN KNOWLES: Well, ideally, in an ideal world, I would like to be able to put a roof over my head so that I can put my family back together.

DM: Jonathan, thank you very much for for sharing your story.

JONATHAN KNOWLES: Okay. Thank you very much for talking to me.

DM: Take care.

JONATHAN KNOWLES: Thank you. Bye bye.

DM: Jonathan Knowles is one of the plaintiffs in the case. More than 200,000 people are being represented in this lawsuit. Tom Goodhead is the global managing partner for the British law firm PG MBM. The firm is behind the lawsuit. Tom, hello.

TOM GOODHEAD: Hello. Good morning.

DM: We just heard Jonathan Knowles describe how it impacted his life. Can you describe for us how it impacted the larger community? The impact on homes of of all this sludge coming down the river?

TOM GOODHEAD: Yeah. I mean, it's it's hard to really overstate just the magnitude of the impact on on two states in Brazil, miniaturised [soundscapes of Santo]. And of course, Brazil, you know, just like Canada is such a geographically immense country. I think in your introduction you described how this toxic sludge had had continued over 600 kilometres down the Rio Doce. This is the largest environmental disaster ever in Brazilian history. And yet, as Jonathan gave you the numbers of over a million people impacted by this disaster, everybody who lives along the river, but then more broadly, everybody who even lives in the states of Minas Gerais and Espirito Santo. Because of the economic impact and the environmental impact coriverntinues to this day. So everybody from artisanal fishermen to business owners to traditional communities, that the whole section of society in Brazil has been devastated as a result of the disaster.

DM: What do we know about what caused the Fundao Dam to collapse?

TOM GOODHEAD: Yeah. So it was a leak obviously from the from the the tailings dam itself. It began leaking on the 5th of November and then and then that eventually caused the, the, the collapse of the dam itself, which caused such a huge volume of toxic sludge to be entering into the -- entering into the river. And that that the long term impacts of that have been affected until this this day. So there have been different concentrations of mercury and arsenic and chromium and other metals within the water which have led to biological devastation. And some of the scenes which Jonathan was describing immediately after the disaster itself.

DM: How many companies were involved in the dam's management.

TOM GOODHEAD: So the the the dam was operated by a company called Samarco, which is a joint venture between BHP Billiton and between Vale, the Brazilian mining company. But obviously a dam of this size there, there were numerous contractors and, and others who had a role in the management of the safety of the dam.

DM: So why launch this in a British court? Why don't you launch it in Brazil?

TOM GOODHEAD: Yes. I mean, there have been numerous efforts to obtain redress in Brazil, both brought by by private individuals and also by by state and federal prosecutors. The difficulty in Brazil is simply time. Many, Brazil, unfortunately, is probably well known to your listeners, has had a number of very high profile environmental disasters, over the previous decades. And these cases in Brazil can sometimes take 20, 25 years, even longer to resolve. So as you heard from Jonathan is representative of thousands of those that we that we we represent. People can't wait that that period of time in order to access effective redress. And so that that's the primary reason that people were coming to us to initiate this this case. But then a secondary what is a lot of people it's it's not purely about financial compensation. They they want access to remedy, to hold those ultimately accountable, in the courts of the country in which they're domiciled. So it's it's we've got multinational corporations coming to Brazil or coming to other countries in the global south, making huge profits as a result of the the natural wealth of both of those countries. But then when a disaster like this happens, they then seek to not have themselves held accountable in the courts of the country in which that their profits are being made. And that makes no sense.

DM: The following the collapse, I mean BHP and its partners set up something called the Renova Foundation, which is supposed to compensate for the damage. How is that worked out for families so far?

TOM GOODHEAD: I mean, it speaks for itself that there are over 200,000 people and over another hundred thousand who've broached us over the past couple of months of joining the lawsuit in England, that that has been largely ineffective. It's a way, you know, the Renova foundation has some programmes which are good and it obviously has some highly skilled people who who are working in it. But but ultimately, it's controlled and paid for by the companies themselves. So there's no economic incentive for BHP or for Vale or Samarco to be expending the amount of resources which are needed to properly compensate everybody and to do the maximum possible for remediating the environment. It's a scheme, effectively, where a company is able to actually limit their liability through using the foundation as a liability shield and effectively putting caps on the amount which are going to be contributed rather than actually going through the court proceedings.

DM: You mentioned remediating the environment. What about the clean up of the site and that surrounding area? Who's paying for all that?

TOM GOODHEAD: Yeah. I mean, there has been attempts at cleanup, obviously, in Brazil and that has been that has been funded through the through the Renova Foundation, which is, as I said, sort of effectively paid for and funded by by the companies. But there's a huge amount more that can be done. I mean, there is there's a lawsuit in Brazil, which has been brought by the Brazilian Federal Federal Prosecution Service, which seeks to claim in Brazil about $155 billion, which I think in in US dollars is roughly about 2025 to $30 billion. And that seeks money for the cleanup as well. But it's hard eventually to put a to put a price on this. The studies which which which I've seen and have looked at, we're talking about sort of a generational disaster that could be as a long term contamination and impact which could be left for decades and decades.

DM: You are putting a price on it, though, for your for your clients. I mean, this lawsuit is asking for BHP to pay roughly 6.9 billion USD in compensation. Walk us through that. How is that going to work?

TOM GOODHEAD: Yeah, I mean, that number actually was was a reference to when the lawsuit was launched in 2018. But the actual level of damages now is probably very substantially higher than that, because just as Jonathan has described, that every day that this goes on longer, people are still without that, people still in temporary accommodation, people haven't been able to to recover their businesses. People haven't been able to restart their lives. And the more that BHP and these companies deny people adequate compensation, the higher the level of losses incurrs. I mean, it's an art, not a science ultimately. I mean, we do everything that we can to to quantify the nature of people's losses. You can calculate what a fisherperson would have made in a particular year were it not for the interruption to their ability to fish. So that number when it was arrived, that 2018 was the best estimate from the information that we had from our clients and from experts that worked with us, putting a number on the losses. But as each day goes on, that that number effectively grows bigger.

DM: How confident are you your clients are going to get the accountability they're seeking?

TOM GOODHEAD: We're extremely confident now. I mean, this has been a real battle. BHP for the past three years have been trying to deny access to the English courts for our claimants. But the recent ruling of the Court of Appeal was was was extraordinarily powerful in saying that this case should be continued to be heard in England. And looking forward now, this is something which is likely to reach a trial of the liability of BHP. It could be as soon as 18 months that that trial date happens. And so I'm extremely confident that BHP will not want to have that their top executives, their former CEO, all of their the discovery of the documents -- which we know, there's enough publicly available information -- that they were intimately involved in decisions made in the run up to the collapse of the Fundoo dam, which really increased the level of risk associated with the collapse of the dam. And, and I have every confidence that we can prove that out in court if we need to be. But I'm hopeful that BHP will come to the table before that day.

DM: Thank you for joining us.

TOM GOODHEAD: Appreciate it.

DM: Tom Goodhead is the global managing partner of the British law firm PGMBM. We contacted the BHP mining company multiple times for comment on the lawsuit and we have not heard back from them. Litigations against mining companies for misconduct committed abroad is nothing new. Catherine Coumans is the Research Coordinator and Asia Pacific Programme Coordinator for the NGO Mining Watch Canada. Catherine, hello.

CATHERINE COUMANS: Hello.

DM: What do you make of how those affected by this dam collapse in Brazil have been treated?

CATHERINE COUMANS: Well, sadly, I'm not at all surprised that a compensation scheme that was created by the very companies, BHP and Vale, that were responsible for the disaster and a scheme that actually relies on those same companies to implement the compensation, in fact has those companies in its governance structures. I'm not surprised that this has not resulted in equitable remedy.

DM: Why aren't you surprised?

CATHERINE COUMANS: Well, the problem of effective impunity of mining companies operating globally is really well recognised. These companies are often headquartered in very wealthy countries such as Canada, but they operate in much poorer developing countries and there they cause serious environmental human rights abuses. But it's almost impossible for people in those countries, and we've just heard that to hold these powerful multinationals to account. And that is often because the companies are supported by local officials and governments or -- and those officials may be benefiting from the mine, or it's because they're being the people who are trying to bring a lawsuit are actually being threatened with repercussions if they take legal action. And and often also local lawyers are simply not equipped to go up against the legal teams of these powerful multinationals.

DM: Let's talk about Canadian mining companies for a second. I mean, how are Canadian mining companies operating abroad, but what kind of track record do they have?

CATHERINE COUMANS: So Mining Watch has been paying attention to the operations of Canadian mining companies around the world for over 20 years. And we've been dealing with really harsh realities, things such as violent evictions by mine personnel of indigenous peoples from their homes, shootings by mine security of local men and boys, and rapes of women and girls, as well as the use of forced labour in places such as Papua New Guinea, Tanzania, Eritrea, Guatemala, Mexico and on and on. And we also see contamination of ground and surface water at nearly all of these mines. And sadly, the occurrence of these incidents is not diminishing over time. In fact, it's increasing. And this reality, combined with zero accountability for their activities at home in Canada, has led to effective impunity for most Canadian mining companies operating overseas. And this impunity again enables and drives further abuses.

DM: You say zero accountability. I mean, how often are Canadian mining companies held accountable for that kind of conduct that you're misconduct that you're describing?

CATHERINE COUMANS: Not often, barely ever at all. And there's been at least six U.N. treaty bodies and agencies that have called on Canada to take action in Canada to prevent the harm caused by our mining companies operating overseas.

DM: What kind of hurdles are there involved in getting cases heard in a mining companies home country for activities that take place in another country?

CATHERINE COUMANS: Right now, it's very difficult for people who are overseas to file a lawsuit in Canada. So there's a number of formidable legal hurdles that they need to overcome, and not the least of which is holding the Canadian parent company liable for the harm caused by a subsidiary overseas. So we just heard about that, the local subsidiary in the Brazilian case was Samarco, and then the BHP and Vale will say, well, it was Samarco's problem, not our problem. And this is also the case in Canada. It's hard to hold the parent accountable for its subsidiary. But there's also the legal hurdle, hurdle that's called forum. So where the courts often want to return the case to the country where the harm occurred.

DM: And so explain that. I mean, how does that end up playing out for the people who are most impacted? And, you know, in this case, this was a British national who ended up having to go to a British court. I mean, how does this play out for the locals who are looking for compensation for a disaster?

CATHERINE COUMANS: So there have been eight cases filed in Canada against Canadian mining companies since 1997, so only eight and the first three were dismissed. Two of those were dismissed because the court said it should go back to the country where the where the harm happened. There are currently three cases still ongoing against HudBay minerals and the two most recent cases were against Nevsun and Tahoe resources. And those were both both settled. But that's it. That's the sum total of all the cases we've had in Canada since 1997.

DM: What sort of changes do you think would make a difference?

CATHERINE COUMANS: Canada needs to follow the lead of European countries and implement something called mandatory human and environmental rights due diligence legislation. This legislation will require the Canadian parent companies to prevent human rights and environmental abuses caused by their global subsidiaries and their supply chains. And if someone is harmed by the operations of a subsidiary of a Canadian company, they would have legislated access to Canadian courts to file a case against the parent company. And there is right now a bill that's been tabled in the House. It's Bill C-262 was tabled by MP Peter Julian that actually has the kind of legislation that we that we really need incorporated in that bill.

DM: And tell me, I mean, what does this do for for Canada's image around the world? If if Canadian companies aren't being held accountable?

CATHERINE COUMANS: Well, it's a really big problem. I mean, Canadian companies, the Canadian mining companies are amongst the major mining companies around the world. Canada is a mining exporting country. And so in many countries around the world, people know Canada through the harm that they've endured from its mining companies. So Canada really should be in the forefront of implementing mandatory human and environmental due diligence legislation. But in fact, we're we're dragging our feet on it.

DM: When we see the British courts approve a lawsuit like this against BHP, I mean, do you think that's going to change the conversation here in Canada in terms of of political will for the kind of legislation that you're you're talking about?

CATHERINE COUMANS: Well, it's and it was interesting to hear how difficult it was to get that case actually accepted in the courts in England. It was actually dismissed a number of times before it was accepted. And we're seeing that same problem here. It's very, very difficult. Like I said, since 1997, we've only had eight cases brought. And of those, there's only two that have been settled and there's three that are ongoing. So we'll see how that goes. But it's just phenomenally difficult, and particularly because the courts have a bias to send cases back to the countries where the harm was done. Even when we know that in those countries, the legal systems are very often not equipped to deal with the legal teams that multinationals can bring to bear.

DM: Catherine, thank you very much for for sharing your analysis of this.

CATHERINE COUMANS: You're welcome.

DM: Catherine Coumans is the research coordinator and Asia Pacific Programme Coordinator for the NGO Mining Watch Canada. Well, coming up after your regional update.

SOUNDCLIP

It would be fewer butterflies, fewer fireflies in certain places in the world due to light pollution. So is a crisis that's underway and it's unfolding right now.

DM: A crisis that can be halted if we do something about it now. In 90 seconds, my conversation with environmental journal environmental journalist Oliver Milman about the world of bugs, how they help our daily lives, and why some species are on the verge of extinction. I'm Duncan McCue, and you're listening to The Current.

Some insects are disappearing, and that could put humans at risk, says author

Guests: Oliver Milman

DM: I'm Duncan McCue and you're listening to The Current. A couple decades ago, if you took a roadtrip in Canada you would be faced with the immediate need to wash your car. The front grille, the windshield, your vehicle would be covered in tiny insect corpses. These days, most people have no such problem in much of the country. And if that sounds just fine to you - fewer mosquito bites, swarming flies, biting ticks -- it's time to rethink the importance of insects. Because a world with fewer insects would be dramatically different from the world we know. And according to Oliver Milman, it looks like that is where we're headed. Oliver Milman is an environmental journalist with British newspaper the Guardian. In fact, just this morning, the International Union for Conservation of Nature has put the migratory monarch butterfly on its endangered list. His new book is The Insect Crisis: The Fall of the Tiny Empires That Run the World. I spoke with him in February - here is our conversation.

DM: It's pretty good to have you. You've been an environmental journalist for a long time, Oliver. Why write a book about insects specifically?

OLIVER MILMAN: Yeah, it's a great question. I mean, most of the things I write about are around kind of climate change or kind a big kind of charismatic endangered species that we all know about the rhinos, orang-utans the bears of our world. So it was kind of a surprise to me, I suppose, as much as anyone said to be drawn so much to this. But I think there can be evidence of declines and what they mean to us. Struck me as so profound. There was a kind of a slew of studies out 2017, 2018, 2019, just really crystallising what the issue is here with insect declines. They seem to be in freefall in many parts of the world, and the implications for us selfishly are huge each. While we may lose other species and that be considered a terrible shame aesthetically to our planet. The loss of insects is something that is far more dramatic. It's far more catastrophic in terms of our food production. The use of our medicines, the decomposition of our waste. Pretty much everything that holds life together on Earth.

DM: The opening of your book, it's you paint a startling picture of of what a world looks like without insects. Can you describe that world?

OLIVER MILMAN: Yeah, it's a very grim place. You want to live there and indeed, we wouldn't survive there for the very long. The biologist [unintelligible] Wilson estimated, would only last a few months without insects. Essentially, a third of the foods we eat that are pollinated by insects would would shrivel up and and disappear. So you'd be facing mass malnutrition. Many people would be starving around the world. You'd have the lack of insects, such as beetles, to break down waste. So lots more corpses, lots more faeces around in our immediate surrounds. You'd be facing, in many ways, societal unrest, really, because insects are so important to the functioning of our ecosystems, and things would start to break down quite rapidly in our forests, you know, in the countryside and in the urban areas, too. So it's not very pretty place to be. Luckily, I don't think we're going to ever see that because I think insects will outlive us on this planet. The issue is that we are creating a world that is changing the composition of insects. So think less butterflies and fewer bees and more mosquitoes, more cockroaches. We are changing the world around us and getting rid of many of the things we rely upon and many things we love.

DM: You say that you don't think that will see that world, but yet you also describe the decline in insect populations as catastrophic. How far away are we from that potential kind of dystopic future without insects?

OLIVER MILMAN: I mean, certain places in the world, we I mean, the declines are incredible and study in Denmark. 97 per cent drop in just since the 1990s.

DM: 97 percent drop of insects?

OLIVER MILMAN: Yes. When [unintelligible] caught in traps and splattered on on windshields of cars is incredible experiment made by this scientist who's been driving up and down the same stretches of road in Denmark since 1997, every summer, nine times a day and then counts them out of bugs that his windshield. Then he traps them as well around in the countryside and found a 97 percent decline, which is kind of startling. In Germany, three quarters down of trapped insects, a landmark study in 2017 found it's a UN assessment that came out that half a million insect species could be lost to us by the middle of this century. I mean, this is catastrophic losses. Insect numbers, obviously is so large that so many species that they went all go. But as I say, the composition of them will radically alter and and is already happening. These few butterflies, fewer fireflies in certain places in the world due to light pollution say. Yet it's really a crisis that's underway and is unfolding right now.

DM: I want to ask you the reasons why in a few seconds. But but before I do that, the title of your book The Tiny Empires that run the world. How do insects run the world?

OLIVER MILMAN: I mean, that's I mean, it's a great question, I mean, like I say, they I mean most immediate impact we think about is we think about our bellies and when we think about the food we eat. So bees, but also flies and other insects pollinate so much of our food. So about a third of the food we get and it's the colourful stuff. So things like rice and corn, a wind pollinated, but the kind of fruit we like to eat, the very nice vegetables we like to eat, pretty much all pollinated by by insects. So we'd lose the huge amounts of food and nutritious stuff we'd lose as well without them as well. I mean, we'd even be without chocolate because tiny midges pollinate the plant that is used for chocolate. Say, OK,

DM: now you've got my attention or a world without chocolate, I'm worried we'd

OLIVER MILMAN: be without ice cream tubes and cows eat alfalfa, which is pollinated by insects as well, so you'd be left with the vegan stuff.

DM: But how are we going to have to adapt if this trend of decline continues? I mean, what kind of difference will people see on their dinner plates?

OLIVER MILMAN: Yeah. Well, I mean, there is there have been warnings that some parts of the world do face food security issues, especially in poorer developing countries, because those are the places where farming is much closer to people in terms of what they consume. So if in your immediate surroundings there is a pollinator crash and you cannot grow the foods that you eat directly, then then that's going to spell big trouble. I mean, there is one estimate that we're going to have several million more deaths a year around the world because of heart disease and other problems that arise from a lack of nutrition because people simply aren't able to get the foods nutritious foods that pollinators help bring to us. So there is a food security issue, a food diversity issue. There is an issue around medicines as well, which I think is often overlooked. Most insects are a great source of new medicines, and scientists see that as a really exciting avenue to get past antibiotic resistance, for example. So there are several kinds of impacts we really should be thinking about when it comes to our own, our own lives going forward.

DM: They're so incredibly important. Yet we don't. We see them as pests. We don't value them. Why is that?

OLIVER MILMAN: Yeah. Well, I think I think insects have had a bad rap for some time, really. I mean, we call them creepy crawlies. We say people are bugging us. The the the verbiage we use around our everyday lives, we spray anti insect. We don't really appreciate them. You speak to entomologists and it's a complete 180. They are completely enraptured by that beauty about the incredible abilities of bees. It's been shown that they can count so you can teach them to play soccer. They have incredible logistical abilities to travel between plants.

DM: Hang on, hang on. You can teach a bee to play soccer.

OLIVER MILMAN: Yeah, you can. With food rewards, you can teach you to play soccer. There are ants that act as paramedics to other ants. Such is the complexity of their societal systems. I mean, they are incredible creatures, and they perform an amazing job in our environment of replenishing our soils, being food for other creatures. So we're seeing declines of birds in places in Europe, but in some spots in Canada, in the US as well, because those birds don't have enough insects to eat. So you see these problems throughout the food chain, you start hitting animals much bigger than insects in terms of problems once you remove them.

DM: This is the $64000 question why are the insect populations declining?

OLIVER MILMAN: Well, I mean, there's several reasons, but they kind of fall mainly under three broad categories. So you have habitat loss. So we've obviously been converting huge amounts of of land into farmland primarily, but so urban sprawl, highways and industry and so on. So we've chopped down huge amounts of forests and converted fields, not just not just to buildings, but in terms of their diversity. So kind of a meadow of wildflowers, for example, is a slightly different environment. So one that's just a field of soy or corn. I mean, there's just no diversity there. There's nothing there for insects to eat. It's essentially desert for them, so they can't survive in that environment. Only a few can, a few pests can. And obviously that dealt with by farmers. So that's that's one main reason. The other main reason is linked to that, which is pesticide use. So the huge use of chemicals on in agriculture and even in our backyards is is a major killer of insects and non-target insects, too. So the chemicals typically used on crops are aimed at pests, but they wipe out pretty much everything they work out. Butterflies, they wear poppies and the and the insects they don't wipe out, they sent it. They tend to send deranged. I mean, bees, can they have the whole mind scrambled by these these chemicals so they cannot function properly? And then the third reason, which is a growing reason, they say, is climate change. So the bands, the bands in which insects can survive in a changing. For some, that's good news, and mosquitoes range is increasing because if climate change is getting warmer in kind of further than latitude so mosquitoes can spread and therefore disease can spread. That's not great news for us, but for other insects that certain types of Arctic. Bumblebee, for example, like one in four species of bumblebee in North America, are endangered and in danger of slipping out of existence and climate change is a big reason for that. They cannot find food. That temperature is not right for them. So that's that's the other big pressing problem that's obviously escalating in only kind of going to get worse.

DM: Your speciality as a journalist is writing about climate change. What surprised you about how insects are being hit compared to other animals by climate change?

OLIVER MILMAN: Yeah, I mean, I think I had the assumption, and I think obviously to the insects would be able to ride through the climate crisis better than other species. I mean, after all, we've had five great mass extinctions in the planet and insects have survived them all there.

DM: The great, the great survivors.

OLIVER MILMAN: Yeah, they are the great survivors. They they are adaptable. They obviously have huge numbers so they can bounce back quickly if they're not under pressure because they can reproduce very quickly. So there was this assumption they would be able to get through this this period of climate crisis and biodiversity loss, not too badly in shape. But I think more and more research has pointed to the fact that insects are severely affected by climate change. There was one study showing that half of them will lose half or more of their habitat, so that's a huge loss when you think about the range in which insects can can survive in. So yeah, the climate crisis is going to take a big toll on many of us, and that's where that's where our focus is really with climate change. But there is this kind of silent disaster going on in the background when it comes to insects.

DM: Yeah, well, you say, I mean, from a bug's eye view that we've kind of we've created a hellscape for them in terms of the destruction of habitat and the spraying of pesticides. Let me ask you about spraying of pesticides. I mean, Canada hasn't banned neonicotinoids. Europe has. What impact do you see the pesticides having in North America?

OLIVER MILMAN: I mean, it's huge and it's pernicious, and it's going to be very long lasting even if those bans do come in. I mean, there's one estimate the neonicotinoids are 7000 times more toxic to bees than DDT, which is this that infamous chemical that was the subject of this book. Silent Spring by Rachel Carson was found to essentially be killing off bald eagles in in the US before it was banned and the Eagles recovered. And so the very toxic they leach out of plants so that they go into soils into waters, so many animals get affected that way. And the I think the infuriating thing about them is that they're not really effective in terms of what they do. I mean, I speaking to scientists say, well, the peak of the spraying of these chemicals doesn't coincide the peak of the pests. So you have a huge spike in chemical applications on crops where insects are killed all over the place. The actual pests arrival a little later. So it's not really that effective for doing the job that it's supposed to do. There's far, there are far better ways this more holistic ways of farming using nature to actually help keep your farm land more sustainable, using cover crops and so on, rather than let soils wash away and be poisoned. So I mean, there is there is a kind of whole other area we could get into about how farming needs to change. But certainly, if you're an insect, if you live surveying the landscape a lot of the time, you're not seeing much food and you're seeing a lot of poison.

DM: It's a dire picture you're painting. I mean, and when the studies started coming out a couple of years ago, the headlines was insect again. I mean, is an insect apocalypse, is that the right way of framing it scientifically?

OLIVER MILMAN: I mean, scientifically, no. I mean, scientists are obviously very reticent to declare any sort of apocalypse, any kind of biblical language like that. I mean, like I say, there will be insects still, a lot of them will proliferate because of the conditions we're creating. So like I say, mosquitoes ranger is expanding because of what we're doing rather than contracting.

DM: So there will be winners and losers.

OLIVER MILMAN: Yeah, there are winners and losers. Yeah. So cockroaches, mosquitoes...

DM: We're still going to have to put up with cockroaches.

OLIVER MILMAN: Yes, a lot of things. I mean, there's two types of cockroaches that have specialised entirely on [unintelliglbe] on humans. So they rely on us and you'll see that more and more, I guess, is insects adapt to the world we are creating that there are insects that will be able to adapt to our practises, the way we've altered landscapes, the way we grow and store use food, for example. And there are those that won't send a lot of things that we are losing the half days, half a million species that are likely to go down the drain. A lot of things we find kind of beautiful and lovely and useful for us.

DM: And what you're really describing with the decline of insects is that it's also a human emergency. And so there are countries that are starting to acknowledge this. Bavaria in Germany in particular, sticks out in your book. Can you tell us what's happening there in terms of trying to? To reverse or slow down or stop this extinction of insects.

OLIVER MILMAN: Yeah, I mean, there are some moves being taken. Yeah, in Germany, like you mentioned and there and around the world to cut down on light pollution. So light pollution is a big issue for many insects, such as fireflies, for example, because they cannot find mates, they cannot orientate themselves. So that's why I'm saying this pesticide bans, like you say before that's happened to the EU and Germany is kind of further on that. There are kind of some very kind of active save the bees campaigns around the world that they have proved effective. I think people like bees, they kind of instinctively catch on to the idea that we need them and we should have them around. So they've become a quite a focal point for campaigning. And you seeing kind of changes in farming practises and the very like you say towards this more kind of holistic, sustainable types of agriculture rather than this kind of pesticide monoculture that dominates in semi landscapes of Europe and North America in particular

DM: as you look toward the future. One of the things you explore is the possibility that we might be able to invent our way out of this. You know, if we lose the bees, if we lose the pollinators that we might be able to do, invent something else. What are what are scientists working on as possible options?

OLIVER MILMAN: Yes, I mean, there are these kind of very futuristic seeming ideas that are being looked at by scientists. I mean, there's a long running programme at Harvard University in Massachusetts around robotic bees. I spoke to another inventor of a of a drone that can pollinate apple orchards and to replace bees. You have a more kind of labour intensive version of that happening in China, where kind can have armies of people are sent out. They fan out in fields with brushes to pollinate fruits and vegetables.

DM: I'm having a hard time imagining how that can be as efficient as a bunch of bees.

OLIVER MILMAN: Yeah, yeah. I mean, that's exactly right. I mean, a hive of bees contains far more formal bees that you can never muster people to do that. And obviously, there is the issue of the pay for those people, the conditions they live in, how tired you get. I mean, bees and other pollinators provide an incredible service to us for free. And we've rewarded them by by taking away their homes and poisoning them.

DM: You mentioned the Save the Bees campaign, for example. I know that when I go for a walk in my neighbourhood, there are people that are starting to plant milkweed to help the monarchs on their on their journey. If a listener is is hearing this and saying, Yeah, I need to care about the the bugs as much as I care about the rhinos and the whales, what could they do?

OLIVER MILMAN: Yeah, I mean, as you mentioned, milkweed planting has become very popular. The annual migration of monarchs has crashed. The migration from Canada and the US down to central Mexico was one I was lucky enough to witness of the end point in central Mexico. And the scientists there who worried that it will be over in just just a few decades because of climate change and pesticide use and habitat loss. So, yeah, planting a good variety of plants in your yard if you have a yard is is important. Also just the importance of letting go. I mean, a lot of the problems we face in the world, and there are quite a few at the moment require similarly kind of complex solutions or kind of huge efforts required by all of us. But in many respects, insects would just appreciate if we just let things go a bit. You don't have to write your yard of leaves every time. You can let the grass grow a little bit. You can maybe not even have a kind of lawn that's manicured and has nothing else. You could just let wildflowers grow a bit. Insects would love that, and they appreciate the diversity in landscapes.

DM: I bet they would. I will try very hard when I'm sitting in my tent in northern Ontario this summer to just let it go. Just just just let them have at me. It's hard. It's not easy. You've done an extraordinary amount of research. And as I bring this full circle we started off with you painting a picture of what the world might look like without insects. What leaving you with some hope after all the work you've done?

OLIVER MILMAN: I think the hope is that awareness of this has just gone through the roof. I think just in the last few years, really, I mean, you've had these studies come out and scientists now are talking about this publicly entomologists who had these kind of forgotten profession, really they weren't really spoken to or about really in any of these kind of conversations around biodiversity loss or climate change. And now they find themselves not quite for sense, certainly far more prominent than they were. So you're seeing awareness of what insects do for us. Number one, also the consequences of losing them. We've been given a glimpse of that now, and it's not a full picture yet because we don't know that the trends in every country around the world, but we've been getting a glimpse in it. It's not, it's not pretty and it's something that we should do something about. So I think there is some hope there that at least there is some kind of galvanising force behind doing something. You're seeing some some moves in some governments to look at pesticides, to look at farming practises, to look at an urban renewal when you're thinking about green space and not just putting in lawns everywhere. So there are there are green roofs in cities. Is is a good example of that as sort of one in New York City. And so there are some good examples of what's going on, but I don't think they are keep pace with the scale of the crisis as yet. We need a fundamental rethink about the way we do things. Unfortunately, tidying up things around the edges a bit isn't really going to cut it, unfortunately.

DM: Fascinating work. Thank you for joining us, Oliver.

OLIVER MILMAN: Thank you so much.

DM: Oliver Millman is an environmental journalist and the author of The Insect Crisis The Fall of the Tiny Empires That Run the World. And he did his best to try to convince me not to go after those mosquitoes when I'm sitting in my tent next week. I spoke with him in February.

SOUNDCLIP

[Song]

DM: That was the impossibly catchy song Fireflis by the American band Owl City, which I could see was giving our technician Austin a middle school flashback. That's our program for today. Stay tuned to Radio One for q with guest host Angeline Tetteh-Wayoe. Kelsey Verzotti was told by a drama teacher that she'd never play Anne Shirley because Anne is white and Kelsey is Chinese Canadian. She talks about how that experience pushed her to achieve her acting dreams, as she now plays Anne in Charlottetown's famous production of Anne of Green Gables - The Musical. I'm Duncan McCue, in for Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening to The Current.

Thursday July 21, 2022 Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode