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 2024

The Current Transcript for September 5, 2024

Host: Matt Galloway

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

SOUNDCLIP

SPEAKER: It's part of our DNA. And about 20 per cent of the tourists who are coming in Montreal comes because of the reputation of our nightlife.

MG: There are many things that define Montreal and nightlife worth travelling for certainly is one of them. Walking back through the city last night, the streets were packed on a Wednesday with people getting out and enjoying a glorious late summer evening. And while you can easily find a party that goes later than your bedtime, city officials want to push last call off the boards entirely. I'm in Montreal this morning, the final stop on a road trip home from Atlantic Canada. And in an hour, why a plan to allow 24-hour bars and clubs and parts of the city is meeting with a very mixed reaction. Also this morning, Yoshua Bengio is worried about AI and he has good reason to be. He helped create it.

SOUNDCLIP

YOSHUA BENGIO: Even if there was a small chance that this could basically destroy the future of my children and grandchild, I couldn't just continue on my usual path. I had to do something about it.

MG: The Montreal computer scientist says artificial intelligence is moving too quickly, and it turns out there is no off switch. In 30 minutes, one of the godfathers of AI on runaway computers, regrets, and why he thinks Canada is perfectly poised to help rein AI in. But as the NDP pulls the plug on its agreement with the government, we begin with a Montreal Liberal MP who has had his own doubts about his party. Good morning from Montreal. I'm Matt Galloway and this is The Current.

[Music: Theme]

Liberal MP Anthony Housefather on antisemitism in Canada

Guests: Anthony Housefather

Well, Justin Trudeau's hold on power got a bit shakier yesterday as Jagmeet Singh announced the NDP was ending its supply in confidence agreement with the liberals.

SOUNDCLIP

JAGMEET SINGH: Justin Trudeau has proven again and again he will always cave to corporate greed. The liberals have let people down. They don't deserve another chance.

MG: This deal has been in place since March of 2022. It was supposed to last until next June, just the latest blow to the Liberal government, which has been struggling with weak poll numbers and internal strife. Joining me now in our Montreal studio is Anthony Housefather. He is a prominent Montreal area Liberal MP and the federal government's special advisor on Jewish community relations and anti-Semitism. Anthony Housefather, good morning.

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: Hey, thanks for coming to Montreal, Matt.

MG: I'm really glad to be here. And I'm really glad to have you in studio. Thank you for being here. Let's start with the collapse of this agreement with the NDP. When's the election going to be?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: I don't know that this materially changes when the election will be. I mean, I think in the end, it means that there's not a certainty that the NDP will vote with the government and confidence motions. There's not that many confidence motions that usually come before the House. I don't know that the NDP wants a quick election. And I guess we'll see. It means the government will have to work with one of the three parties in the House when there is a confidence vote.

MG: The suggestion is, there's been reporting that the government only found out about this just as the deal, as the news was breaking. As the video that that Jagmeet Singh recorded went up on social media. What does that tell you about the state of this relationship, such as it is?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: I mean, I think it shows poor form, if that's the case. I think in the end results, right, one of the things that you see here is really harsh criticism by the NDP of a government that they were in this agreement with for two years. In the last couple of years, they've been claiming credit for a number of the achievements of the government that were actually Liberal Party positions to begin with. I think that people need to remember that this was not a coalition, as Pierre Poilievre tries to pretend. There are very stark differences between the liberals and NDP on many policy issues. We have some things that we agree on, many things we don't. And then there's a broad range of people within the Liberal Party, as well. We're a party that has a wide coalition. And I think that this agreement was what it was, it was saying that we would get dental care done, we'd get pharmacare done, and that they would vote with us on confidence votes. It was nothing more.

MG: Is Justin Trudeau still the right person to be leading the Liberal Party?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: Well, that's something Justin Trudeau will need to decide.

MG: From your perspective, is he the right person to be leading your party?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: Look, Justin Trudeau led our party back from oblivion in 2015. And what I would say is that any advice I give Justin Trudeau will be done in private. And I think that it's up to him to make that decision.

MG: Do you have confidence in him as the leader of the party?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: While he's leader of the party, of course I have confidence in him. I have confidence in anybody who is going to be leading the party. I think Justin Trudeau has a lot of wonderful qualities that Canadians have, you know, somewhat, in the last few years forgotten about.

MG: The concern, though, I mean, you use the word oblivion. The concern if you follow the polls, such as they are, is that the party could be headed back toward oblivion. Eighty four per cent of the country, according to abacus, is looking for change. The liberals trail the conservatives by close to 20 points. The conservatives lead among all voter groups in all parts of the country except Quebec, where the liberals are fighting the conservatives for second place behind the bloc. What will that mean, I mean, if you say that the decision is in his hands, there are real concerns. And you hear this from within the party about whether he is the right person to be there. How is that going to resolve itself?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: Well, it's going to resolve himself by him listening to members of caucus and Canadians and making that decision. You know, in the end, to me, the decision is his to make. And that's where things are. One thing that I have to remind everybody is that the party, of course, any party, is far more than its leader. And we in Canadian politics too often look at a leader centric approach where you have a vast team in a party with very different views and very different, you know, and very different opinions. And too often we ignore, and MPs themselves often fail to recognize the power that they themselves have, which you have, you know, in the United States, in the U.K., and more often than not, I think Canadians are forgetting that their own MP is the person they elect in their riding, is their representative, and they should be looking at them and their actions and their votes in terms of deciding on their votes in the next election.

MG: Why are you still in the party? You yourself have had really difficult conversations. You talked about a painful discussion with the Prime Minister himself. But I know conversations with people in community as well about whether you were still welcome in the Liberal Party or whether the Liberal Party was your place to be. Why are you still in this party?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: Because overall, I'm a liberal, right? I don't believe that I, any party is perfect. I don't believe that any party shares my views on every issue. But on most issues, you know, whether you look at the right of a woman to access choice, whether you look at the rights of the LGBTQ+ community, whether you look at wider issues such as my belief that you need to help the more poor and vulnerable in society, I'm more of a liberal, but I also believe in centrism. I also believe in pragmatism. I also believe in a strong defence and a strong military. I also believe that, you know, that we need to get our railways moving. And I supported, for example, the government's decision last week to push the railways and the workers to binding arbitration.

MG: But those aren't the issues that put you in that difficult conversation with the Prime Minister. The issue largely was about, I mean, there's a mayor in the town of Hampstead, which is in your riding, who said that Justin Trudeau has, in his words, 'Tremendously failed Jews.' Is he right in saying that?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: No, he's not right. I think that again, that's personalization of an issue. What I hate the most about our politics is those people that yell and scream and attack people, and say horrible things about them. Most people are in good faith. Jewish communities across the world feel that governments at all levels have let them down. Whether federal. Whether provincial. Whether state. Whether local.

MG: What does that look like in this country? Again, the Jewish community is not a monolith. There are many different parts of that community. But in the conversations that you've had, what does that mean to be let down by levels of government?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: Oh, I think the Jewish community is pretty united in viewing-- and this is not just in Canada, it's all around the world-- in viewing that there have been demonstrations in the streets targeting Jewish businesses. There have been demonstrations that have blocked access to Jewish community centres, including here in Montreal at the Federation building and targeted synagogues. There have been incidents on campus that are completely unacceptable. And I think the vast, vast, vast majority of Jewish Canadians feel that universities, feel that local governments, feel that the provinces, feel that the federal government, have not done enough to ensure their safety here in Canada. And that is part of what I have been working on, to make sure that Jewish Canadians also understand that politicians, most politicians, are of good faith. They want to quell anti-Semitism in Canada. They want to make sure that these issues are dealt with just like everywhere else in the world. They're not used to this wave of anti-Semitism that is swept across the world. And they're not dealing with it as effectively, perhaps, as they can. I think we're doing better, and I think we're going to keep doing better.

MG: How divided is your party on this? I mean, when you were named to this role as a special advisor on Jewish community relations and antisemitism, a member of your caucus publicly opposed your appointment. There's a by election that's coming up in Quebec, and a group of liberal staffers are refusing to campaign because they are unhappy with the government's handling of Israel. How divided is the Liberal Party right now?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: So, I think there's two different questions. One of the questions is, on the conflict in the Middle East and what's happening in Israel and Gaza. I think there is great division in Canadian society and great division in the Liberal Party. On the issue of antisemitism and quelling antisemitism in Canada, there should be no divisions in our party on that.

MG: What does it tell you when staffers are saying that they don't want to work-- this is a crucial by election in a Liberal stronghold, such as it would be. And that the staffers are saying that they don't want to be involved in this because they have real issue with how the government has handled this war?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: Well, I mean, I don't think that staffers have, I think it's unacceptable for staffers to do that. I think...

MG: What does it tell you?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: Well, again, what it tells me is that there's a group of people who are publicly saying that they don't want to work in a by election, that, you know, I don't think many of them were actually working on. Everybody has a right in the Liberal Party to say what they believe. But this is staffers. Staffers are at work for politicians. They're supposed to reflect the views of the politicians that they serve. It is certainly their right to say something, but if they feel so strongly about it, I don't know that what they did was the appropriate way to do it. Leaking something to the media is not usually the appropriate way for staffers to deal with issues, but I'll let the people who are their bosses deal with that. To me, the issue is, like most Canadians, I have strong views on the issue. In the Liberal Party, there are people that represent all of Canada, and it brings a different dynamic in the Liberal Party than you have in some other parties where you have less of a right to be different.

MG: What have the last 11 months been like for you? We were just chatting as you came in about this and about being in this role and being a prominent member of the community and speaking out. What have the last 11 months been like for you?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: I mean, they've been difficult in the sense that I think Jewish communities around the world and the vast majority of Jewish Canadians have had a very difficult time being scared and frightened about what's happening in Israel, where many of us have friends, family members, etc. Even more nervous about what's happening in Canada where we see the rise of anti-Semitism. Although again, that's everywhere in the world. And for me as a politician, getting the hate that I get for vocalizing and being loud about the views that I think most of my community holds.

MG: Do you feel personally threatened?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: I mean, I have been. I mean, I think that it would be a lie to say that I don't feel that there's been a multitude of threats. So, sure, I feel threatened. Do I feel unsafe? That would be a different question. I always have reconciled the fact that I believe that this small vocal minority is a small vocal minority. I believe that the vast majority of Canadians support our fight against anti-Semitism and are on the side of Canada's Jewish community and, but it's been a hard time. It's been a very hard time for me, and not only just for me, but for other Jewish politicians in Canada and around the world.

MG: You've argued that some of the pro-Palestinian protests in Canada, including on university campuses here in the city of Montreal, have crossed into anti-Semitism. Where are you drawing the line on that?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: The line is where you are yelling and screaming things that you know Jewish communities feel are targeting them in a way that is unacceptable. For example, telling Jews to go back to Poland or go back to Yemen. That has been a constant refrain at some of the demonstrations in Montreal is clearly anti-Semitic. Using words like 'Intifada, intifada' and 'From the river to the sea,' are words that Jews see as endorsing the killing of Jewish civilians in Israel and wiping Israel off the face of the map. If your real goal is a two state solution, which I strongly support, if your goal is a ceasefire and you understand that Jewish communities feel that those words are targeting them in hurtful, to say the least, then you should find other words to use. And those demonstrators are purposely using those words, those demonstrators are purposely calling for the boycotts of Jewish businesses. They're saying that Zionists have no place in their space. That's unacceptable. The vast majority of Jews in Canada are Zionists. It just means we believe Israel has a right to exist. Many non-Jews are Zionists. You can't use broad terminology like that and attack people for who they are.

MG: We've spoken obviously with a number of people who are involved in protesting Israel's actions in the war, some of them from Jewish communities, who have said that what they're doing is not anti-Semitic. That-- they push back very strongly on that. And I just wonder what you say to Palestinian supporters who feel that the civilian losses in Gaza aren't being adequately considered by the supporters of the state of Israel.

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: I think that we all believe that all of these losses are tragic and horrible. Anytime a civilian is killed anywhere, it's tragic and horrible. I think the difference is that supportive is Israel will point to Hamas, the terrorist organisation that controls Gaza, that uses civilians as human shields and that started this war on October the 7th, massacring 1200 Israelis and holding people hostage and brutally murdering six hostages last weekend and would tie them to a greater share of the responsibility then the pro-Palestinian side. But what I do want to say, Matt, is I don't feel that it's anti-Semitic, never have I said that, to protest in favour of a Palestinian state, or to call out what you feel is Israeli government actions, but that doesn't mean that targeting Jews in Canada, that yelling horrible words that Jews consider to be anti-Semitic and awful, is okay. You can yell other things at your demonstrations. You cannot do, you can avoid doing encampments that say 'No Zionists wanted in this space,' on public university grounds.

MG: What is it going to take 11 months into this war and the horror that that has unfolded, what is it going to take to have Canadians who have really deep feelings, who are really entrenched in where they are, to get them to find some not common ground, but at the very least, some sort of shared humanity, get people to talk to each other. Do you know what I mean? What is that going to take? Because that feels to some people like it's really far away.

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: I mean, I think that the views are divergent, and it doesn't mean that we don't talk.

MG: Really?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: I mean, it depends who you're talking about. If you're talking about absolutely extreme positions, I'm not going to talk to somebody that says the state of Israel has no right to exist.

MG: Or I mean, back and forth. I mean, it feels as though, again, maybe that's on the poles of...

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: Right, if you're not on the poles, and I don't feel that I'm on a pole, I am not somebody that demeans people for no reason like this. I don't insult, I don't attack viscerally. I don't personally insult anybody. I think there is discussion and dialogue, but I think it's hard. But it exists that, where we can, I hope always agree there should be no hate in Canada as a result of what's happening in the Middle East.

MG: And yet, but there is. And that's what people, I mean, it's not to diminish certainly what's happening there. But here, people are really worried about what's unfolding here.

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: I do agree with that. And that's what I've been talking about. Right? The Jewish community in Canada is deeply concerned that Jews in Canada are being targeted constantly for the actions of the state of Israel, in the same way that Palestinians in Canada, that Arabs in Canada, that Muslims in Canada shouldn't be targeted by the actions of Hamas or Hezbollah or any Muslim government, Jews in Canada shouldn't be targeted for Israeli government actions. And yet it seems to keep happening. And I think we should be trying to agree that we need to leave the hate off of Canadian streets. And that means that these demonstrations targeting another community have to stop.

MG: Are you confident that that's going to happen? I mean...

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: Am I confident that the loud extremist voices will not continue? No. Am I confident that the vast majority of Canadians don't like this? Yes. And am I confident that universities have learned their lessons from what happened last year? Yes.

MG: What does that mean? Learn their lessons.

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: I think universities that tolerated encampments last year have learned their lesson about not tolerating violations of their code of conduct. I think universities have seen that there was across the country a feeling by Jewish faculty, staff and students that they were constantly being targeted in campus and even in some ways by professors in some classes. And I think abusive podium, I think the violation of codes of conduct I think university for recognize cannot be tolerated anymore. And it doesn't mean that you don't have free speech on campus. It doesn't mean that a professor can have pro-Palestinian views or views, you know, that... But what they can't do in class is say, if you don't agree with my views, you're not welcome in my classroom or you're going to get a bad mark.

MG: And has that happened?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: That is my understanding that it has happened in a number of places. I mean, I've met with Jewish student groups across the country who have come and testified in Parliament and have had, you know, multiple examples of where things have gone awry in campus. And I think anything campus leadership, again, is in good faith, just like governments. They want to do the right thing. They're just, you know, it's hard when you're, you know, when you're dealing with a situation you're not used to. And I think last year was an unusual situation for everybody. I think all levels of government and I think university groups will do better.

MG: Anthony Housefather, I'm really glad to have you here. It's good to have you in studio. This is a really precarious issue, and with a lot of heat in it. And I hope to your point, maybe people can talk to each other. We'll see whether that happens in the months to come. Thank you.

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: I hope so as well. Thank you, Matt.

MG: Anthony Housefather is a Liberal MP for Mount Royal, the federal Government special adviser on Jewish community relations and anti-Semitism. He was with us in our studio in Montreal. I want to give you the heads up about something that's happening next week. We will be on the other side of the country in Haida Gwaii in British Columbia, a remarkable place where an agreement has been signed that recognizes title that the Haida have over that land. I spoke with a number of people there just a few weeks ago, including Guujaaw. He is a carver, hereditary chief negotiator, longtime activist for the rights of the Haida. I spoke with him about his activism and the new agreement in a carving shed next to a totem pole that his sons are carving for him.

SOUNDCLIP

GUUJAAW: What we have right now is we have, you know, we have a transition period, but basically the land is going back into the hands of the people who love it the most. You know, after 100 years of abuse of the forest of the salmon, halibut, everything that they've managed has been treated with disdain.

MG: Did you ever imagine that you would get to this moment where the government, I mean, there's been court battles that are still continuing, but that the adversarial kind of fight might be won?

GUUJAAW: Oh, I knew we'd win.

MG: You knew you'd win?

GUUJAAW: Yeah, we did a lot of things with other governments. You know, we won a lot of court cases. We won a lot of stands. We did a lot of things that led to this moment. But, you know, it wasn't automatic. It wasn't going to come freely. But in the end, you know, really there is not much other choice.

MG: What do you mean there wasn't much other choice?

GUUJAAW: couldn't beat us.

[Music: Instrumental]

MG: Monday on The Current, we will bring you stories from Haida Gwaii, a magical place in this country. Your CBC News is next. And then more from Montreal. We'll speak with one of the godfathers of AI. He's worried about the technology he helped create. We'll tell you why. Coming up in six minutes. I'm Matt Galloway in Montreal, and this is The Current. Stay with us.

[Music: Fades up]

Does Yoshua Bengio regret helping to create AI?

Guests: Yoshua Bengio

MG: Hello, I'm Matt Galloway in Montreal, and you're listening to The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I will not be quiet, Chewbacca. Why doesn't anybody listen to me?

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Coming, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: The old girl's v-h-o-m-e-l-y.

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I may be homely, buster, but I'm s-m-a-r-t smart.

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Open the pod bay doors, HAL.

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that. I know that you and Frank were planning to disconnect me, and I'm afraid that's something I cannot allow to happen.

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Data.

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Data. My name. It is pronounced data.

MG: What was your first exposure to artificial intelligence? Was it C-3PO? Rosie? HAL? Maybe Data? Those characters captured our imagination long before AI was at our fingertips. Yoshua Bengio has been imagining the potential of AI as well, but not in Hollywood. Here in Montreal, he is a Canadian pioneer of artificial intelligence, named this year as one of time magazine's 100 Most Influential People, and he is deeply concerned as to where artificial intelligence is headed. Yoshua Bengio is a professor at the University of Montreal. He's also the founder and scientific director of Mila, the Quebec AI Institute. Yoshua Bengio, good morning.

YOSHUA BENGIO: Morning.

MG: We heard little clips there from popular culture of what people imagined artificial intelligence might look like. How different is AI now from what you imagined it might be when you first started in this field?

YOSHUA BENGIO: Well, it clearly is much more advanced than I was imagining for my lifetime. And it also made progress in ways that we did not expect. So, many of us expected that the advances in the intelligence of AI systems would mirror evolutionary advances. So, you first get bodily control, you know, like the having the ability of a small animal and then you would grow up towards, you know, mammals and primates and humans or something in terms of intelligence. But it isn't what's happening. The fastest progress has been with the latest stuff in evolution, which is language and mastery of high-level cognition to some degree, not completely. And that was not expected.

MG: I mean, it feels from the outside as somebody who is watching this that everything when it comes to AI is moving very, very quickly, particularly in the last year and year and a half or so. From your perspective, do you see that wild progression in a short period of time?

YOSHUA BENGIO: Yes. Now, we don't know what it's going to be in the future, but clearly it turned out that the recipes that we and others have been coming up with over the last decade work incredibly well when you simply scale them up to larger systems with more data. And the result is astounding. [MG: Astounding] That final result that we have today is way above what we expected. Most people expected.

MG: What is it that surprises you the most about that?

YOSHUA BENGIO: Well, what really triggered my thinking about the social consequences of AI potentially being catastrophic is the realization that we have systems that essentially pass what is called the Turing test. Once we have machines that we can have a dialogue with and not be sure if we're talking to a machine or a human, we will have achieved human level intelligence. Now, what we have is almost that. You have to work hard to, you know, see that the AI systems we have now in these chat bots are missing some cognitive elements to be like us. But they're also stronger than us in many other areas. So, it was that mastery of language, I think, is the thing that we did not expect to come so quickly and, you know, is believed to be the entry point to, you know, intelligence. And there's a good reason for that, because once you master language, you can have access to all of human knowledge that is at least knowledge that is written down or, you know, in movies or whatever. And that is a huge amount of knowledge that brings the AI at the level of humans in some ways.

MG: What do you see--and I want to talk about the concerns that you have. But when it comes to what AI could do for us, what do you see as artificial intelligence's greatest, I guess, potential for improving our lives.

YOSHUA BENGIO: So, what I'm most excited about is how AI can help advance other sciences. Biology. So, think about medical applications. Chemistry. Think about new ways to, you know, capture carbon or to have better batteries or better drugs. Better physics, better climate models, better engineering in general. So, sciences and engineering could be really boosted as we advance in AI. And it already is making a difference. But I think we're just seeing the tip of the iceberg. And this is something very different from what companies are trying to achieve right now. They're trying to sell products. But in a way, I don't care so much about the next gadget. I care about the well-being of humanity. And often that goes through the development of, you know, solutions to hard problems that require new science.

MG: There's talk right now of an AI bubble. That a couple of years after ChatGPT launched, changes in our lives haven't been as radical as promised, and that this is a very expensive technology. It's not particularly profitable at this point. What do you make of that idea of AI being a bubble that could pop?

YOSHUA BENGIO: Yeah, I'm not impressed by that kind of statement. So, the reason is you have to distinguish scientific progress and markets. Right now for investors to continue putting money in AI, they either need to have enough belief that in the future it will be extremely profitable, or they want to see revenues right now, you know, in the short term. And that's seeing this as a short term phenomenon because the science is going to continue moving forward. How fast? Well, of course, nobody knows. And then, you know, for people who investing, maybe that's an issue. But from my point of view, it's pretty clear and very, very probable that we will reach human level intelligence. But is it going to be three years or 30 years? I don't know.

MG: I mean, that suggests that you see this as-- and I don't want to put words in your mouth-- but it is an enormous potential for human achievement. That people are comparing this to, you know, inventions that changed how we think and how we live. That you see this in that continuum, in some ways.

YOSHUA BENGIO: Yes. I don't think we have made any technical or scientific advance that could be as transformative as AI could be if we reach human level performance, at least in some domains.

MG: In the face of that, you wrote in the Globe and Mail, major AI risks are a grave source of concern for me. Keeping me up at night, especially when I think about my grandson and the legacy we will leave to his generation. What wakes you up in the middle of the night?

YOSHUA BENGIO: A possibility of losing democracy, not just in this country, but across the planet and the possibility of human extinction. These are extreme dangers. And even if we are not sure about, you know, the probability that they will happen, credible scenarios go in those directions, and we need to understand them and mitigate these risks.

MG: What are those two things mean? Start with losing democracy. What does that mean practically?

YOSHUA BENGIO: You have to understand that intelligence gives power. And if we have machines at some point that are smarter than humans, at least in some domains, that could be critical. Whoever controls them will have power never seen before in history, because that can be superhuman powers. You know, you can think of militarily or economically or politically, right? Because one of the things that we are worried about with AI in the short term, it's already happening, is the use of AI, you know, with disinformation to change people's opinion. To basically influence politics in ways that could destroy our democracies. But ultimately, as AI becomes more powerful, then whoever controls it could really destroy the notion of sharing of power, because democracy is about sharing a power. And here we have a technology that can give huge concentrated power to whoever controls it. You can see there's a problem.

MG: The other piece that you mentioned, and I think people have an idea of what that might look like, but they may not know, is human extinction. What does that actually mean?

YOSHUA BENGIO: Well, a simple way to think about it is if we're not careful, as we build machines that are smarter than us, we could create new living entities that have their own goals, their own will to survive. And what does this mean for the survival of humanity is not clear. If there are entities that have goals that are not exactly what we want, and they're smarter than us. For example, they might not want us to turn them off, and in fact, they might want to make sure we can never turn them off, which means they would need to control us or get rid of us. How could that happen? Well, that current technology wouldn't, you know, allow that to happen. But we are on a path of building machines that have what is called agency. In other words, theY act like, you know, animals act, like humans act, because they have goals and they try to achieve them. They might have long term goals and that's where it gets dangerous.

MG: I mean, that's, you know, open the pod bay doors HAL. I mean, that's that that's exactly from from that scenario.

YOSHUA BENGIO: Exactly. This movie is remarkable in many ways. But in a way, it's telling a story that current scientists are really worried about.

MG: But how close are we, do you think, to a scenario like that? You said that we haven't had an AI Hiroshima yet. But that could happen. How close are we to something like that?

YOSHUA BENGIO: I don't know, but what I do know is that credible people who are working in some of these frontier AI labs think that it could be within the next three years. Now, I think that's very short. You know, if I had to make that myself, I would say maybe five or ten years, but I don't know. And I also see reasonable arguments that it could be more. It could be 20. It could be 30. The problem is not it is plausible that it could be very fast. Even if it's just say, 2030. But that's incredibly fast because to manage those risks, is probably going to require big changes in our society and just, you know, new legislation, international treaties. These things that years, if not decades.

MG: What do you say to people in your field who I mean, it's too simplistic to split it down the middle between people who want to, you know, stand on the accelerator and those who want to stand on the brake when it comes to artificial intelligence. But there are many, many people who say that the concerns you have are overstated. That we don't know anything about that yet. And in the face of not knowing, we have to continue moving fast and breaking things, as the phrase goes.

YOSHUA BENGIO: Well, that's clearly not rational, right? So, let's take an analogy here and say you're driving in the mountain. And you know there are sharp places where bad things can happen. And there's a big fog in front of you, and you don't know if behind that particular fog there's a precipice or it's just going to be a straight road. Should you just accelerate or should you be careful and maybe make sure at each step that you're not going to step into the precipice? It's obvious what the answer should be, right? So, I don't think that the people who are saying we should accelerate are... I mean, either they're not rational and there are good reasons for that, or they actually, and some of them have stated it, they actually want to see humanity replaced by superhuman AIs.

MG: How do we go about regulating this?

YOSHUA BENGIO: What we need to do in principle is fairly simple. It's the same thing we do with any other dangerous technology like nuclear plants or dangerous weapons. What we do is we ask the corporations which build these systems to do their homework to try to make them safe based on what is currently the scientific state of the art, and to document that in a way that the, you know, the governments and the scientists, independent scientists can check and, you know, be satisfied that we're not going to do something crazy dangerous. But in computing, we basically have no regulation. I mean, we're starting to have some restrictions on things like privacy and, you know, data, but but not for AI or software and more generally.

MG: Why should we trust those huge corporations whose I mean, they're not, they might have some altruistic arm, but their primary goal is to make enormous sums of money. Why should we trust them to have our interests at heart?

YOSHUA BENGIO: Well, we shouldn't. You know, in any other area, we don't. That's why we have regulators. That's why we ask companies to do their homework and then also ask them to grade their homework. Who should be grading them are independent, you know, people, you know, auditors, experts, people working for the government or whatever. There are many possible recipes, but they shouldn't be grading their own homework. And we've seen in other sectors of society, when companies were grading their own homework, we ended up with catastrophes. The reason, for example, drugs were regulated is because companies introduced drugs without careful testing that led to lots of people dying.

MG: Do you see an opportunity-- I mean, people will look at the creation of the general internet and say that that was a missed opportunity because it became something-- sure, it came out of military and industry, but it became something that was out of our control and that there was a chance for it to be used, perhaps as like a public utility or seen as a public utility. And we lost that opportunity. Do you see the possibility of moving in that direction with artificial intelligence? That there could be a public piece to it that allows us, all of us, to have a say and a stake in what it looks like?

YOSHUA BENGIO: Totally. I think, in fact, that is the only safe way. When we get close to the precipice, you don't want to have conflicts of interest between public safety, public good on one hand, and profit maximisation on the other hand. So, the most dangerous systems, I mean, potentially dangerous systems, should be heavily, you know, guided by public good considerations and probably should under, maybe non-profit or governmental or even international governance.

MG: You've said that Canada has, well, these are your words, 'A once in a generation opportunity and a moral responsibility to demonstrate its leadership in safeguarding our democracies human rights and safety when it comes to artificial intelligence.' What could this country do and why do we have that moral responsibility, do you think?

YOSHUA BENGIO: Well, there are two connected reasons. One is we've been big players in creating that science. So, two of the three, you know, Turing Award recipients, are Canadian. Geoff Hinton and I am. But of course many other researchers. And so, that was the second reason, is we have a large outsized pool of AI researchers and scientists here in Canada that can play a role to, you know, get humanity in the right place where AI is beneficial. Is not, you know, destroying democracy. Is not destroying humanity. We also happen to be sort of a, you know, small sized country that has a voice at the international level and could help steer other big players like the U.S. In a direction that's better aligned with the, you know, general public good at the plant level.

MG: When you speak to people, perhaps in government or within the Canadian scientific community here, what kind of response to get to that?

YOSHUA BENGIO: Well, it varies a lot. It's interesting how much diversity of opinions there are even in the scientific community, about the risks of AI. And I think there are good reasons for this. So, we can't model, you know, society and the advances in science that are going to happen in the next five or 10 or 20 years. So, we can't really be very scientific about it. What we can do is come up with scenarios, arguments and so on. And I think there are also psychological factors. That it's very difficult for somebody who's been working in a field like AI and then suddenly accept that maybe what they've been working on, maybe their whole field is something dangerous for society. It's hard to make that shift from it's beautiful, it's great, to oh, maybe it's dangerous. We just don't like these sort of thoughts. And so, we might actually deny them.

MG: Have you been able to make that shift? I mean, I wonder whether you have regrets about what you've done. Nobel regretted inventing dynamite. Oppenheimer talked about how he was destroyer of worlds because he created the atomic bomb. How do you think about what you have unleashed or helped unleash?

YOSHUA BENGIO: Well, first of all, a lot of people participated in this. But, yeah, in any case. I think, as somebody involved in that research for many decades, I should have seen it coming earlier. I read about those risks like a decade ago, but I didn't take them very seriously because of these psychological factors. One thing is to recognize the sort of academic possibility of things turning bad, and the other is a kind of emotional shift that happened only a year and a half ago for me, after ChatGPT and thinking about, even if there was a small chance that this could basically destroy the future of my children and grandchild, that I couldn't just continue on my usual path, I had to do something about it.

MG: Is there is there an exit plan for this? If this thing starts rolling on its own and we don't like where it's going, is there an emergency brake? Is there a button that we can push? Something that could get us out of that scenario?

YOSHUA BENGIO: I wish there was. I mean, one of the things that we see in proposed legislation is to force companies to put a, you know, power off button that could be even remotely controlled by governments, when they build these very dangerous things. In general, the way to manage those risks is to have external oversight, democratic oversight, for how we move forward at this frontier, to make sure that it's done right. And that means sometimes saying, okay, we stop because we seem to be potentially close to this precipice. And until we understand better, and we have better visibility through that fog, we shouldn't move too much.

MG: Is it a part of your life now?

YOSHUA BENGIO: So, the two main things I'm doing with my time right now are research in AI, targeting how do we, the question of how do we build the AI that will be safe? How do we build AI that will not turn against humans? How do we build the AI that cannot easily be used by bad actors? That's a scientific problem, but it is not sufficient. I'm also working on the political side, talking to you, talking to audiences from all over the world about those risks to help the debates about should we even have legislation and how do we set it up so that it's going to be agile and protect us, almost like an activist thinking about the politics of these questions.

MG: And does artificial intelligence help you in that work?

YOSHUA BENGIO: No. It might one day, but we're not there yet.

MG: Just before I let you go, we asked, because we could, asked ChatGPT what it would ask you. Which is a strange thing for a journalist to do. But one of the questions that it suggested was, what advice would you give to aspiring researchers entering the field of AI and deep learning today?

YOSHUA BENGIO: I would suggest that they start thinking for themselves about the risks and the social impact of AI and their responsibility as scientists, or as simply as human beings and citizens, and that they take the time to read to see what others have thought about this.

MG: It's a real pleasure to talk to you. It's fascinating. And I hope we have the chance to talk again. Yoshua, thank you very much.

YOSHUA BENGIO: Thank you.

MG: Yoshua Bengio is a pioneer in the study of artificial intelligence. He's the founder and scientific director of Mila, the Quebec AI Institute here in Montreal.

[Music: '99 Nights' by Charlotte Cardin]

MG: It's Montreal's Charlotte Cardin, 99 Nights. She has had some year. And I mean, not even just one year. The last couple of years have been extraordinary for her. Her album of the same name is on the shortlist for the Polaris Music Prize. Well, coming up after your regional update, more from Montreal's music and entertainment scene.

[Music: Theme]

MG: This is a city that knows how to live and how to have a good time. We will talk about what it means for the city's nightlife culture. If bars can open 24 hours. Not everyone is onside with this move. And then the reunion of one of Quebec's first multilingual hip hop collectives. That's coming up in 90 seconds. I'm Matt Galloway in Montreal. You're listening to The Current. Back in just a minute. Stay with us.

[Music: Fades up]

Could Montreal become the Canadian city that never sleeps?

Guests: Sergio Da Silva, Jenny Thibault

MG: Hello again. I'm Matt Galloway in Montreal, and you're listening to The Current. Bars and clubs in the city usually ring the bell for last call at 3 a.m., but Montreal could soon become the Canadian city that never sleeps. The city officials say they plan to create nocturnal zones where bars, restaurants and theatres in certain pockets of this metropolis can remain open until 6 a.m. Pilot projects in various neighbourhoods kicked off earlier this year, and the city's getting set to unveil the location of what will become Canada's first 24/7 nightlife district. We asked the Montrealers what they make of this idea.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE ONE: Personally, no, because often when I walk during the night downtown, there's a lot of people with a lot of alcohol, so at least there's like a moment they need to stop drinking.

VOICE TWO: Yeah, I basically have the same opinion as her, but also for the sound. Because it's going to bother all the neighbourhood.

VOICE THREE: As long as the proper measures are put in place to make sure people are safe. I think it would go well. Honestly, the noise is already a lot downtown. I don't think it's going to be more significant than normal.

VOICE FOUR: I don't think the city or like the local politicians or whoever is in charge of the town can handle the nightclubs until 3:00 in the morning. So, imagine 24 hours.

VOICE FIVE: That'd be an awesome idea because I love clubbing. I love the club scene in Montreal. I think it will bring more tourists and more money to the city.

MG: Sergio Da Silva is the owner of Turbo Haüs, which is a bar and live music venue in downtown Montreal. He is with me in our Montréal studio. Good morning.

SERGIO DA SILVA: Morning.

MG: For somebody who has never been to Montreal, and I say this, I ask the question of somebody who, when I was going to university in Toronto, we would take the train on regular weekends to come to Montreal, because-- and it's no shade on the bars and restaurants in Toronto-- but you knew you were going to have a better time here in Montreal. For somebody who has never been here or gone out late at night in this city, how would you describe the nightlife and the nightlife culture in particular, and what sets the city apart?

SERGIO DA SILVA: I feel like there's not a day in the week that there's not something to do, that there's not something really exciting. Montreal has this really fun, you know, combination of like, English culture, French culture, all these things that are coming together to create something completely unique, and like a joie de vive that we have here, that, I mean, coming from Toronto, like, I'm not from Toronto, but I've been there enough to know that there's kind of like a, sort of like repressed thing going on, [MG: You're trying to be polite.] That does not exist here in Montreal.

MG: How does that play out in your bar? What does that look like? That joie de vive.

SERGIO DA SILVA: I mean, it looks like, you know, people coming together to put on shows, put on all kinds of events that sort of reflect the, you know, the culture that we have here.

MG: So, you ring the bell at 3 a.m.. What does that look like at the bar?

SERGIO DA SILVA: I mean, for the most part, it's pretty orderly. People understand how that works. And then, you know, that's basically what it's been for the past, god knows how long.

MG: Does it feel like you're pulling the plug on the party?

SERGIO DA SILVA: Sometimes it does. Absolutely.

MG: And so, do you support the idea of a 24 hour I mean, no last call. We'll go until you can go no longer.

SERGIO DA SILVA: For-- my general stance is, yes, absolutely. There are a lot of people who are involved in the sort of like all night party scene that are responsible, ready and willing to make that work in the city to add to this sort of like ecosystem of Montreal nightlife. So, on the record, absolutely. I am 100 per cent for it. If the right people are involved.

MG: The right people.

SERGIO DA SILVA: Yeah. I mean, you are going to speak with Jenny very soon and she'll be able to tell you more about that, but absolutely. I think it's a good idea.

MG: You've also said, though, that there are many people who are in your industry who see this as kind of a magic bullet.

SERGIO DA SILVA: That's my, that's one of my biggest sort of situation comes in, because it's not a magic bullet. It's a nice thing to put on a, you know, a postcard or whatever, like, Oh, Montreal, 24 hours. You can do whatever you'd like. But at the end of the day, there's still people who have to make that happen. Like...

MG: What are you worried about? When you call it like, when you say that people have like this as a magic bullet? Like, what are you concerned about?

SERGIO DA SILVA: Well, it's one thing to say like, it-- because it's just a very flashy thing to say. Montreal, 24 hours. Like, that'll solve the problem. Like, I'm not already working 16 hours a day. So, the way to fix the problem is for me to work another eight hours doesn't really fix that for me. Plus, there has to be things in place to make this work. An analogy that I like to use is like giving somebody one superpower. You can jump really high, but you haven't given them any other powers to deal with it. So, when you're coming down and you don't have super legs, you're going to splat on the floor. So like, does 24 hour bars come with increased security? Does it come with better infrastructure for like public transport, like all these things?

MG: Because people are going to be out drinking at 5:00 in the morning.

SERGIO DA SILVA: Yeah. And then...

MG: Is that a particularly good thing?

SERGIO DA SILVA: I mean, why not? I mean, absolutely, there are night people and these people exist and they're not monsters, just because you have a different schedule. Like ,the people are not the issue.

MG: But you need you need the infrastructure around to support those people.

SERGIO DA SILVA: Of course. And you've got to be able to make that work. It's like you can't just say, Oh, bars of 24 hours now. Go wild. Like, that's not going to fix the problems.

MG: You, at Turbo Haüs, have had to deal with noise issues in past. And that's one thing I think that people, you could imagine, people would say, hold on a second. It's great that people are going to be able to go and have a good time. But the city isn't just a bunch of bars and nightclubs. People live here, people work here. People wake up early and do things or just want to sleep. How do you ensure that the noise of extending last call or eliminating last call isn't going to ruin the lives of other people?

SERGIO DA SILVA: I'm fully on board with people having a sort of set kind of like quality of life, and that includes noise. And I understand that where people would be upset about that. But where I'm at in Quartier des Spec, where there are bar-- the zoning is set so that every single storefront can be a bar. I don't have any sympathy anymore for people who move into these neighbourhoods expecting a quiet life.

MG: You're not moving to the country. You're moving to an area that is designed in some ways for that.

SERGIO DA SILVA: Well, this is where, specifically they want us to be. And then to come over and then complain about noise is asinine. If you like the quiet go to Candiac, move next to a golf course and you won't have this issue. But if you're going to come to the Quartier des Spectacles and then complain that there's noise, I have zero sympathy.

MG: But it's not black and white, right? I mean, there is some kind of grey area in there where people can live in an area, they can live in the heart of a city and not be woken up every night at 4:00 in the morning by people who've been out all night.

SERGIO DA SILVA: Absolutely. But if there's going to be nocturnal zones, you would imagine that people would know, I'm moving into a nocturnal zone, and then I can adjust my life accordingly. You can't move into a place that the city is telling you is going to be 24-hour bars and then be like, oh, I didn't think there'd be 24 hour bars. [MG: I can't believe this is happening in this institution.] That's it. It's just a very sort of like you, you have to pick your battles and like, deciding to move like, I live above the bar that I probably shouldn't say, like-- [MG: You just did.] But I live in the neighbourhood. I live right there. And, like, you know, for me, it's not a problem. And a lot of people can get accustomed to that. And certain people can live in these neighbourhoods and not have an issue.

MG: What do you, just before I let you go, and we hinted at this at the beginning, but what makes this city special when it comes to its nightlife? I mean, how-- what you're doing is a big part of it. And so, for people who are elsewhere in the country, what should they think of when they think of Montreal and that nightlife?

SERGIO DA SILVA: They should think of all the amazing things that happen. And not, the most important thing is like the venues and the bars don't make the culture. It's the people that make the culture. And there's such a rich tapestry of people who live in Montreal doing the wildest things. Like if the venues went away tomorrow, it wouldn't matter because people are playing under bridges, people are playing in parks. Like this will always exist. The culture in Montréal always exists. And to think that, like, you know, you're missing out on that. Participate. Like, it's here for you to have. Nobody's gatekeeping you. We want everybody to get as involved as they possibly can.

MG: Sergio, thank you.

SERGIO DA SILVA: You're welcome.

MG: Sergio da Silva is the owner of Turbo Haüs, which is a bar and live music venue in downtown Montreal. He mentioned Jenny, that's Jenny Thibault, who is looking forward to finally hearing the city's nightlife plan in detail. She is general director of the society for Arts and Technology in Montreal, a non-profit space and salon showcases digital art and immersive experiences. It's the premiere venue for electronic music in this city. Jenny, good morning to you.

JENNY THIBAULT: Good morning.

MG: We just heard Sergio describe what closing time looks at his bar. What about your institution? When it hits last call, what is it like?

JENNY THIBAULT: Well, we've been very lucky because we did many pilot projects with the city. You know, we had, like, a five or six event, with the night, opening, late night opening, extended permit and they went very well, actually. So, we didn't have, like, the [unclear] moment at three a.m., that you opening the lights. You know, it was more a natural flow to get out of the venue whenever you want until, like, five or six a.m..

MG: What difference would it make if you were allowed to stay open past three a.m. and serve alcohol in particular? Like to be open, but to serve drinks later on? What would that mean for your venue?

JENNY THIBAULT: For, electronic music promoters, it's more easy to do the booking, because we are reaching out to a lot of international DJs. And when we are trying to convince someone to come in Montreal and let's say, and play the headliner at 2:00 a.m., it's a bit complicated to make them understand that we're going to be close at 3:00 a.m..

MG: Because elsewhere in the world, they might start their set at two and play until 6:00 or 8:00 in the morning.

JENNY THIBAULT: Exactly. And even for the crowd, you know, the clubbers, they are going late. They are going to the bar very late. So, when we are doing electronic music shows at night, people are getting in the room, let's say around 1:00 a.m. So, you just have two hours of activities. So, it's being complicated.

MG: Do you have sympathy? I mean, Sergio is saying he doesn't really have any time for people who would move into a neighbourhood that's filled with bars and clubs and then complain about the noise. Do you have sympathy for people who would hear this and say, come on. Really? Like at 4:00 in the morning, I'm going to hear the thump of music from down the road or below me or something like that when I'm trying to sleep.

JENNY THIBAULT: Yeah, totally. We have sympathy. You know, we have built condos just behind our venues, actually. But we are in Quartier des Spectacles. We are trying to improve our sound system and everything to reduce the noise. And we did a lot of things to improve that. But if you moving just next to a venues, you know, you should admit that it's part of the city. It's part of the life.

MG: How do you make sure that everybody feels like this is being done with them not to them. Do you know what I mean? That people don't feel like this is being imposed. And yeah, sure, you might have moved into that area, but you live in a condo. To get people to talk to each other. What has to be in place to make sure that this actually works?

JENNY THIBAULT: I think we need to do a lot of mediation with them to discuss, to find like, you know, some agreements. We did a lot of things with our venues to improve, like, all the noise issues. And I think it's working, actually. We are receiving less complaints, so we have to open the dialogue and to adjust.

MG: How has the city changed, do you think? As, I mean, Sergio was talking about what it means to be here and the fact that the venues could disappear. But people still have a sense as to-- they want to get out. I saw this last night, wandering through the streets. It's a Wednesday night and people are out. The parks are filled with people. There's lots going on. How has that changed over time? Because Montreal is not the city that it was five years ago, or ten years ago or 20 years ago.

JENNY THIBAULT: Good question, though. You know, with the pandemic, it's been very hard on us. We've been like the last city in North America to reopen all the venues and the bars. There's a last restaurant open, like, late night. I think we need to take over the night back, you know. We need to be more, for sure during the summer is different. But during the winter, it's quite calm. So, I think we need to dynamite the night, and to, let's say, open some art gallery at night. Open late night restaurant, to improve, let's say, the urban lightning, to have, like, a night patrol, to...

MG: To make it safer for people to be out late.

JENNY THIBAULT: Exactly. Yeah.

MG: If it works, and when the city rolls out this plan officially and all the details are put into place, what would you want to see? How do you imagine Montreal at night? Paint me a picture of what you imagine Montreal at night to look like.

JENNY THIBAULT: Good question. Yeah, I think with a lot of life, a lot of people walking safely. Like, a safe zone where you feel like you can enjoy yourself. Go to restaurant, go to dance and to, yeah. To be very like, yeah, in a quiet zone, calm and without like, yeah. For sure people are drinking more alcohol with this new policy, officially. But maybe they will take less drugs as well. So, I think it's an issue right now in Montreal. The drugs are really all over the place, and they are really strong. So, I think maybe we need, some, yeah. Some musician.

MG: It feels like that's part of the DNA of the city, though. [JENNY: For sure.] I mean, as Sergio was saying.

JENNY THIBAULT: It's been our reputation for years.

MG: We'll see how it unfolds. And hopefully everybody can be, there's a path to make sure that people feel as though they're all on side with this if it goes forward and the people don't feel like it's being done to them, as they say, rather than with them. Jenny, thank you very much.

JENNY THIBAULT: Thank you.

MG: Jenny Thibault is the general director of the Society for Arts and Technology in Montreal. It's a non-profit space that showcases digital art and electronic music.

Nantali Indongo and 20 years of Nomadic Massive

Guests: Nantali Indongo

[Music: 'Hot to Go' by Chappell Roan]

MG: That's Chappell Roan at Osheaga, at one of the highlights of that festival, which is one of the great summer festivals in and around Montreal. You know, you can't talk about Montreal's nightlife without talking about the music scene and those festivals. And just because summer is wrapping up, it's not over yet, but it's wrapping up. That doesn't mean that the festival season is coming to an end. Later on this month, dozens of artists will take part in Pop Montreal's international music festival, and that includes the hip hop supergroup Nomadic Massive, celebrating their 20th anniversary, one of the first multi-lingual hip hop groups in Quebec. Nantali Indongo is one of the earliest members of the group, was with them for 17 years. She is the host of The Bridge here at CBC Montreal, and will be back on stage for this group's 20th anniversary block party at Pop Montreal, and she's with me in studio now.

NANTALI INDONGO: Hey. Hope the knees are still functioning at that event when I get there.

MG: You'll be fine. It's like riding a bicycle or something like that. We were just talking about the nightlife in Montreal. [NANTALI: Yes.] What do you like about this city after dark? What makes it-- we're saying, like, it's special.

NANTALI INDONGO: It has...

MG: Something different about it here.

NANTALI INDONGO: And by the way, it's always been an after dark city, right? If we go all the way back to the 40s, the jazz scene in Montreal, and earlier than that, that's a part of the identity of the city. What I love is that culture is brewing at that, during that moment, as well. Culture is being made especially, I think Sergio talked about it, at least, in a web article, that there's an underground scene here. So, the city is already 24-hour city, but there are people who are testing out ideas with music, with dance, with just exchanges, with different communities that are happening after 3:00. And it's a beautiful thing. So, I think we get new things out of that, what happens, you know, in the 24 hours between 3:00 and 7:00 in the morning.

MG: It's not for sleeping, apparently.

NANTALI INDONGO: It's not for sleeping.

MG: You say that with some, like you're talking to the rest of the country and saying, I get it that you might be sleeping, but we're not.

NANTALI INDONGO: We're not. We really aren't. And I know, I understand, of course I do agree. If you're going to move into the areas where there is a nightlife, that's going to be a hard argument to make, like shut it down. And it's had an impact. We've had those debates in this city, and it's had a negative impact not only on businesses, but on artistry. On ability for especially musicians and live performers to find and be in spaces where they can work their craft and share their joy.

MG: Things make noise, right? And if you can't be in those places making noise, where are you going to do it?

NANTALI INDONGO: That's it. I would actually like to see little 24-hour zones, special zones all throughout the boroughs of the city, because that's what's missing, is that when you get to a little bit further north, west, east, south, you lose culture a little bit more as you go outwards. So, if you can have a little sprinkle here and there, some midnight concerts in the local parks in the boroughs, I'd love that.

MG: Who better to talk to about this than the host of The Bridge. A show, which is all about, I mean, culture and life and the things that bring us together. In addition to talking about it, though, as I said, you make this music. Or made. [NANTALI: Made.] No, you're getting back on stage. Tell us about Nomadic Massive.

NANTALI INDONGO: Oh my gosh. Nomadic Massive have started in 2004 in Cuba during a hurricane. Hurricane Ivan. And really, the idea was they were, I wasn't in the group yet. I joined a year after. The main members of the group were there, almost like a delegation of hip hop acts from Quebec. But because of this hurricane, they turned into like disaster zone volunteers. So, the festival was cancelled and they just worked with the community and different people they knew there, boarding up windows and helping people prepare, but they did get a chance to perform, but they had to perform as a collective, which wasn't necessarily what they were doing in Montreal.

MG: One of the things that makes this group stand out, as I said, aside from the music, is who was part of the group. And all of the different, the way that people came together.

NANTALI INDONGO: Yeah.

MG: Tell me about that. I said that it was one of the first multi-lingual hip hop.

NANTALI INDONGO: Yeah. So, shout out to Morzine, because they really were the first. They mixed English, French and Creole. Nomadic added Spanish, Portuguese, Arabic because Narcy, an Iraqi Canadian artist was in the group. Meryem Saci brought her Algerian dialect of Arabic. I brought Caribbean patois. There was also Haitian Creole nomadic.

MG: How unusual was that at the time? How unusual is it now?

NANTALI INDONGO: Yeah. I don't think it was unusual for Montreal, because that's the beauty of this city. I think people believe that we have two solitudes. We don't have two solitudes. We have 100 solitudes because we have so many people of different cultures speaking different languages. And that's what was special about this group-- is special, because the group is still going.

MG: When you put all of those things together, it mean, it can collide.

NANTALI INDONGO: Yes.

MG: What made it work?

NANTALI INDONGO: So...

MG: What made it not solitudes?

NANTALI INDONGO: Explode? Yeah.

MG: But what made it something [NANTALI: Come together?] and something that would hang together?

NANTALI INDONGO: A love of rice and beans.

MG: I mean, really, if you're looking for fuel for creativity, it's rice and beans.

NANTALI INDONGO: Right? But really, it's just that we were either children of immigrants, most of us, or immigrants ourselves. So, there was an identity and experience of having a foot in two worlds, being Canada and somewhere else, that all, that came, that brought us together. And then a love, a passion, an obsession for hip hop culture in particular.

MG: So, you're going to get back on stage?

NANTALI INDONGO: Yeah.

MG: When was the last time you performed?

NANTALI INDONGO: It's been a while. I left the group about two years ago.

MG: It's been a minute.

NANTALI INDONGO: It's been-- exactly. As we say, it's been a minute.

MG: And so, what are you looking forward to?

NANTALI INDONGO: I'm looking forward to the kind of symbiosis that we had very quickly in the group. Like by 2015 or so, mid, that just five, ten years into the group, we could get on stage and you'd think that we coordinated outfits or something. Because we just had this energy that worked. And so, it got to a point where we knew when to come in to each other's verses, to back each other up. We knew how to move without knocking each other over. I mean, in early days, people broke teeth, you know, trying to pass through somebody else and another person's elbow knocked them in the mouth. But we just got to a point where it was just smooth. It was easy. You made a mistake, you didn't have to stop playing. You just flow with it and we'd fix it on stage. And that energy on stage then carries over stage to the audience. And you feel this literally that-- a vibration. That's what I'm looking forward to. The vibration between the audience and us. And our city has always showed us love.

MG: That's what live music is about.

NANTALI INDONGO: It is.

MG: You can listen to stuff, you can have it on your headphones, whatever. Look at it. That vibration happens.

NANTALI INDONGO: It really does. And that's what was different for us as a hip hop group. Because hip hop, you know it as MC and DJ, but we were inspired by groups like Roots, so we had a live band, and a DJ at times and a bunch of MCs.

MG: Okay, so we're going to play a tune. This is Any Sound.

NANTALI INDONGO: Yeah.

MG: Set this up real quick.

NANTALI INDONGO: So, Any Sound was written, I don't even remember the year, but we were in the jungle in French Guyana, in the Amazon, invited to a festival happening there. And just a small delegation of us went a couple of MCs and a DJ. So, we had to write new music to fill the set time. And we wrote this new song, and it was really about just, we're from everywhere. This is 'Any Sound' type of vibe.

MG: I'm so glad to have you here to wrap up our time in Montreal. Thanks very much.

NANTALI INDONGO: Thank you for having me.

MG: Nantali Indongo is the host of The Bridge on CBC Radio in Montreal. Also a musician, and she will be back on stage with Nomadic Massive as they celebrate their 20th anniversary at Pop Montreal, September 26th here in Montreal. That is it for The Current today. Q is up next on CBC Radio One. Thanks for joining me on this road trip across the eastern half of Canada. Next week we head to the other side of the country. We will bring you stories from way out west on Haida Gwaii, an amazing place, and we'll tell you all about it next week. I'm Matt Galloway in Montreal. Thanks for listening to The Current.

[Music: 'Any Sound' by Nomadic Massive]

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

Thursday September 5, 2024 Full Transcript

Social Sharing