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 2018

The AIH Transcript for October 03, 2018

Hosts: Carol Off and Jeff Douglas

CAROL OFF: Hello, I’m Carol Off.

JEFF DOUGLAS: Good evening, I'm Jeff Douglas. This is “As It Happens”.

[Music: Theme]

Prologue

JD: Tonight:

CO: Flesh and blood. 13 years after Adam Anhang was murdered in Puerto Rico, his father finally sees justice done — when his son's wife is found guilty of hiring a hit man.

JD: Catch you later. Canada joins the EU and 8 other countries in signing a major agreement to ban commercial fishing in the Central Arctic Ocean for a full 16 years.

CO: The author of his own missed fortune. Donald Trump says he's a self-made billionaire, but the New York Times says that's self-made-up — and tonight we'll hear what reporters uncovered about the Trump family's hidden wealth.

JD: Can't win for lozenge. In the latest instance of her male colleagues discriminating against her, a Japanese politician is thrown out of the assembly for speaking with a cough drop in her mouth.

CO: One tricked-out Pony. Actually, the 1986 Hyundai Pony on sale in Quebec isn't fancy, but it is in mint condition. And our guest explains why people still love the throwback hatchback.

JD: And...blowing hot in cold. While he was stuck on a snowy highway in Alberta, the renowned trumpet player Jens Lindemann got out of his car and played for his fellow drivers.

JD: "As It Happens", the Wednesday edition. Radio that recommends a whole team of highway trumpeters — a real brass-routes operation.

[Music: Theme]

Part one: Puerto Rico verdict, Trump taxes, Alberta snowstorm

Puerto Rico verdict

Guest: Abe Anhang

JD: Thirteen years ago, Adam Anhang from Winnipeg seemed to have it all. He was 32 years old, he was a millionaire, and he was living in Puerto Rico with his wife, a former beauty queen. But one night in 2005, a man attacked the couple on a street in San Juan. He beat and stabbed Adam Anhang to death. Today, a jury found Adam's widow guilty of conspiring to kill her husband. They found her sister and her sister's boyfriend guilty as well. Adam's father, Abe Anhang lives in Winnipeg. But he is in San Juan for the trial. And that is where we reached him.

CO: Mr. Anhang, I'm sure you have very mixed emotions today. What does this verdict mean for you?

ABE ANHHANG: Well, it's the end of a very unhappy, abysmal time of our lives for my family — our family. For 15 years almost, it’s been 14 years almost to the day that we've been having to live with this tragedy. When our son was murdered in San Juan in Puerto Rico — 200f, September 22^nd. A day that we will not forget.

CO: I know this is painful, but you've spoken about it a great deal. I just want to know if you would take us back to what you understand happened that night in September, 2005?

AA: Well, what happened was this lady who had been our son's friend for a few months only. She decided to take our son's life. And it was only after a lot of meticulous planning over a period of time along with several other people that she made the plan and then executed the plan.

CO: It was supposed to appear as though a robbery had gone bad?

AA: Yes, that was supposed to have been the appearance. And, in fact, during the middle of the assault, she actually talked to the murderer. And reminded him that he should give her a glance on her cheek. So that it could appear to be that she was involved. And as our son was fighting with the murderer, my son who was in fear of his own life, I’m afraid said run baby, run. And she didn't run; she just stayed put. And then when he expired on the street, on the cobblestones of old San Juan, she just sat down, and waited for whatever it was going to happen about 15 minutes later. The emergency vehicles arrived, and it was only then that she suddenly stood up and said my husband has been murdered. The bottom line is that she was a participant from the very beginning, and it was planned well in advance.

CO: There's so many disturbing details of this, aren’t there? And this is this testimony came from the man who actually committed the murder. He had been commissioned to do it — offered money if he would kill your son. And your son, one of his last gestures is to tell her to run — to protect herself. The woman who actually had hired the man who is now bludgeoning him to death. it just tells you so much about what kind of a man your son was as well.

AA: Yes. It was a terrible, terrible event. And as you say, he had no knowledge that he died probably from brain injuries loss of blood that it was she who was in on it. And she had planned it.

CO: The Puerto Rican police arrested man. The wrong man as it turned out to be. Did you at the time think that justice had been served? Because that man was sent to prison for 105 years before the truth came out. Did you think that was the end of it?

AA: I did not believe he was guilty. And, in fact, I went to the FBI the very next afternoon and told them so, and asked them to open a file. And they did. And within about nine months they got the right man, they let out the wrong man.

CO: Did you suspect that this woman that your son had been married to — his widow — was behind this murder all along? Is that your suspicion?

AA: Absolutely. Absolutely. She had the biggest motive of all.

CO: And can you describe… they were only married for about six or seven months. What was the motive?

AA: The motive was greed. The whole family had moved into their house. And basically, he had to move out. There is no doubt that they looked upon him as a meal ticket. And he was dispensable, in fact, they convinced themselves that he was worth more dead than alive.

CO: When you contacted the FBI, how did they react? Did they think that you had something?

AA: The FBI were taken out of that jurisdiction by the fact that the local police felt they had exclusive and primary jurisdiction. It was only when we produced a number of items like, for example, a list of invoices for the use of a cell phone, which I had gotten the bills for that the FBI was able to come in on this case because it was then shown that in the course of their event of the carrying out of the offense, that a cell phone was used.

CO: During all this time where was this woman? Where was Aurea Vazquez-Rijos?

AA: She fled. She fled to Italy. And she was pretending that she was taking a course in film. But that wasn't the case because she couldn't afford it. According to her, eventually she had to fall back on the goodwill of the Jewish community of Florence. And she passed herself off as Jewish when she wasn't. And so forth and so on. But the bottom line is that she was fleeing all over Europe, and we were tracking her.

CO: But, as you mentioned, she tried to pass herself off as being Jewish. It was one of her scams. She now had three children by different men in Italy.

AA: Well, she had two in Italy, and then one in Madrid in jail. There was a six-and-a-half year extradition battle.

CO: Six –and-a-half-years.

AA: She refused to leave Italy. She refused to leave Italy because in Italy, they do not have the death penalty for capital offenses. But they do have the death penalty in the United States. So the Italian government took the position that they would not extradite her because she could be executed.

AM: You finally did it. There was a bit of a sting operation. The FBI got her. They brought her back. Aurea Vazquez-Rijos, her sister, her sister's boyfriend all found guilty in the murder of your son. The FBI did its work. But you did an extraordinary job over all these years chasing all these leads down. And I understand your own security was under question a number of times?

AA: All true. But I would expect and hope that any other parent would do the same.

CO: And now you've seen justice.

AA: I’ve seen justice. But you know Carol, nothing's going to bring our son back. And the biggest tragedy is that the kind of thing that he was doing here in San Juan was so needed for this economy. He was an entrepreneur. A man who had vision. A man who knew what had to be done. And he was doing it. And just in the middle of it, somebody murdered him.

CO: Mr. Anhang, I'm really sorry for what happened to your son. And to how difficult this has been. But I really appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

AA: Thank you for calling me. I appreciate it.

CO: Bye bye.

AA: Goodnight.

JD: Abe Anhang is the father of Adam Anhang, who was murdered in Puerto Rico 13 years ago. Today Adam Anhang’s widow was found guilty of conspiring to murder him. We reached Abe Anhang in San Juan, Puerto Rico.

[Music: Horns]

Headscarf ruling

JD: She was in a Montreal court for a routine traffic issue. But in 2015, a judge told Rania El-Alloul to remove her hijab, or leave. The judge, Eliana Marengo, said, quote, "Hats and sunglasses are not allowed. I don't see why scarves on the head would be either." Unquote. Well, today, Quebec's top court ruled that Ms. El-Alloul had every right to wear her hijab in the courtroom. She told CBC Montreal reporter Steve Rukavina why fighting the long legal battle was so important to her.

SOUNDCLIP

RANIA EL-ALLOUL: I feel very, very happy Nice morning that I am hearing the final decision. It was nice from them. And I feel very happy for the final decision. Thanks for all the people they helped like my lawyers, the NCCM, everybody supported me. And they were with me since three years. It was a long time, but I felt that we can do something, I can do something. So really I'm happy.

STEVE RUKAVINA: What does the judgment mean, not just for you, but for other people who wear the hijab?

RE: All the ladies who are wearing hijab. Actually, I didn't do it for me only, I did it for all of them. And some of them they congratulate me. And I can congratulate them also because I didn't do it for myself. I did for everybody. For all ladies who are wearing hijab. And from the beginning, I talked about all the religions. Not only us.

SR: Three-and-a-half years ago you were just going to get your car back. Take me back. How did you feel when Judge Marango said that she wouldn't hear your case unless you took off your hijab?

RE: that day, I cannot forget about. That day, I forgot totally about the problem of my car. I felt sad for what I faced in the court. Because the court — the place for justice — was discrimination. I don't know what she was feeling against me, but in court, and she's a judge, and she knows that people are coming for justice, and seeking for justice. And I hope that she feels that what she made was wrong, and insulting to me. But really today I'm happy. It was a long journey for me. But today I'm happy.

JD: Rania El-Alloul, speaking to the CBC’s Steve Rukavina in Montreal. on Monday night, of course, the right-leaning coalition Avenir Quebec won the provincial election. The party has vowed to cut immigration by 20 per cent, and introduce a so-called values and French language test for new comers. And ban religious symbols in the civil service. Here is what Ms. Elul had to say about those policies.

SOUNDCLIP

RE: Actually, I don't feel happy. I feel sad for this thing. But I hope they change their mind, and I hope they will deal in a fair way with all religions and with all people. All of us we are Qubeckers. We love this area. We love Quebec. We love Canada. We respect them, of course, but I hope they respect all minorities. I hope they respect everybody because we came here to seek for justice and peace. That's it. We don't make any harm for anybody, even wearing hijab or not wearing hijab. I don't think we love to hurt anybody. So I hope they will not hurt anybody.

JD: Rania El-Alloul, reacting to the Quebec election results. Today, Quebec's top court ruled that Ms. El-Alloul had the right to wear a hijab in a Montreal courtroom in 2015.

[Music: Ambient]

Trump taxes

Guest: Susanne Craig

JD: The current U.S. President Donald Trump tends to repeat himself. And one of the things he's repeated over and over and over again is how he is a, quote, "self-made billionare." Well, a New York Times investigation offers a different perspective. It reveals that Mr. Trump received 413 million U.S. dollars from his father's real estate empire — most of it because he helped his family dodge taxes. Two years ago, reporter Susanne Craig — a Canadian — was mailed Mr. Trump's 1995 tax returns. She told us he had possibly avoided paying federal taxes for 18 years, but now The Times is reporting that Mr. Trump participated in outright fraud. We reached Suzanne Craig in New York City.

CO: Suzanne you put out a tweet what you were up to last night, as you waited for this story to be printed in today's paper. What did you do?

SUSANNE CRAIG: after we were finished at work, I went out to the New York Times Press plant in Queens. And I watched the story that we wrote roll off the presses.

CO: So last time we spoke, a couple of years ago, you received a brown paper envelope, in which you had a part of Donald Trump's 1995 tax return. And from that, you were able to extrapolate a lot of information. But since then, you have found other streams of documents. Describe what you've been up to in the past two years. What you have on unearthed since then?

SC: Sure. We continue to look at Donald Trump's taxes after the story that we wrote in 2016, where we got three pages of his tax returns right before Election Day. And we’ve just continued to push on his finances. Part of that we've examined tens of thousands of public documents. And we also got access to thousands and thousands of confidential documents from Fred Trump's real estate empire.

CO: You’ve sent out questions to Donald Trump, his lawyer Charles Harder responded that should the Times state or imply that President Trump participated in fraud or tax evasion or any other crime, it will expose you to liability and damages for defamation. So I know the language is careful here and is in the article. How would you characterize the charges you're putting out here concerning Donald Trump, his family, and the family's empire?

SC: Well, in terms of the wrongdoing, we found several instances based on the documents that we looked at where Donald Trump participated in fraudulent tax schemes.

CO: Let's get into some examples of it if you would. Now for instance can we talk about what happened when the huge numbers of loans that Donald Trump received from his father had grown into the millions of dollars? How did he cover for those?

SC: Donald Trump has long claimed as part of this narrative that he's created for himself that he's sort of been pretty much up-from-nothing business man who made it to the president like a self-made billionaire. And we uncovered in the documents not only at least 61 million dollars in loans that Fred Trump extended to Donald Trump. And, in cases, many of them weren't repaid. We also found that Donald Trump received over Fred Trump's lifetime more than, and beyond also as an inheritance, More than 400 million dollars from his father.

CO: Fred Trump being his father. And there's one instance you give that Fred Trump at one point spent about 15 million dollars to buy a stake in Trump Palace. And then sold it back to his son. Can you describe that?

SC: Sure. I think spent 15 million would be a generous description of it. Donald Trump owed his father 15 million dollars. And debt, instead of being written off, was, in fact, he used it to invest in the Trump Palace. So he turned the debt into an investment in Trump Palace. And then it was written down to almost nothing.

CO: You mentioned companies. the All Company Building Supply and Maintenance. Can you tell us what that was?

SC: Sure. That was one of the most intriguing frauds that we found. It was probably the most kind of ones with the bright lights around it. Fred Trump was getting older into his 80s. He owns not only you know huge number of buildings in the New York area worth hundreds of millions of dollars. But he was also sitting on a huge amount of cash. And Donald Trump and his siblings realized that at some point he was going to die, and that money was going to be subject to a 55 per cent inheritance tax. So what the Trump kids — it's pretty incredible. For years Fred Trump would you know for his buildings he would buy everything from fridges and stoves. And then one day, a company called All County was created. Suddenly, All County started doing all the buying for Fred Trump's empire. They would pay 300 dollars for new fridges. Then they would create a separate receipt, and they would mark it up anywhere from 25 to 50 per cent, and send it up to Fred. And the difference on that was pocketed by All County, which was controlled by Donald Trump and his siblings. It allowed them to drain huge amounts — millions of dollars in cash from their father's empire, so that it would not be subject to the death tax.

CO: Just finally, kind of an overarching theme of this investigation is that Donald Trump is presented as understood to have been a self-made man, isn't he? But why does it matter? In what way does it fit in to your story about fraud? As to how Donald Trump benefitted, profited from that mythology?

SC: Well, he's benefited greatly over the years from this lie that has been repeated over and over, and over. And I guess just the myth making of him that's been wrong. I mean it's spectacular con. It was interesting as we were going through the reporting’s early on in the 1970s right out you know when he graduates and he goes to work for his father. He does an interview with The New York Times, and he goes around and he talks about this job that’s his. And this building that's his. And he's driving around in a car. And he's showing this reporter all this stuff. And it was incredible. Every building he showed the reporter was his father's, even though he claimed it was his own. As his life went on, he then started to diminish his father's achievements. You know he would say only about a million dollar loan. My father was a great building. But it was in Brooklyn and Queens. And then when it came time in 2004, five years after Fred Trump’s death, to sell the empire — the biggest single payday in his life in 2004 — it was done very quietly.

CO: Just finally, what was that final pay day?

SC: That year it was just under two hundred million dollars. He got roughly 177 million. The Empire itself sold for roughly eight hundred million. And we found through other records that it should have been valued at roughly a billion. So even on that day, the man who wrote “The Art of the Deal” you know I think got a lot less than he probably should have for that sale.

CO: Extraordinary! Suzanne, thank you very much for speaking with us.

SC: OK great, thank you.

CO: Bye.

JD: Susanne Craig is a New York Times reporter. Responding to the Times investigation, the state taxation authority in New York said it would review the allegations and is, quote, "vigorously pursuing all appropriate avenues of investigation." There is more on this story on our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Ambient]

Alberta snowstorm

Guest: Jens Lindemann

JD: In most of the country, it's early autumn. But in parts of Alberta — you'd be forgiven for mistaking it for, you know, the next season. Yesterday, instead of pleasant multi-coloured leaves, snow fell in areas around Calgary. A lot of snow — as much as 60 centimetres' of snow. If you were inside sipping tea, it was not welcome, but otherwise not a big deal. If you were out on the roads, it was a nightmare. On one highway, hundreds of motorists were stuck for hours, stretching into the night. Trumpet player Jens Lindemann was one of them. After a while, he decided to get out of his car, and serenade his fellow stranded motorists. We reached Mr. Lindemann in Calgary.

CO: Jens, when did you realize yesterday that you were well and truly stuck on the road?

JENS LINDEMANN: Well, I looked ahead, and I saw a bunch of truckers with their flashers on. And we came to a dead stop pretty much in the middle of nowhere. And neither lane was moving left or right. I had a quick look around one of those semi-rigs, and I could see cars as far as you could possibly look.

CO: And so at what time of the day did you get stuck to not move again? What time was that?

JL: Well, it was a leisurely drive back. I hit the actual car roadblock at about 11 a.m. And that's when we came to a full stop. And it was bright outside, and it wasn't too cold — just below zero. So it didn't feel like there was going to be too big of a problem.

CO: How long are we out there?

JL: Well, I was out there for ten-and-a-half hours. And hadn't moved an inch — nobody had. There were literally hundreds — probably a thousand cars easily.

CO: Why couldn't you just turn around and head back?

JL: Well, there's a very wide meridian in between. It's a sort of a grassy knoll, which was completely and deeply covered in snow. In fact, at one point, a number of hours in, there was a brave SUV driver who literally launched his vehicle into the ditch. And he had enough power to slide about two hundred meters, and we finally got him to the other side. There was actually a lot of applause from people who were staring watching this maniac try it, but he pulled it off. And not one other person dared to do it.

CO: Did you try?

JL: No way. I had a front wheel drive rental car. It wouldn’t have had a chance. In fact, at one point because the lanes were very difficult to see it was a soft shoulder, and my car actually slid just slightly off and got stuck. And immediately six people jumped out of their cars and helped get me back onto the road, which was great because we had that obstructing up a pretty good friendship after Ten-and-a-half hours.

CO: At what point did you decide to unpack your trumpet?

JL: Right at that point. I was stuck in the ditch, thinking I'm not going to get out of here. And all these good Samaritans came and helped push me out. And I mean it was fun. It was actually fun at that time of day still. And I opened the trunk of my car. I gave them all a couple of C.D.s to thank them. And then I pulled out a trumpet, and it was like a little bit of a Canadian party, so to speak.

CO: I'm sure a lot of people have seen the video but, and we can't show them. We can play a bit of it here. Here’s a bit of the sound part of your friend’s video of you playing on your trumpet outside the snowstorm.

SOUNDCLIP

[Sound: How Canadian]

CO: And we should point out we just played part of it. You did the entire “Oh, Canada” song —the whole anthem you played.

JL: Yes, I did. And for any of your viewers that are listening carefully, I might like to add that it was about minus 10 below, blowing wind, and I was in the middle of a snowy Meridian. So it was a musical sacrifice for my fellow Canadians, especially the six people that helped me get out of a ditch.

CO: I was going to mention that. Because, first of all, you can hear the wind in that, but the other thing is that it's a nice warm sound you got there. Your lips must have been frosty.

JL: Well, again, for trumpet players that might be listening to this, it turns out I was actually playing a synthetic mouthpiece. So the metal didn't stick to my face.

CO: But anyway, so people reacted well to that. But then I guess that was at close to the beginning of your ordeal.

JL: Yes, well they loved it. And like I said, it was a true Canadian type of party. People were outside their cars talking to each other, trying to just figure out what was going on. And then it got dark. And then it was quite disconcerting because you know, as I said, I'm from Alberta, so you know even though I haven't been here in a while, you remember all the most important rules of travel on roads. Make sure your gas tank is full. Because it's not full, you can't run your car. And if can't run the car, you can't run heat. So there were people that were running out of gas, and having to turn their cars off and on. And it was very cold by nighttime. So the fun and games were over at that point. Everybody was just looking out for each other. But everybody made sure to jump out of their car and check in on other people. It was quite a thing to be a part of, indeed

CO: You finally got to Calgary, you’re just about to get on a plane, you're headed to L.A. — I can't blame you.

JL: Well, actually, I'm going to Vancouver. I had to cancel a concert yesterday. And, unfortunately, I will make it to Coquitlam tonight to play, and then back to Los Angeles. So it's been quite a story to regale my friends the family with when I get home.

CO: I was going to ask back in L.A., when you finally get home, what will the make of your story of being stuck in a snowstorm on a highway on October the 2^nd?

JL: Oh, they don't understand at all. We never talk about weather in Los Angeles. In fact, when I first moved down there, I left the cord hanging out of the front radiator of my car. You know the cord that heats your oil pan so that you can start it in the morning. And people assumed that I was driving an electric vehicle. That’s how out of touch anybody in California is when it comes to trying to describe a sudden winter storm in Alberta.

CO: All right, Jens. Well, happy and safe travels from here. It sounds like it couldn't get worse than it’s already been. And good to talk to you, thanks.

JL: Very nice to chat with you too. And thank you for calling.

CO: Bye.

JL: OK. Bye bye.

JD: trumpet player Jens Lindemann was in Calgary.

[Music: ambient]

Part two: ocean protection agreement, Hyundai Pony for sale

Ocean protection agreement

Guest: Trevor Taylor

JD: If you fish, particularly if you fish for a living or livelihood, it's a net loss. If you study fish, or fish habitat — or, indeed, if you are a fish — it's a net gain. Earlier today, Canada joined the European Union and eight other countries in signing an agreement that will prevent commercial fishing in the world's smallest ocean. The ban will last for at least 16 years, and will protect nearly three million square kilometres of the Central Arctic Ocean. During those years, scientific research will be conducted to better understand the region. Trevor Taylor is the VP of Conservation for Oceans North, a Canadian NGO. He's been lobbying for a deal like this since 2010. We reached Mr. Taylor in Iqualuit

CO: Mr. Taylor, what does it mean to you that this agreement has come into place that there will not be fishing in the Central Arctic Ocean for 16 years?

TREVOR TAYLOR: To me, I just view it as such an unprecedented move that even though we've been at it for eight years lobbying to get this done that I still look at it a little bit in disbelief that it’s actually done. It’s such an unprecedented move.

CO: Why is it so unprecedented?

TT: You know historically or right up until now, in every ocean and every sea in the world, we've gone fishing first and asked questions later. And usually we only get around asking questions after we've substantially depleted the fish stocks that we've been directing for and causing irreparable damage to coastal communities and ecosystems generally. We typically try and fix the problem after we created it. And in this case, we've addressed the problem before it's presented to us.

CO: How were you able to do that? How were you able to convince all of these governments to agree to sign on to this agreement that would prevent commercial fishing in this area of the Arctic?

TT: Well, certainly I didn’t do it. But I had a small hand to play in it. You know initially I'd have to say that most people thought this was at best a good idea whose time had come. And at worst, that there were far bigger fish to fry. And nevertheless, we made the case that imagine if you could in Canada for example that we had an agreement like this prior to the extension of jurisdiction. Prior to the establishment of the 200 mile limit. Say we had it in the 1960s. We would have prevented wholesale destruction, one could say, of the groundfish stocks off eastern Canada in late 60s and early 70s. We would have prevented the turbot war on the nose and tail of the Grand Banks of Canada. So imagine the diplomacy that had to be endured and committed to that to try to bring some resolution to those problems. And I think you know when you told that story it resonated with them. And we find ourselves where we are today.

CO: Extraordinary. Now, so what we know about the central Arctic Ocean is that it's changing rapidly, isn't it? That we've seen that the decrease of the thickness of sea ice in the region is more than half of what it was 30 years ago. There’s open water now that wasn't there before. It's an extraordinarily changing environment, isn't it? So what's at stake here? What do you think exists there that the fisheries — commercial fisheries — would like to be able to get their hands on, so to speak?

TT: Well, you know the critical piece, of course, is that hundreds of thousands of years, nobody has been able to get into the Central Arctic Ocean. And it’s only since about mid-90s that it's opened up enough for fishing fleets or any kind of vessels really short of the heaviest icebreakers to get in there. If you look at the topography… hydrography I should say of the Central Arctic Ocean, you can see just outside the 200 mile limits of Canada, the United States, and Russia, there is an area that is particularly accessible. It's the area that clears up from ice earliest and longest in the Arctic summer. And it's an area that has water depths less than 2,000 metres, which is a very fishable depth of water. We don't know really how much fish is there. We suspect that there's not a lot. But there are undoubtedly some. And it's probably Arctic cod. And Arctic cod is the underpinning of pretty much the entire Arctic ecosystem. Seals, whales, polar bears indirectly depend on Arctic cod for their food source. And it's a very oily fish. It would lend itself very well to what's referred to as a reduction fishery, where you catch these fish, you turn it essentially into a meal product — a fish meal product. And you know there's always demand for that. The Central Arctic Ocean is only 8,000 miles from ports in Southeast Asia. So you know it is accesible. And I say that in many of these cases fisheries can be prosecuted economically, but they can't be prosecuted sustainably. And I think that’s the case for the Central Arctic Ocean as it stands right now.

CO: OK, if I understand you correctly, I mean these countries who have signed on — the Arctic Five as they call them: Canada, Norway, Russia, Denmark, United States — the fishing nations Iceland, Japan South Korea, China, European Union they've all signed on to this for 16 years — this moratorium. But they're looking at some pretty rich fish stocks in there that they want to get their hands on. So you're saying that you can't imagine there would be any time when you could sustainably fish there. So what happens at the end of 16 years and they say OK, you've had your way, and now we're getting in there?

TT: Well, I don't know that it can never happen. I don't think it can happen right now, and I don't think it can happen in the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, there is a mechanism for renewal in five year increments. It will not be renewed, only if somebody puts up their hand, so to speak, and says we want to end this agreement. You know I think before we go too far into the future, and speculate on what might happen. I think the important thing here today is to you know reflect on the fact that this actually happened right now, which is just so unprecedented. I still can't really believe it. Because it’s not so much that people would go here today because there's a commercially viable stock. People have a tendency sometimes — states and fishing companies — to go places to stake out ground. You know to say that I was there. So when the time comes, I have to be at the table to have my piece of the pie. And that's been prevented here now.

CO: All right, well it's going to be interesting to see what happens in the Central Arctic Ocean. Thank you very much for telling us about it, Mr. Taylor.

TT: Thank you very much for your interest.

JD: Trevor Taylor is the VP of Conservation with Oceans North. We reached him in Iqaluit.

[Music: Ambient]

Call centre scam

JD: Twenty years ago, Jacqueline Stone was a teenager living in British Columbia. She wanted to make some money, and so she started working sales at a call centre. Pretty quickly, Ms. Stone got the feeling that it was a scam. She went to the police, she confronted her boss. Nothing changed. Eventually, however, officials did get back in touch. And this year, Ms. Stone was a witness at a trial in a Los Angeles federal court. And that trial ended in the jury convicting a Canadian man — her former boss — of mail and wire fraud. A press release said he had, quote, "orchestrated a bogus telemarketing scheme that defrauded at least 60,000 victims of over 18 million dollars." Jacqueline Stone spoke with the CBC in British Columbia, about how she started working that job all those years ago.

SOUNDCLIP

JACUELINE STONE: A bunch of my friends were hired at a telemarketing room, and they were offered a lot of cash bonuses, so word got around really quickly amongst our friends. So I went and got a job there. And we were basically hired to call people and offer them credit card fraud protection. It became very clear pretty quickly that we were only calling senior citizens. We were only calling people in the United States. We were instructed to lie to them about where we were located. And they were basically then ripping off the credit cards. We didn't know, but it started to become pretty clear. So I still wanted to make the money, so I would call these people. And then I would warn them to check out the company's name and make sure they do the research before giving their credit card number to anybody on the phone. I was 16 at the time, and I was just so upset about it. And I really wanted action, and I wanted justice. So I went down to the police station and I reported it — gave them as much information as I could. I think I brought some paperwork down there from the telemarketing. But you know basically they just told me the investigation would take time. And I really thought you know we were all going to march back up the hill and go arrest this guy. But they just said no, it's going to take a lot of time and a lot of research before they could do that. So I was a little bit disappointed. I finally got to testify when I was 36 years old. Literally 20 years. You know I was always a bit of a rebel. I pushed boundaries when this happened. You know I was 16 years old, and I was living on my own in White Rock because I thought I was invincible and I knew everything. But I was raised to stick up for people and to not let something like that just go by.

JD: That was Jacqueline Stone, speaking with the CBC's Jason Proctor in B.C.

[Music: Acoustic guitar]

Hyundai Pony for sale

Guest: Brendan McAleer

JD: A few things that Canadians loved in the beautiful '80s: Corey Hart, Roots sweatshirts, and the Hyundai Pony. If you don't remember that last one, lots of Canadians do. The Korean car sold like gangbusters here. Take a listen to this TV spot from 1987.

SOUNDCLIP

SPEAKER: Another 30 seconds of common sense from Hyundai. Value — that's why Canadians have been buying Hyundai Ponies at the rate of 10 every hour — 100 every day since 1984. Come and see for yourself the ’87 Hyundai Pony has more no extra cost features. More built in value. It's a better buy than anything else on the market today. More good news: Hyundai announces immediate summer cash rebates of five hundred or nine hundred dollars on every new Pony. Great car. Great price.

JD: Great ad. Yes, the Pony was all over Canadian roads in that era. These days, sadly, you're more likely to bump into Corey Hart than spot a Pony out for a spin. That's because, to put it politely, they were not exactly build to last, were they? But now a dealership in Quebec has put a rare 1986 Pony up for sale. They say it's in "magnifique" condition — and they're asking 15,000 dollars. To explain the allure of the Pony, we reached automotive writer Brendan McAleer in Vancouver.

CO: Brendan, for those who have never laid eyes on a Hyundai Pony, can you describe what it looks like?

BRENDAN MCALEER: Well, it's a four door hatchback. About the size of contemporary Honda Civic. And it's just kind of a little donkey of a car. It originally was designed by an Italian design firm. But we got a face lifted one with square bumpers and square headlights. So it really just looks like you know the 1980s. And most of them — if you happen to see one — usually got a bit of rust on them. It would be rare to see one in good condition.

CO: So basically, the shape of it is kind of like from the 1980s — the same as the shoulder pads we were wearing in our jacket.

BM: Yeah, it's just a big box.

CO: Now, why did Canadians have to love affair with the Hyundai Pony?

BM: The main thing to remember about Canada that unites us all more than anything is that we are really in love with a good bargain. We’re really cheap. So this car came out in December of ‘83 as a 1984 model. It cost 5,994 dollars. And that was thousands less than a Toyota Corolla or a Honda Civic. And it looked nicer than some of the really inexpensive Eastern European stuff that was available in Canada and not the U.S. So we immediately started buying these things up like crazy. The initial run I think is supposed to be 5,000 cars, and they ended up selling 25,000.

CO: This is in the 1980s. So why do we never see Hyundai Ponies around anymore?

BM: The problem is that they were good value initially, but they were a very disposable car. They just did not last. There's some stories about the door hinges would only open so many times before they would fail. Basically, all the problems that people had with Japanese cars in the 1970s, The Hyundai Pony was sort of a 1970s car with a face lift on it. So it just kind of fell apart. So they looked good, but then they did not last.

CO: You actually wrote at one point that if you listened carefully, you could actually hear them rusting.

BM: Yeah, they really did not last. Back east, they didn't like the winters. Apparently, they were pretty good at starting up in cold weather, but they were like I said like a donkey. They just kept going. They were faithful, but they weren't rugged. They just kind of fell apart in people's hands.

CO: Just a few years ago though you actually got hold of a Pony. But you got it a few years ago. How did it handle?

BM: The surprising thing I think was that it was actually pretty good. It had a 70 horsepower engine. So it was you know by modern standards very slow. It did not have the optional tachometer with the manual. It had a clock instead. And I believe somebody chimed in and said you know based on the zero-to-60 time, maybe a calendar would have been more appropriate. It was really slow. But you know at the time are our standards are pretty low in the 80s. I mean you know Night Ranger was still really popular. So we had pretty low standards.

CO: For everything I think.

BM: Yes.

CO: And now the reason why we're calling you is that we've seen this ad for Hyundai Pony in Brossard, Quebec. It's in mint condition apparently — that's what the dealer is saying. So you just had a chance to test drive the one you had a few years ago. I mean is it tempting? Could you conceive that might be something you buy? A mint condition Hyundai Pony?

BM: I recognize that I have pretty weird taste in cars compared to like what a normal person would have. But it's not tempting to me because it's not part of my childhood. I was still watching Fraggle Rock when the Pony came out. But I do think that it wouldn't surprise me that it became part of somebody else's collection. Or that, in this case, it's in a dealership sort of as a preserved piece of history. The car that I drove had actually been purchased from its original owner by a Korean man who's had emigrated to Vancouver. And he was actually taking the car back to Korea because his dad had had one. In Korea, Hyundai in particular is very proud of the Pony because it was sort of the start of their automotive industry. But there is also something about an inexpensive everyday car from the past that just pushes the buttons on the nostalgia meter. People collect you know cars at Pebble Beach they're all very expensive and fancy — those cars get preserved. Cars like the Hyundai Pony just kind of vanish from the roads, and suddenly when you see one, it's so unusual to see a survivor that it kind of maybe reminds you of you know Bryan Adams and all that stuff that was going on in the mid-80s. And you just have this little moment of nostalgia for a fondly remembered time.

CO: Or some of us might be running in the other direction.

BM: Possibly! It could be that too.

CO: And now the three main features in the ad for this car are being sold in Brossard, Quebec — here's the ad: Special features are that it has cloth seats, a cassette player, and a cup holder. Those are the only three features that are advertised here. I guess that's about it eh?

BM: Well, I mean it's got to be fun to be a dealer — to be the guy who does the dealer's ads. And the original ad in the Pony when it debuted they actually made a big deal of the fact that the carpeting in the car was the whole car, so that you actually had carpet in your trunk. I think the said something like you have full interior carpeting from the tip of the driver's tow to the end of the cargo space, and that it had a rear window defroster. So all this stuff, again, our standards were very low in the 80s. Like we didn't have any of this stuff. Yeah, to look back and be like wow! A cup holder! We didn't have those back then.

CO: I have to say that a car with a cup holder and a cassette player it would have been heaven in the 1980s.

BM: Absolutely. A little Night Ranger on your cassette player and you're good to go.

CO: All right. Great to talk to you, Brendon. Thanks.

BM: Thanks for taking my call. Take care.

CO: Bye bye.

BM: Bye

JD: I was an Aries K myself. Brendan McAleer is a freelance automotive writer. We reached him in Vancouver. If you'd like to see photographs of this 15-thousand-dollar-Pony, go to our website: www.cbc.ca/aih. And if you've got memories or pictures of your own Pony, even the rusty Ponies, let us know, and send them to us. Reach us on Twitter and Facebook @cbcasithappens, both those accounts — or email us: aih@cbc.ca. Or give us a call… it doesn’t really work well for the photos I guess, but we like to hear your voice: 416-205-5687.

[Music: Show tune]

Part three: Japanese politician cough drop controversy, Indonesia: latest

Japanese politician cough drop controversy

Guest: Yuka Ogata

JD: Last Friday, an 8-hour disruption hit the Kumamoto Municipal Assembly, in the south-west of Japan. And the cause...was a cough drop. There is nothing remarkable about the cough drop itself, except that it was in the mouth of the Japanese politician Yuka Ogata, as she spoke at the podium. She says she had a cold, and was just trying to avoid coughing while addressing her colleagues. But some of those same colleagues took issue with the lozenge. So they booted her out. We reached Yuka Ogata in Kumamoto City, Japan.

CO: Ms. Ogata, first of all, what were the reasons your colleagues gave when you were asked to stop speaking and leave the assembly chamber?

YUKA OGATA: Because I had lozenge in my mouth.

CO: A lozenge.

YO: A lozenge, yes. To stop my cough because I had irritation in my throat.

CO: Is that against the rules to bring anything to eat or drink anything in this chamber?

YO: No, it's not.

CO: So you weren’t breaking the rules. Why did they think you should leave?

YO: They misunderstood that there was such rule. They were shouting in the chamber that it's against the rule I have something in my mouth. And they stopped the session, and they checked the rule book, and the rule was not there.

CO: They were shouting at you for having a lozenge in your mouth.

YO: Yes. They were shouting many things during the whole time I was asking questions to the chairperson of the council management committee.

CO: What were they shouting at you?

YO: They were shouting just read the report. Or don't ask same questions many times. You know you have something in the mouth. Or her throw away the candy. Or it's against the rules. Or there's so many things.

CO: And so eventually they decided that it took all day — eight hours this went on.

YO: Yes.

CO: They threw you out, and then they had did the whole meeting about what to do about you and your throat lozenge. And then they wrote an apology that you were to read aloud. What were you to say in that apology?

YO: Well, I was ordered to say that I broke a rule. And I hurt the dignity of the council.

CO: In what way did it hurt the dignity of the council? That you were being rude?

YO: Yes.

CO: Now, the last time we spoke with you, they thought you were rude because they objected to you in the chamber because you brought your baby to work — your little boy, seven months old. It was less than an hour of a meeting. You brought your child in, and we talked to you about how they responded to you then. Can you remind us what happened that day?

YO: Yes, I sat in the chamber with my 7-month-old baby. My colleagues, chairperson approached me, and they told me that I had to leave the chamber immediately with my son because they cannot start the session with the baby in the chamber. I tried to hold my ground. I told him that we are fine. The baby you know didn't make any sound or anything. And I have the all right to be there because I'm representing somebody like me, so you know please start the session.

CO: Did they back down at all? Because it's been almost a year since we spoke to you about that. Has anything improved?

YO: Actually, no. They actually made a rule that the baby cannot be there.

CO: And so and so you stopped bringing the baby to work?

YO: Not in the chamber. But I still bring the baby to my office. So I hire a baby sitter, and have my son looked after during the session outside of the chamber.

CO: How have you been treated… because it’s almost all men in this chamber, right? It's very unusual. Japan is infamous for that.

YO In Japan, it's actually normal.

CO: Yes, it is way, way down the list of countries with the numbers of women representing. So do you think that this lozenge incident is because they don't like you there?

YO: Yeah, I mean because I'm trying to change things there. They want to keep things the way they are, and the way they have been. Here and there they give me you know pieces of advice that things are done this way and this way, and I should respect that. I'm trying to bring the change. That's why I'm treated this way.

CO: It wasn't really about the lozenge, was it? It was about the fact that you're disrupting the order of things in the assembly, is that right?

YO: Exactly. And I think they feel almost like I'm challenging the authority because I was asking questions to chairperson of council management committee. And the councils usually ask questions to city officials, and not to fellow council members. They don't really like discussions. So I guess they have maybe some fear.

CO: What are you trying to change in the assembly — in your city assembly?

YO: Well, I'm trying to make it more relevant to people's lives. I want it to be more open to women or you know people with disabilities — you know more diverse people. And I would like to make it more open to public, so people can more easily participate. Make it more transparent. You know the decision making process.

CO: But they want things to remain the same. The status quo is pretty strong in Japan, I get the impression.

YO: Oh yeah, yeah, very much. But I'm doing my best to change that. And things are moving forward bit by bit. I don't get any support… much support in the council. But I have support from you know citizens, even after I brought my baby to the chamber. A group of people gathered, and they collected signatures and submitted a petition to the council. They are supporting me out so well.

CO: You know this brings to mind that just last month, the prime minister of New Zealand brought her three-month-old daughter to the floor of the U.N. General Assembly, and people were cooing and praising. Do you think you'll ever see a reaction like that in Japan?

YO: No, not yet. Hopefully, sometime in the future, and I'm sure one day it will happen. I'll do my best to make it happen.

CO: I think you will. One way or another. Ms. Ogata, it's a pleasure to speak with you. Thank you.

YO: Oh, thank you very much.

CO: Bye bye.

JD: Yuka Ogata is a member of the Kumamoto city assembly. We reached her in Kumamoto City, Japan. We have more on this story on our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Ambient]

Recycling death

JD: When Rex Ross learned that a body had been found in a Winnipeg recycling depot last week, he feared the worst. And then his fears were finally confirmed by the Winnipeg police — that the body found was that of his daughter, Mary Madeline Yellowback. Ms. Yellowback lived in Manto Sipi First Nation, but had been in Winnipeg with her son for medical appointments when she went missing. Her cause of death Is not known, nor is it known how she ended up in the recycling facility. Winnipeg Police are treating her death as suspicious. Mr. Ross spoke to reporters this week about learning that his daughter had died.

SOUNDCLIP

REX ROSS: You know it's really hard. It's really hard to talk about this tragic loss that we had. As a parent, and as raising my daughter, my daughter was 33 years old. She had been in Winnipeg quite a while before that time. She just recently came back about three weeks ago. And then this happened. You know it's a great privilege that I have a lot of support from the community members back home. All my children are here in Winnipeg — we came in on Saturday. And I would like to thank the police services for their work that they had done. It’s tragic. It’s a tragic event. When I was thinking of this — when I got a call on Saturday morning is my daughter out there in Winnipeg somewhere? That's my realization that I wanted to know. I thought she was still alive. My wife didn't sleep for the whole night. I never realized that it will be me. It'll be me that would loss a daughter through this tragic event of being destroyed. Her life been cut short. And I surely was thinking you know to this day, to this day, a lot of of parents that the daughters are missing out there. They don't know where their daughter is.

JD: That was Rex Ross, speaking at a press conference yesterday in Winnipeg. Mr. Ross’s daughter, Mary Madeline Yellowback, was found dead last week in a Winnipeg recycling plant.

[Music: Sombre]

Indonesia: latest

Guest: Timothy McLaughlin

JD: Officials have raised the death toll on the Indonesian island of Sulawesi once again. More than fourteen-hundred people are now said to have died after an earthquake, and then a tsunami, hit the area last week. And for the people who survived that disaster, the situation is still dire. Timothy McLaughlin has been reporting from Sulawesi for the Washington Post. We reached him in Pasangkayu earlier today, after he returned from the hard-hit city of Palu today.

CO: Tim, your story in The Washington Post today, you describe a 10-year-old boy who had been waiting for days to get an operation on his stomach — he's got some lacerations. What more can you tell us about him?

TIMOTHY MCLAUGHLIN: Yes, he’s one of the many I would say probably dozens of people that are waiting there. One of the big issues is that the fuel supply in the entire city is extremely limited. People are queuing up for hours. And so there's no fuel petrol to run the generators that they need to power a lot of the things the hospital. So, at the moment, the situation there is pretty dire.

CO: But this the earthquake and the tsunami was on Friday. Why is it taking so long to get basic things like petrol?

TM: Yeah, I mean I think there's a lot of people asking that question right now. And there's certainly a lot of disappointment and frustration and certainty bits of anger from people in this city. To answer your question directly, I'm not 100 per cent sure, and I don't know anybody yet. You know it seems like the distribution of aid has been at best spotty and limited to a few areas. There's absolutely people that haven't been reached as of yet who are quite upset about it, and rightfully so I think. So yeah, I mean I think the government on all levels will probably have to answer some questions on this coming up, and kind of explain what the strategy here was, and how prepared they and also how prepared they were to deal with something like this given that earthquakes and tsunamis, unfortunately, are not super uncommon in Indonesia.

CO: In Palu, you see a lot of police and military on the streets. They've been able to get in. Why is there such a big police and military presence.

TM: Yes, so they kind of came in today. We drove the road from Pasangkayu to Palu today pretty early in the morning. And there was a lot of military and police heading into the area. I think that's because there was issues around security the past couple days. There was people who were breaking into the shops and taking water and food because they weren't getting any. And so the security situation kind of deteriorated in the last few days. It looks like there's been an effort to figure that out. There is a lot of armed military officials now, soldiers sitting around ATMs, a few of them posted outside of different shops and malls. But that seems to me a little too late because most of the shops and malls that they're sitting outside of are empty, and the doors are broken down. So I'm not 100 per cent sure what they're doing, but the rest of them are out kind of patrolling the streets, directing traffic. So it seems like the presence is building up. I would expect that to continue for the next couple of days.

CO: So people are complaining in Palu, but out in the regions they're even getting less attention. So you you've gone to Pasangkayu, about two hours outside of Palu. What's the scene there?

TM: Well, we're south, so everything here is fine. But the regions around Palu have been hit very hard by the quake and tsunami. It took aid and rescue groups up until yesterday some of them got to first start and arriving today some more. And what we've heard we're heading there tomorrow. What we've heard from people that have been there from aid groups is that there's a lot of, again, frustration and anger as to why they haven't gotten anything. And then back to your original question, even heading north from here, the main road that runs into Palu, you pass a lot of people along the way. Dozens if not into close to 100 people who have made signs and banners asking for the government not to forget about them, that they need food as well, that they're going hungry.

CO: Aside from whatever government support is there is not there, what about the international aid agencies who usually arrive in large numbers at this point?

TM: President Joko has announced that he would allow that of that aid and assistance to come in. I think that there are, again, significant questions needed to be asked about the delay, and you know what took so long from the government side in getting these people the international groups in from the government they say that there will be people arriving from the U.K., from Japan, I believe maybe some American assistance as well. I think we maybe start to see that tomorrow or the next day. I'm not sure how long it's going to take.

CO: You've been in many places. You have seen what happens in disaster areas or war zones and how quickly the international aid agencies start to arrive and set up shop. So why has it taken so long for the Indonesian government to give the permission for that aid and those agencies to begin to arrive.

TM: Unclear from the government side right now. Clearly, there some hang ups that haven't been publicly discussed I think from their side. Or some logistics that weren't smoothed out because yeah, I think certainly again the people whom we spoke to on the ground were hoping that the international groups arrive. You know certainly the Red Cross of Indonesia and kind of local arms a lot of larger organizations are here. But a lot of what we've seen in the past few days is going on is very kind of small groups. Local rescue teams from other cities, you know hobbyists kind of rescue rock climber teams who have come in, and we met some firefighters today who had driven 18 hours from another city. But again, there was only eight of them in one truck. So the idea is fantastic I think it's commendable to see the kind of civic nature, but the scale of the response certainly from what we've seen perhaps could have been more significant.

CO: All, right Tim. I know you need to get back to work. You sound exhausted. I appreciate so much you found time for us. Thank you.

TM: Thank you very much. Have a good one.

CO: OK. Bye

JD: Timothy McLaughlin has been reporting on the aftermath of the earthquake and tsunami in Indonesia for the Washington Post. We reached him earlier today in Pasangkayu. After this conversation, Reuters reported that foreign aid was gathering pace for those affected.

[Music: AIH50 Theme]

AIH50: Goody Two Skates

JD: 50 years… the rumours are true. This radio program is turning the big 5-Oh this year. And as you've likely heard, to celebrate the last five decades of "As It Happens", we've hand-picked some legendary interviews from our archives. Tonight, we dug up a classic from 1994. At the time, figure skater Tonya Harding was at the centre of a media circus. She had just placed 8th at the Winter Games — but she was accused of orchestrating an attack on her fellow U.S. Olympic skater Nancy Kerrigan. That's when former "As It Happens" host Michael Enright called up Elaine Stamm — the founder and president of the Tonya Harding Fan Club — and started a circus of his own. From February 28th, 1994, here is Mr. Enright's infamous interview with Ms. Stamm, in which he coined a questionable four-word nickname for Ms. Kerrigan

SOUNDCLIP

ELAINE STAMM: You know people are taking it as if she's guilty. And in my heart, and those of us that know Tania, know that she could not have had anything to do with it. So she is a victim. And to be innocent of something, and to be treated as if you were guilty, without any charges against you, you know it's just so unfair and so un-American.

MICHAEL ENRIGHT: Did she stay for the closing ceremonies?

ES: No, she did not. Neither did Nancy. I don't know why.

ME: Nancy apparently had to go to Disney World to sign a two million dollar contract or something.

ES: That’s a pretty good reason, isn’t it?

ME: Yeah, I guess. What about Tonya now? Does she have a career left? She doesn't have all of the endorsements and, apparently, all the support that Ms. Goody Two Skates has. But I'm just wondering if she has any kind of career or life left to her.

ES: Oh, I'm sure.

JD: That was former "As It Happens" host, and current “Sunday Edition” host Michael Enright, speaking to Elaine Stamm — president of the Tonya Harding Fan Club — on February 28th, 1994. It turns out members of the Nancy Kerrigan Fan Club were also listening to "As It Happens" that night. Hundreds of them called Talkback questioning whether Mr. Enright should have "any kind of career left" after using his nickname for Ms. Kerrigan.

SOUNDCLIP

BARBARA BUDD: Boy, am I glad I didn't say it. Not that I, of course, ever would. Never would the words Ms. Goody Two anything leave my lips. Well, last night Michael. Yeah, that one referred to U.S. skater Nancy Kerrigan as Ms. Goody Two Skates. There are a lot of Nancy Kerrigan fans out there, and many of them know our number.

LEAH BRWON: Hi, it’s Leah Brown from Mississauga. Did I actually hear you refer to Nancy Kerrigan as Ms. Goody Two Skates? I mean just on occasion you seem unable to control your snide opinionated human self. Tsk, tsk Michael.

SPEAKER: Michael Enright, I'm a fan of the “As It Happens” program and yourself, but calling Nancy Kerrigan Ms. Goddy Two Skates is about the biggest most stupid mistake ever heard on the air.

SPEAKER: I usually enjoy listening to your program. I love CBC in general. But tonight, I was ready to ring Michael's neck. What did Nancy Kerrigan do to deserve being referred to.

SPEAKER: I thought Mr. Enright’s comment about calling Nancy Kerrigan Goody Two Skates was rather inappropriate considering that she's the one who was injured and said she has done nothing.

SPEAKER: And I just wanted to say that I am appalled and disappointed by Michael’s designation of Nancy Kerrigan as Ms. Goody Two Skates. Exactly what has she done to deserve that?

SPEAKER: In your discussion tonight concerning the Tonya Harding fan club, I think you made a rather unfortunate disparaging comment about Nancy Kerrigan, referring to her as Ms. Goody Two skates. Hardly the type of comment she deserves after coming through her tough ordeal so successfully, don’t you think?

JD: Michael, Michael, Michael! From March 1st, 1994, that was, of course, former “As it Happens” co-host Ms. Barbara Budd, announcing some of the hundreds of calls on our Talkback line, after former host Michael Enright called figure skater Nancy Kerrigan "Miss Goody Two Skates". It's hard to believe, but Mr. Enright managed to eke out a modest career in radio — and somehow we convinced him to sit down with us to take a look back at that interview. You can find a video of that conversation, and check out a timeline of other legendary interviews from the past 50 years of "As It Happens", on our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

October 3, 2018 episode transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode