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 2019

The AIH Transcript for October 23, 2019

Hosts: Carol Off and Nana aba Duncan

Prologue

CAROL OFF: Hello. I'm Carol Off.

NANA ABA DUNCAN: Hello. I'm Nana aba Duncan. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

ND: Tonight...

CO: Driven to tears. 39 bodies are found in a truck container in Britain and one Conservative MP tells us he's certain they were victims of human trafficking.

ND: Before they were so rudely interrupted. Dozens of Republicans crash a hearing in Washington yelling about the impeachment inquiry, which makes yesterday's testimony seem all the more significant.

CO: A showdown about showing up. 13 women have accused an Ottawa's City Councillor of inappropriate behavior -- and today, council members told him to reappear or lose his job.

ND: Suiting the messengers. New Brunswick's Premier says he heard what voters said on election night so he's changing his mind and adopting the carbon tax for his province.

CO: Sticking your nose where it's wanted. If you are the successful applicant, a British company will pay you 100,000 pounds to put your kind and friendly face on thousands of robots.

ND: And bread and beak fest. There's outrage about a sign in the UK encouraging people to feed bread to the ducks -- but our guest says not to worry, baguettes are their bag. As It Happens. The Wednesday Edition. Radio that once again proves loaf conquers all.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: U.K. MP calls for crackdown on human trafficking after 39 bodies found in truck

Truck Deaths UK

Guests: Andrew Mitchell

ND: A shocking crime scene -- in the middle of an unremarkable industrial park. Earlier today, 39 bodies were uncovered in a truck container in the southeast of the UK. A 25-year-old northern Irish man has been arrested on suspicion of murder. Police say the truck was registered in Bulgaria and traveled to a port in Belgium where it crossed over to the UK. The National Crime Agency says it's investigating whether any organised crime groups may have played a part. And to a lot of observers, the case bears clear markings of a human trafficking incident. Andrew Mitchell is a Conservative MP, and the former minister of International Development. We reached him in London.

CO: Mr. Mitchell, as you know, police still have not determined how these 39 people died. Is there much doubt in your mind though that the deaths were due to human trafficking?

ANDREW MITCHELL: There's no doubt at all. And it's an awful prospect. And I think not only of the families of all 39 of the victims of this -- all of them will have loved ones, sisters, brothers, husbands, wives. But I think also of the emergency workers who will never forget the experience of opening up the back of that container this morning and what they saw inside there.

CO: This was in Essex. And as the Freight Transport Association has pointed out that the route that this lorry was taking from Bulgaria to Essex was an unorthodox route. Why do you think they did that route?

AM: Well to be honest the answer is I don't know. And of course it's now the subject of a murder investigation by the police. And we must await the conclusions of that investigation, which I'm sure will not be long in coming. But what the whole incident I'm afraid underlines is that there has been a complete breakdown in the conventions governing refugees and indeed asylum seekers too. Because over recent years that these conventions have been in operation, the whole nature of foreign travel and migration has changed. And we need to recognise that. We've seen terrible examples not only today, but also in the Mediterranean, people leaving Libya, deaths on European shores caused by often very brave people who put themselves into the hands of the modern day equivalent of the slave trader and who suffer the appalling fates that have been suffered which we've seen about in Essex today. And what therefore is required is the international community to recognise that the current conventions are broken and to try and negotiate internationally, probably through the United Nations, a new convention and a new accord which gives protection to people from traffickers, people traffickers, and the modern equivalent of the slave trade. And I very much hope that Britain which has considerable experience [inaudible] at the United Nations and in its humanitarian work -- I hope that Britain and Canada will be two of the nations who will push for this and try and make sure we do have a modern, more modern, convention which will save lives in the future.

CO: But is the cause really the human traffickers or is that part of the way they were escaping from something? I mean, isn't the issue that people are -- well, if they have to leave someplace, I'm sure you would, I know I would do anything to get out of some of the situations these people are leaving -- isn't the issue that people will do anything they can to try and get themselves and their families to someplace safe? Isn't that what's behind this?

AM: Well, of course it is. And that's why I made the point that often these are very brave people who we've seen this in the exodus from Syria were probably more than a million people have now sought to come across to Europe. They are by and large, the brightest and the best from Syrian society. And they have to put themselves into the hands of the modern day equivalent of the slave trader. And these evil people who mount this trade, they need to be deterred in the same way that we need to deter people from coming in the first place. We need to warn people much better than we do at the moment about the dangers of being trafficked and the desperate danger and harm they place themselves into. But we also need a real deterrent to stop people traffickers from practicing their evil trade.

CO: But then again, the people who are desperate will find a way which appears to be why they took this unorthodox route was to avoid going through the Port of Calais which has very high security because it used to be the common route that people were taking. How much responsibility does the UK, does the Home Office, have to bear for the deaths of these 39 people?

AM: I don't think we're in the position of allocating blame like that. I think we're in the position of trying to ensure that the full force of justice is visited on the people who are responsible for these deaths. And I think that must be enough for now. But as I say, the critical thing is that we recognise that the international conventions simply are not fit for purpose. And we need to ensure that they are thoroughly overhauled and updated to meet the modern day nature of migration and exodus like this, which as I say is very different from how it was when many of these conventions were first put together.

CO: But again, what will you do -- if your idea is to make it more difficult or have bigger penalties for human traffickers -- what do you do about the reasons why people are fleeing and why they're even taking these desperate measures in order to get to your country?

AM: Well that is much of the arguments and ethos behind Britain's International Development Programme, which is one of the largest in the world. We spend something like nought point seven percent of our gross national income and taxpayers money on international development. And Canada is a very staunch and strong leader and supporter of international development as well. And the purpose of much of this expenditure is to try to build the sort of decent, safe, conflict free, and more prosperous societies which mean people will not seek to leave. And that's something which makes progress every year. But because of the ease of traffic now we have to recognise that that is a process which will take time. And in the meanwhile, we need to update these conventions.

CO: All right. I know you're pressed for time, Mr. Mitchell, so I appreciate you giving us some of it tonight. Thank you.

AM: Okay. All the best. Bye bye.

ND: Andrew Mitchell is a Conservative MP, and the former minister of International Development for the UK. We reached him in London. And there's more on that story on our website: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Rick Chiarelli Vote

Guest: Theresa Kavanagh

ND: An Ottawa city councillor accused of inappropriate behavior and comments by 13 women is going to have to start showing up for work or lose his job. Today, Rick Chiarelli's colleagues voted unanimously to deny his request for a leave of absence in the wake of the mounting allegations against him. Mr. Chiarelli says he's sick, but his fellow councillors aren't buying it. And they say it's time for him to come out of hiding. Theresa Kavanagh is the City Councillor for Ottawa's Ward 7, and the city's special liaison on women and gender equity. We reached her in Ottawa.

CO: Ms. Kavanagh as you know Mr. Chiarelli has provided council with a medical note explaining that he suffered fainting spell and that his stress levels are high, erratic blood sugars, and blood pressure. Why wasn't that enough for you and others on council to give him this leave?

THERESA KAVANAGH: This note was given to us at the very last minute. We saw it just moments before the vote. But it did not indicate a diagnosis or prognosis. It talked about some of the symptoms that he was having and that more testing needed to be done.

CO: We heard Mayor Watson say that well there's always an effort to accommodate someone who is ill. And there's a lot of latitude for that usually, isn't there? And so I'm just wondering if the background for this, if the reasons why there is a lot of skepticism is because of what councillor Chairelli has been accused of by these women?

TK: This note was taken on its own merit. It was looked at. It is not related to any allegations. This was looked at in terms of someone asking to have unlimited -- basically -- leave. And it did not fit into the criteria of the reason. For example, we had a recent case of a councillor who has ovarian cancer and she asked for a few months off of leave. That was granted. We knew what we were dealing with. This does not indicate what it is for. This just talks about some symptoms.

CO: At the same time, we know councillor Chiarelli is facing allegations from 13 women who have come forward to say they experienced or witnessed inappropriate behavior and comments by the councillor. He denies all those claims. But I mean, for listeners who may be new to this story, I know in Ottawa people are familiar, but can you just give us a sense of what you and your fellow councillors have heard about these allegations?

TK: We are quite aware that there is a number of former staff members of Mr. Chiarelli who have contacted our integrity commissioner. However, we're not privy to the information and we're hearing about it mostly through the media.

CO: And that's exactly how you've come to learn of this, isn't it? I mean there are women who felt the only recourse, I suppose, was to tell a CBC reporter that they were asked -- they alleged that councillor Chiarelli asked them to wear certain kinds of clothing. To not wear bras -- is another allegation. And that they've found this difficult to report. What do you make of that? What is the culture in Ottawa City Council that would mean that so many women would be reluctant to bring this to anyone but a reporter?

TK: It's difficult to know until we've got the whole story. But whenever anyone feels that there's something really wrong with what they're being asked to do in employment, they should come forward. And I have total respect for the women that have done that. This is something that we've heard about before. We know about the "MeToo" movement. So people do need to have the courage to come forward if they have concerns. And we are glad they did that. And we have to wait for the results of what decisions are made based on that.

CO: We also know from the "MeToo" movement that it's not just that women experience these kinds of things -- that have made these allegations, many of them proven to be true. But that they find themselves in environments and cultures where if they were to report it, if they were to deal with it, it would terminate or damage their careers. So there are cultures, aren't there? There are workplace cultures that we have learned to the "MeToo" movement that enable this kind of behavior. Do you suspect that Ottawa City Council has that kind of a culture?

TK: I think any political environment has...it's possible. I worked on Parliament Hill for almost 30 years. And as you know, from the past, things have happened in other political environments. And Parliament Hill was one of them. And rules were put in place and it was looked at more seriously after allegations came forward. It looks like we should be doing the same at city hall. We should be doing that anyway. In fact, before these allegations came forward, I had already asked for training for all councillors on equity and gender lens too. So they really understand it. So I was already thinking about this.

CO: Did councillor Chiarelli have that training?

TK: He did not because as it worked out, the timing was that it was at the end of September -- and that's when all these allegations came forward. It was an odd coincidence.

CO: I want to play for you a clip from one of Mr. Chiarelli's accusers and get you to respond. This is Victoria Laaber who says that Mr. Chairelli asked her to wear revealing clothing and to wear no bra to work events. Here is Victoria Laaber.

SOUNDCLIP

VICTORIA LAABER: I don't fully believe that no one knew. I'm not here to assign blame, so I can't say this person knew or you all knew. But this was a known rumor in the sense of it was known Rick had a young-pretty girls ever revolving through his door. No one decided to look into this. That's what shocks me. No one decided to look into this.

CO: You heard what she has to say. She believes that it was there in plain sight. Why didn't anyone respond to it?

TK: Hard to say. As you know, I'm a new councillor -- it was my first anniversary yesterday. It is sometimes difficult to find these things. We hear about this in other environments, for example, on schools. These are things that if you're not the victim, it's not necessarily something that is in your view. And then you know you're in your own world I guess -- I'm not making excuses for other people, but I'm glad that they're coming out now. That's why they have to speak out because people aren't seeing it. And that's why it's necessary for people to say something.

CO: Councillor Chiarelli now has until November to show up in council or his seat will be declared vacant. Do you expect him to materialize?

TK: Hard to say. It's hard to know what somebody else is going to do. But that's what's in the rules. He's got two more council meetings he could attend.

CO: All right. We'll be watching. Ms. Kavanagh thank you.

TK: You're welcome.

ND: Theresa Kavanagh is the City Councillor for Ottawa's Ward 7, and the city's special liaison on women and gender equity. She was in Ottawa. Ottawa Councillor Rick Chiarelli denies all the allegations against him. The CBC has confirmed that the city's integrity commissioner is investigating at least four formal complaints.

[Music]

Feed the Ducks Bread

Guest: Wendy Hermon

ND: In the English town of Buxton, the sign was posted near a pond and it was extensively put there by the ducks. It reads. "It's okay to feed us bread." That little sign has since exploded on social media with people disagreeing over whether bread helps or hurts waterfowl. Wendy Hermon works for SwanSupport, which is a charity for the rescue and treatment of swans and ducks. We reached her in Berkshire, UK.

CO: Wendy, we need to know, is it safe to feed bread to ducks and swans?

WENDY HERMON: Absolutely. There's no evidence to suggest that it's not safe to feed them.

CO: But you know everyone's seeing the signs and say, don't do that, don't feed them bread. It's not good for them. Is there any truth to that at all?

WH: No. The original "Ban The Bread" campaign was started last year by a company selling pet food. And obviously people got scared because they were saying that it was bad for them. They said it caused "angel wing." There's no scientific evidence to suggest that that is the case because we've been working alongside the Queen's Swan Marker and the Queen's Swan Warden and they issued a statement last year stating that there's no evidence to prove that it causes any diseases in wildfowl.

CO: You mentioned "angel wing" -- what is that?

WH: Angel wing is like a deformity where the wing will stick out. It can't fly if it's got that. And the wing looks like it's got sticks stuck out the side of it and it's sort of where the wing grows back to front. And that's not caused by swans being fed bread.

CO: That was one of the theories?

WH: Yes. That's what these people who are against bread are saying.

CO: But the warnings not to feed waterfowl bread -- that's not just in your area. We see that here. So what do you base your conclusion on?

WH: I need to point out we're not telling people to feed bread alone. We're just telling people that have always fed bread not to stop feeding it because we've been feeding swans in our care for over 25 years with bread. And they've never died from being fed bread and they've never got ill through us feeding them bread. So it's part of a mixed diet -- it is better than nothing, if they've been used to being fed by the public.

CO: So this controversy has blown up because somebody posted some signs that say "It's okay to feed us bread" just by where the ducks and swans and the geese are -- and says, "Everyone stop feeding us because they wrongly think bread will make us poorly and now some of us are dying of starvation without your bread, please feed us again, especially in the winter." What do you make of that sign?

WH: Well I'm glad -- whoever has done that sign I would pat them on the back if I see them because ducks, geese, and swans have been fed bread for hundreds of years. And it's just been a tradition for years for people to take their children down to the pond to feed bread. And I think what some of it stems from is people saying it's contaminating the waters. But we're trying to get people to feed swans -- all of waterfowl sensibly. For example, if you go down and you throw some slices of bread in, once the swans have stopped eating don't throw any more in. People are saying that the bread stinks and it contaminates the water. The fish eat the bread. If you throw in lots and lots of corn and it doesn't get eaten, it's going to have the same effect on the water as the bread.

CO: Your Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals says that bread in itself is not the best food to give to the waterfowl and that you should give them --you mentioned -- corn, birdseed, pieces of lettuce. I think they've said grapes without the seeds in them. But people don't usually have that kind of (thing) around what they have is a loaf of bread that's a day old or gone stale. And that's what they're going to bring down to the water, isn't it?

WH: Well this is what we're trying to say. And the people that have always fed bread, can't always afford to go and buy the food -- the corn, the pellets or anything -- or they haven't got the time to go buy it. So those people that have always fed bread have completely stopped because they've been told it's bad for them. So those swans may not be getting fed at all. And they sadly don't often find their own food, so they starve.

CO: There are those who say we shouldn't feed them at all. We should let them get naturalized again using their own food and migrate where they will and must and not interfere in the food chain. What do you say to that?

WH: Well we've got swans and flocks -- that I've known for years. They've been there over 10 years and they've been in the exact same area being fed constantly because that's what us as humans have created. We've created these flocks. So as soon as the bread stopped, they don't go off and look for their own food and they just stay there and starve.

CO: And that's what was happening -- is this true that, whoever wrote this sign, that the birds were dying?

WH: Yes, they are. Last year with permission from the Queen's Swan Marker we weighed 25 swans in a flock of swans Reading -- and 25 in the flock of swans in Windsor -- and three quarters of those swans were under-weight and a lot of them were half their body weight of what they should've been. The poor birds didn't know what to do. Didn't know where to go. And they just give up. They stayed in the same area. And then the ones that did go off were walking into shops where they're starving and they're trying to find food and they're not used to finding their own food. Right or wrong, we've created that situation. So then all of a sudden people are being told don't feed bread -- it's killing them.

CO: What do you feed the swans and the birds?

WH: We feed them bread, we feed them corn, we feed them grains. We don't just obviously feed them bread -- there is a diet on its own, but we mix in with everything else we give them.

CO: All right. I'm sure we're going to hear from people about this on this side of the pond. But thanks for speaking with us, Wendy. Thank you.

WH: All right. Thank you.

ND: Wendy Herman is the operational director of SwanSupport in the UK. We reached her in Berkshire in the UK. If you want to check out that sign, encouraging people to feed the ducks bread, you can go to our website: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Robot Face

ND: At first, it seems like a tempting offer: 100,000 British pounds -- that's nearly 170,000 dollars Canadian -- for the use of your face. I know a lot of people are already grabbing a pen to write down the details even before I tell you that you get to keep your face. And after you hear the details, you'll likely still be interested. A British company called "Geomiq" has teamed up with a robotics company to produce a virtual friend for elderly people. And elderly people like their friends to have faces. So in a public appeal, Geomiq says, quote, "The company is searching for a kind and friendly face to be the literal face of the robot once it goes into production." So Question 1: How kind and friendly is your face? And Question 2: How kind and friendly will your face be when you see it on dozens of virtual friends walking by you every day accompanied by their elderly friends? Because that's the thing, right? Again, from the appeal, quote, "The selected person's face will be reproduced on potentially thousands of versions of the robots worldwide." Look, I like my face, but seeing it on several creepy robots everyday could become a problem. And besides the money thing, I'm not sure I want to be the human face of that problem.

[Music]

Part 2: Ambassador who testified against Trump is 'as radical as oatmeal,' says former diplomat

Impeachment: Taylor Testimony

Guest: John Herbst

ND: The impeachment inquiry into US President Donald Trump continued in Washington today with three committees meeting with Pentagon official Laura Cooper. That...didn't go smoothly. Dozens of Republicans not on those committees stormed the secure area in protest, delaying the proceedings. It comes a day after the US's top diplomat in Ukraine, Bill Taylor, gave what's being called an explosive testimony. His 15-page opening statement has been made public. CNN's Manu Raju asked Republican Congressman Mo Brooks about that testimony.

SOUNDCLIP

MANU RAJU: Mr. Brooks. Mr. Brooks. The opening statement says very clearly...[person interrupts] Let me finish what I'm saying. Let me finish my question. He says...[person interrupts]

MO BROOKS: You should not be relying on it!

MANU RAJU: Why should I not be relying on it? It's public testimony.

MO BROOKS: If you were in a court of law, would you rely just on the opening statement of an attorney? Or would you have cross-examination? Would you allow rebuttal witnesses to determine, to explore, whether the first witness's testimony was...

MANU RAJU: I'm asking about the substance of what he said here.

MO BROOKS: That doesn't make any difference. We don't know whether what he said is true or not because of the sham process being used.

ND: That was Republican Representative Mo Brooks speaking with CNN today. John Herbst is an ex-US Ambassador to Ukraine. We reached him in Washington, D.C. earlier today.

CO: Ambassador Herbst you just heard what Republican Mo Brooks had to say today about the sham that he regards this testimony is. How do you respond to Ambassador Taylor's testimony and how Mo Brooks has responded to it?

JOHN HERBST: Well, I will start by saying that I think Ambassador Taylor's testimony can be read as a straightforward document of what has happened as he understood it. And he has documented it well. I think what Congressman Brooks is talking about is the process, which is also partisan. And so I understand why there may be some objections from the Republican point of view, just as the Democrats try and shape this process to their own advantage. But the testimony itself is very very strong in my opinion.

CO: The Democrats are saying -- or they believe that Ambassador Bill Taylor's testimony is really the strongest plank they have in their investigation. What do you make of what Bill Taylor had to say?

JH: I think it is a very impressive, precise, and even devastating documents which presents a whole series of conversations -- pointing it in a fairly clear direction.

CO: And that direction being?

JH: That the president was orchestrating a policy where he was withholding agreement to a meeting and withholding military assistance in order to persuade the president of the Ukraine to conduct an investigation into the hacking of the Democratic server, an investigation into Burisma and Vice President Biden.

CO: At the same time, there was this effort, according to Ambassador Taylor, while he was in Kiev, while he was in Ukraine he observed what he describes -- this is really the structure of his opening statement -- that there was a regular information channels, a regular way of doing things, and there was this irregular channel that he discovered once he was in the office in Ukraine. Can you describe -- your understanding -- how this irregular information channel was being conducted?

JH: Well I think that there's a fair amount of evidence for what happened. And that is the efforts seemed to be quarterback by mayor Giuliani. And you know he had sought meetings with Zelensky in the springtime, which didn't quite pan out. But then when the president had his conversations with Zelensky in July it became very clear to the Ukrainian side that in some form they needed to deal with Giuliani. And again, unfortunately, what Mr. Giuliani was selling was not our stated policy. It was not a policy that served American interests. And that's not a good thing, to put it mildly.

CO: As a diplomat and someone who has been part of foreign policy -- US foreign policy and information channels -- what do you think it was like for Ambassador Taylor to discover this irregular channel that was being conducted by mostly Mr. Giuliani?

JH: Well Taylor is a real pro. And I think he understood even before he went to Ukraine and even before as he was considering going to Ukraine, that there was something strange going on with Giuliani. So I think he had an inkling of this even before he went out. But then he saw it up close because he was partly brought in -- and brought in sufficiently in order to help make the policy work. And he realized that what he was seeing was not a good thing and that it needed to be stopped. And so he spoke. He raised serious questions about it. And I think that was probably one of the reasons why President Trump reversed himself.

CO: And you think he had that influence? You think he was the voice...

JH: Well, one of the reason. I think the other reasons were the announcement in early September without reference to impeachment per say by the Democrats who control the House that they were going to conduct investigations into Ukraine policy. And then finally my understanding is that Republicans, especially senators, were privately telling the president to release the aide. But it is those factors that explain why President Trump reversed himself.

CO: In the opening statement by Ambassador Taylor, what's really remarkable -- it's almost emotional when he describes his love of this country, and how important he could see this money, this nearly 400 million dollars in aid that was going to assist Ukraine in resisting the Russians in their efforts to redraw the border. And he went to the front. He went there and looked at it and saw. And he makes his declaration. He believes that more Ukrainians are going to die. People will die if they don't get this money. That was such a passionate part of this, wasn't it?

JH: I think it was a brilliant statement. He laid out the great American interests in the policy that have I described to you in helping Ukraine fight Kremlin aggression. Again, reform. The consequences -- if American support is seen to be shaken, and he described the process...this ugly policy was being pursued. So it was a tour de force and shows what a quality diplomat Bill Taylor is and what American interests are in this important country.

CO: The statement from the White House, from the White House Press Secretary, was that this is a coordinated smear campaign from far-left lawmakers and radical unelected bureaucrats waging war on the Constitution. Does that describe in any way Ambassador Taylor?

JH: Bill Taylor is as radical as oatmeal. That's a ridiculous statement. Again, he's a forthright American diplomat who has served presidents Republican and Democrat, who has a strong interest in America having the right role in this world, a patriot. That statement is just silly.

CO: How far do you think his testimony goes to giving credibility to the whistleblower statement that began this process?

JH: I think we're well past the whistleblower. I mean, we've had all these people directly involved in this process starting with Ambassador Yovanovitch. She was unfairly removed from Ukraine for doing a great job there. Fiona Hill. Kurt Volker. Even Ambassador Sondland. And today, Laura Cooper. And we don't know what Laura is saying yet. But all the others, you add up their testimony together, even with some differences in presentation and an emphasis, and it all points to, again, this bizarre second policy working against the stated policy of our country and the interests of our country.

CO: We'll be watching. Ambassador Herbst, thank you.

JH: Thank you very much.

ND: John Herbst was the US Ambassador to Ukraine from 2003 to 2006. Now he's the director of the Eurasia Center at the think tank Atlantic Council. We reached Mr. Herbst in Washington, D.C. And there's more on that story, you can go to the As It Happens website: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

NB Future: Blaine Higgs

Guest: Blaine Higgs

ND: Justin Trudeau says it's going to be "yes" to a pipeline and 'no" to any kind of coalition government. The Prime Minister spoke to reporters in Ottawa today. It was his first time taking questions since his Liberals were cut down to a minority in Monday's election. Mr. Trudeau was asked whether the loss of his majority would mean he'd be backing down on his promise to build the Trans Mountain pipeline between Alberta's oil sands and Burnaby, BC.

SOUNDCLIP

JUSTIN TRUDEAU: We made the decision to move forward on the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion because it was in Canada's interest to do so, because the environment and the economy need to go together. We will be continuing with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion.

REPORTER: Prime Minister, will you seek a formal support arrangement with one of the other parties? Or are you planning to just try to manage this minority parliament on a case by case basis?

JUSTIN TRUDEAU: I intend to sit down with all party leaders in the coming weeks to talk about their priorities, about how we can work together, to respond to the preoccupations that Canadians have from one end of this country to the other-to the other. There will be various and varied conversations. But I can tell you it is not in our plans at all to form any sort of formal coalition -- formal or informal coalition.

REPORTER: You've said now that you think all Canadians have to work towards keeping the country together -- united. Specifically, what do you expect the premiers Kenny and Moe to do and what do you expect Conservative provincial leaders to do?

JUSTIN TRUDEAU: I expect premiers Kenny and Moe and all premiers to stand up for the interests of their citizens. That's their job. And people in Alberta and Saskatchewan have been suffering and struggling because of circumstances beyond their control. And we have over the past few years endeavored to be supportive. We have endeavored to get those resources to new markets and we're well advancing on that. But there is more we need to do. And I look forward to conversations with all premiers across the country about what the next things we should be doing to better serve Canadians.

ND: That was Prime Minister Trudeau in Ottawa this afternoon. Blaine Higgs is New Brunswick's Premier. Premier Higgs had been one of the Conservatives who refused to adopt the federal carbon pricing scheme. But after Monday's federal election, he announced he'd be imposing a carbon tax of his own. We reached Premier Blaine Higgs in Fredericton.

CO: Premier Higgs you heard Prime Minister Trudeau. What are you going to say when he calls to ask you how you can better serve Canadians?

BLAINE HIGGS: Well I've actually already said it because I have talked to him this afternoon. And we did discuss -- I mean, obviously firstly, I congratulated him on his victory. The situation that is certainly most prominent is our national unity with this resurgence of Quebec and the Bloc, and then the reality of the economic situation in Alberta and Saskatchewan that has been, I would say, exasperated over the last number of years. And so the talk is there. I hear what he's saying -- reaching out to the other premiers. But actions have got to be forthcoming. I mean this has been on the books for a long time. And so talking about Trans Mountain -- getting it done. Obviously, it's been concerning the support on the corridor and the coming east is a concern for us because Quebec very clearly and the leader made it -- he wasn't interested in oil pipeline, but he was interested in...he didn't say it in the speech but they are interested in a gas pipeline to an LNG plant. It's concerning that our promises are not showing. You know, we're not seeing this national connection. And that's of course discussion...

CO: And you said all this to Mr. Trudeau that you feel that the provinces aren't working together. What did he say to that?

BH: Well he recognized that was you know one of the biggest challenges. And we called it that. The biggest challenge is the alienation from one end of the country to the other. And it's, you know, the policies, the economic policies have been a big driver of that. I know in Atlantic Canada we've often been just said well you know just throw more money at Atlantic Canada and they'll just be quiet and carry on. And I've said I want to build an economy here. And trying to do that through this transition into a greener economy. So he recognized that those are the challenges. And he reiterated he was going to be reaching out to all premiers. And he did. I mean, he called me today. And he's doing that across the country. But it is the biggest challenge because our country is fractured like you know we haven't seen that on both ends of the country in many years.

CO: But you know, many are saying one of the other great challenge facing this country and the world right now is what you just mentioned, this transition to a green economy. To moving away from non-renewable fossil fuels. You just mentioned the corridor -- the Energy East pipeline. So this is something that Quebec is very opposed to. As you know, one of the provinces that I'm sure you think you need better relations with. How is that possible given what you're saying is that priority?

BH: You're right, Carol. I mean I'm not holding any illusions that it is possible given the outcome of this election. What I find is kind of the double standard of what is in Quebec's interest -- kind of the only interest that seem to be paramount there and then what's in our nation's interests of which they are a big part of -- but yeah, as far as that's concerned, you're right, I'm not holding out any illusions here that that's possible. But I also think that there are other issues that relate to you know us as a nation that are troublesome. I mean I found that here in New Brunswick -- I felt, like as I've said many times, a stranded asset because we aren't big enough to warrant national attention. But the message was clear coming out of Atlantic Canada about the climate, the carbon tax, and the philosophy that the federal government had -- 7 out of 10 seats here in New Brunswick. So that's why for me, even though I put a plan forward to meet all of our targets and to be committed to that, and we're well on our way 28 percent now of our 30 percent reduction target, I didn't need a carbon tax to do that, but it's been imposed upon us anyway.

CO: And that's a change of heart for you because you were working with the western premiers who would strenuously opposing that tax. What changed for you?

BH: Well, the election. And I still am working with them in relation to the court challenge and the jurisdictional right of the federal government to impose this on our provinces. But here in New Brunswick, we've seen the electorate support -- 7 out of 10 seats for parties that are supporting a carbon tax. I put together and we put together a private plan that has been accepted from other provinces by the federal government. The only thing missing was the carbon tax itself because I said I don't need that to meet our standards. So it was imposed upon us. So I'm saying look the government's already imposed upon us, they've got a new mandate, so rather than spend the next four years arguing about whether a carbon tax is real or not, we're paying it now. Our provinces, 7 out of 10, voted in favor of it. So let's work out an arrangement here that is in the best interests of New Brunswick.

CO: At the end of Monday's election, columnist Chantal Hebert -- I don't if you heard that part of it -- but she said that her view was that the message that came out of the election that no party can hope to get a mandate to govern without a credible climate plan anymore. What do you think? You think that's the case?

BH: I think that's fair. I think it was portrayed as either or -- and it wasn't. And so, yes, I think that's a fair comment. I think we all have an environmental responsibility. And I certainly, you know, grew up in the country. I'm very much an outside guy. So I appreciate that. I know the impact here with the floods in the last couple of years have brought it to the reality of what we are seen. But it's not going to change overnight. It didn't get here overnight. It's a process. You know, we're transitioning through and we need to do our part as a nation. I absolutely agree and support that. What we can't do is isolate ourselves to the point where we have an economy that does not survive and provide the services that so many people expect.

CO: You've spoken about the feeling -- the country being torn apart, the feeling of alienation in the West. Jason Kenney and Scott Moe -- the premiers of Alberta and Saskatchewan -- they'll say that Mr. Trudeau's carbon pricing policy is an attack on the West. So what do you say to them now that you have joined that policy?

BH: Well, I mean look at their economy. It's been devastated by the fact that we can't get oil to the market. So I have great sympathy and I am part of the group in relation to this jurisdictional battle because it's real. It's a concern. And you can't take one against the other and say, well, I can just ignore the economy in these provinces -- and then because I can get elected on this policy. That's not representing all of Canada. And that's where we are right now. That's why we've got this big divide. I have been supportive of working with both premiers -- western premiers -- and I'll continue to do so. It's just I'm in a situation of reality here. I'll do what's best for New Brunswick. That's why I was elected. And right now, I need to kind of in some ways just mitigate your losses and come up with a plan that works federally and works provincially.

CO: Premier Higgs it's good to talk to you. Thank you.

BH: Nice talking with you as well. Take care.

ND: Blaine Higgs is the Premier of New Brunswick. We reached him in Fredericton.

[Music]

Congolese Giant Toad

ND: It's dusk in a rainforest in the Democratic Republic of Congo. A Gaboon viper is going to kill some food when it sees a creature it's pretty sure it recognizes. "Bintu" the viper says. "Bintu, my fellow Gaboon viper -- is that you?" "Uh...yes," the creature says. "I'm definitely Bintu -- the snake you know. Well, I have to go now. Bye bye." But the viper wants to catch up with its viper friend so it stays to talk, and then it notices something. "Bintu!," the viper exclaims. "You're...you're just a head! What happened to your regular long snake body?" At which point the creature yells, "I have to leave now" -- and hops off. Because it's not the disembodied head of a Gaboon viper at all: it's a Congolese giant toad which has adapted to mimic the deadly snake. This is an example of the kind of mimicry in which a harmless species imitates a dangerous one so predators will leave it alone. And new research shows that the Congolese giant toad is covering its bases when it comes to mimicking the deadly Gaboon viper. Its colouration is almost exactly like the colouration on the vipers head. And when it's threatened, its hiss is almost exactly like the hiss of the Gaboon viper. Plus, it lives exclusively where the viper lives. So its predators will be familiar with the threat posed by that nasty venomous snake. Pretty crafty Congolese giant toad. And good call on not trying to grow a whole fake snake body too. Best to quit while you're a...head.

[Music]

Facebook workers

ND: There were all kinds of question marks as they questioned Mark. Today, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified in US Congress about his company's proposed crypto-currency, Libra. But US lawmakers took the opportunity to grill him on all kinds of other concerns about the company: Russian meddling, fact-checking, political ads, even anti-vaccination censorship. Here's an exchange between Mr. Zuckerberg and House Representative Katie Porter about the people Facebook hires to moderate its content.

SOUNDCLIP

KATIE PORTER: Facebook is known as a great place to work. Free food, ping pong tables, great employee benefits. But Facebook doesn't use its employees for the hardest jobs in the company. You've got about 15,000 contractors watching murders, stabbings, suicides, other gruesome disgusting videos for content moderation. Correct?

MARK ZUCKERBEG: Congresswoman -- yes, I believe that that's correct.

KATIE PORTER: You pay many of those workers under 30,000 dollars a year. And you've cut them off from mental health care when they leave the company, even if they have PTSD because of their work for your company. Is that correct?

MARK ZUCKERBEG: Congresswoman, my understanding is we pay everyone, including the contractors associated with the company at least a 15 dollar minimum wage. And in markets and cities where there is a high cost of living that's a 20 dollar minimum wage. We go out of our way to offer...

KATIE PORTER: I take your word at the wage. Reclaiming my time. According to one report I have and this is straight out of an episode of Black Mirror -- these workers get 9 minutes of supervised wellness time per day. That means 9 minutes to cry in the stairwell while somebody watches them. Would you be willing to commit to spending one hour a day for the next year watching these videos and acting as a content monitor and only accessing the same benefits available to your workers?

MARK ZUCKERBEG: Congresswoman, we work hard to make sure that we give good benefits to all the folks who are doing this.

KATIE PORTER: Mr. Zuckerberg -- reclaiming my time -- I would appreciate a yes or no. Would you be willing to act as a content monitor? To have that life experience.

MARK ZUCKERBEG: I'm not sure that would best serve our community for me to spend that much...

KATIE PORTER: Reclaiming my time. Mr. Zuckerberg -- are you saying you're not qualified to be a content monitor?

MARK ZUCKERBEG: No congresswoman -- that's not what I'm saying.

KATIE PORTER: Then you're saying you're not willing to do it.

ND: That's US House Representative Katie Porter questioning Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg today.

[Music]

Part 3: NL Voting Divisions

NL Voting Divisions

Guest: TJ Smith

ND: On federal election maps, the divisions are clear. Almost all of Alberta and Saskatchewan painted Conservative blue, and much of eastern Canada a bright Liberal red. And it's not just political. Residents of Newfoundland and Labrador are experiencing the gap between East and West on a deeply personal level. There's been an online explosion of anger from Albertans, including people from the province who've moved there for work, directed at those back home who cast their vote for the Liberals. TJ Smith has been pleading for more civility. We've reached him in St. Anthony, Newfoundland and Labrador.

CO: TJ can you give us some examples of the things you've been seeing online from people in Alberta directed toward Newfoundlanders?

TJ SMITH: Yeah, I've seen a few things via Twitter and Facebook. Things such as being called a welfare state. Some people say Newfoundland is dead to me. People are messaging family members saying they hope their significant others lose their job in Alberta. We have been called a bunch of potheads. And saying, let's send the Newfies home. So it's been a variety of things being said and a lot of it is hurtful.

CO: But a lot of what you have seen comes from Newfoundlanders who are working in Alberta, right, who have moved there?

TJ SMITH: Yeah it's kind of both. It's Albertans that are born raised there and it is also people from Newfoundland that have moved there for work or travel back and forth from Newfoundland to Alberta for work.

CO: I understand that this particularly affects you because you have family there yourself. What are they saying?

TJ SMITH: They were disappointed with how Newfoundland and Labrador voted. Of course. They work there and they are someone who live there as well so they were disappointed how we voted here on the East Coast. But that's our right to vote for who we want to vote for. I just try to make my point that it was not about who got voted in whatever province. It was more of us. I was trying to stand up for people that live here. And we're kind of being raked over the coals for who we voted for.

CO: Did your own relatives get into those postings on social media?

TJ SMITH: Some did yeah. But they were very good about it. And again, we had no issues. I still love my family members out there and I wish them all the best you know going forward in what they're dealing with out there and their politics.

CO: What did they say to you about why they're so angry?

TJ SMITH: I think it's because you know a lot of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians do go out west to work and a lot of them do spend their money back here in Newfoundland and Labrador, which I completely understand. And I think some of us felt slighted that we would vote for Liberals as opposed to the Conservatives. You know they're helping our economy and so on. But you know no one ever came to our door and knocked on the door and say, this is what Conservatives are offering to your friends or family out west -- this is what we can do for you here in Newfoundland and Labrador as well. So it's tough to vote for people when there was no representation in your own community.

CO: And why do people in Newfoundland -- why did they vote Liberal in such large numbers?

TJ SMITH: I think that dates back to the Stephen Harper days. I know that Newfoundland had a rough time with him when he was our prime minister. I think some people still have a sour taste in their mouth from that, which is completely understandable. And the Liberals work for the people that are here -- living here right now. Again, I like their involvement in our communities and how much representation we have here and they listen to us.

CO: As you know -- people in Alberta feel that Newfoundlanders owe them some -- at least some political loyalty given how many of them had work and how much the Newfoundland economy needed the money that was coming from those people who came and went and worked in the oil and gas industry in Alberta. So do you understand that sentiment that they believe that you should be loyal to the needs and demands of Albertans?

TJ SMITH: I can definitely see it from their perspective. But again, no one from the Conservative party and especially in our area, come around and telling us how it would benefit us and how it would benefit our people out in Alberta as well. So easy to see it in hindsight now that they should have done more to educate and tell us what's happening out west and why Conservatives would be better than the Liberals for example.

CO: Why do you think that so many people in Alberta believe that the Liberals in general and Justin Trudeau in particular are responsible for what's happening to the economy?

TJ SMITH: I really think they have something going on out there that's good for them and their economy and their families and their communities out there. And I believe they're really behind the Conservative party. They got a serious hate for Mr. Trudeau. And if I was out there, I might be on the same boat. But again, I didn't really brush up on my politics for other provinces because I was voting in Newfoundland and Labrador. If whoever got voted in Saskatchewan or Yukon wasn't really my concern as opposed to who was getting voted here.

CO: But why do you think they have that hate on for Justin Trudeau? Because it really is quite visceral, isn't it? It is not just that they're angry about the policies and the politics. It's very personal at times. What do you make of that?

TJ SMITH: It's unfortunate, but I can definitely understand their point of view. It's politics 101. I mean not everybody is going to agree with things that are being done or policies being put in place. And they have got to blame somebody. And that's why we have leaders and they're the ones that take the grunt of most of that blame.

CO: We know that people in Alberta are saying that they should stop hiring Newfoundlanders. They should not give them work. And they should send those who are working in Alberta -- send them back. Fire them from their jobs. What do you say to that?

TJ SMITH: It is disappointing to hear that. I hope it doesn't come true. I know a lot of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that work out there and are very hard workers and they do very well for themselves and their families. And I hope it doesn't come to that where people have to fire in Newfoundlanders and Labradorians because we voted different than they voted.

CO: We know that there has always been this tension. There's always been this East-West rivalry. Do you think it just seems like it's more uglier because of how active people are online and that really Facebook and Twitter and various accounts have become so angry? Do you think that it's really that there is more anger or that there are just more ways of showing it?

TJ SMITH: I think social media definitely gives everybody a voice. And definitely using social media lets people share their opinion -- and they are allowed to do so. But a lot of the stuff that came towards our Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that are here was really hurtful and mean and I thought personally was uncalled for. I mean it is nothing about politics -- it is just about being a good human being and being kind.

CO: TJ we'll leave it there. Thank you.

TJ SMITH: Thank you very much Carol.

ND: We reached TJ Smith in St. Anthony, Newfoundland and Labrador.

[Music]

Aly Jenkins

ND: Aly Jenkins loved the game of curling. Even with two young kids, she would make time to get to the Nutana Curling Club in Saskatoon, where she was a lead for Sherry Anderson's rink. Last season, the team made it to the provincial final, where they were only one shot away from qualifying for the Scotties Tournament of Hearts -- which is something Ms. Jenkins had dreamed of achieving. On Sunday, Aly Jenkins died during the birth of her third child -- a baby girl. She was 30-years-old. Nancy Martin and Rachel Fritzler curled with Ms. Jenkins. They spoke to CBC Saskatchewan about the world class curler and their dear friend.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: She had the most competitive spirit and fierceness that I could ever describe.

VOICE 2: She just brought it every day.

VOICE 1: Oh, yeah.

VOICE 2: And I think last night we got together with a few of the curlers here at Nutana and I heard the same thing from every one of her friends is her humor, her competitiveness, her drive, her passion for the game. I mean she's at home with two little ones expecting the third one, and she's messaging me, "What happened in that game? I watched you guys. Why did you do this? What happened with that? When are you going to your next one? What's happening? I'm going to come watch." And I know the last time you talked to her, we phoned her on her way to our last event and we were like it's Team Anderson calling, how are you doing? When is this baby coming? She was due that day and she said, don't worry -- I've been late before. I'm going to be late. It's all good. And I'll be there in Saskatoon to bring the new baby and you guys can hold her and hug her and I'll be there to cheer you on. So she loved the sport. Loved the game. Loved the people -- the camaraderie. She brought so much. She was just so special.

ND: That was Rachel Fritzler and Nancy Martin. They both curled with Aly Jenkins, who died this weekend from a rare complication during childbirth. Her funeral will take place this Sunday at the Brian King Centre in Warman, Saskatchewan at 2 p.m. local time.

[Music]

Australian journalists

Guest: Michael Miller

ND: Newspapers are known for being competitive. Trying to scoop their rivals and get that big exclusive front-page story first. But earlier this week, when Australian newspapers hit newsstands, they shared largely the same front-page. One stamped "Secret" and filled with lines of blacked out text. This rare show of unity is part of the "Right To Know" campaign. It's a new initiative launched by a coalition of media groups pushing for stronger protections for press freedom. The campaign comes amidst parliamentary inquiries into restrictions on the media -- and months after three journalists were subjected to police raids. Michael Miller is executive chairman of News Corp Australasia. We reached him in Sydney.

CO: Mr. Miller what effect was it for people to see all these front-pages filled with blacked out lines?

MICHAEL MILLER: It was a wake-up call not just to our government, but particularly to Australians. I think in any democracy, the government has a responsibility to be open to the public and Australians overwhelmingly believe they have a right to know what's going on. However, there are too many things that courts, governments, local authorities are keeping from Australians and they don't like it.

CO: In addition to all this redacted text that was on the front-pages on the papers, it said 'when government keeps the truth from you, what are they covering up?' Can you just give us a sense of why that message was necessary? What is it you're telling Australians about what's going on?

MM: Well the New York Times has described Australia's now as the world's most secretive democracy. And in the past two decades we've seen over 80 pieces of legislation passed which allow governments to mark documents top secret, and that restricts journalists be able to cover what is going on amongst the parliamentarians [inaudible]. And that is being used ad hoc in ways to really cover up and suppress information that is not national security. It's more of a personal embarrassment.

CO: What kinds of stories have journalists attempted to do and have been shut down?

MM: There are stories about the closure of maternity wards in regional Australia. And that's a story we have not been able to publish until recently. We had to go through a court process which disclosed that the Queensland government had continually closed these maternity wards which saw babies being born on the side of the road. We saw that local councils for freedom of information requests --duty-bound to provide that information -- blacking out and therefore redacting the content, making the claims redundant. Today's papers are running stories that the army is marking document top secret due to the pure reason that it is a social media embarrassment should decisions that they've made incorrectly get out. These are of public interest. They are of national interest.

CO: And there are several reporters, including one from your News Corp who have been raided and are possibly facing criminal charges. Is that right?

MM: Yes. One of our journalists, Annika Smethurst -- her house was raided for about seven hours. They went through every book, every drawer. In many ways it was an intimidation. And the story she wrote was that the Australian government was considering passing laws to allow it to spy on its own citizens without their knowledge. And that would normally go through a process of public debate and then government debate to then be passed.

CO: And your reporter and others could possibly face time in jail?

MM: That's right. We have been waiting for four months to know whether they will be charged. And that is a awful limbo to be in. The journalists are just doing their job.

CO: You also have whistleblowers who are facing similar problems -- some are facing prison time for having passed on documents to journalists. What's happening with whistleblowers in Australia?

MM: Yeah, there's a number of cases. There's one of a security expert that on Sydney Airport wrote two report -- a government official we believe -- passed it onto one of our newspapers, The Australian. And the person subsequently lost their job, got a nine month suspended sentence for being accused of being the whistleblower even though through many different legal processes it's been shown that he was not the source. So, again, that's the intimidation to both the journalist and the public officials not to be able to speak up.

CO: What are you asking? What are you demanding from your government by virtue of this campaign? What are you wanting the government to do?

MM: Well, first of all, there are many countries you see that it is either in their constitution or in the Bill of Rights -- some statements that are enshrined in their democracy. Australia doesn't have these. So we're looking for changes in law that ensure the public are being informed of what their parliamentarians and their elected officials are up to. And we're looking to contest search warrants. You mentioned one of the raids, but we saw two raids with more planned in two days after our recent federal election. Timing coincidental for coverage that occurred up to two years prior. So we're looking to be able to contest warrants in a closed court. Looking for greater protection for whistleblowers and enshrined commitment from parliamentarians to be open with the people who elect them.

CO: Now, Australia's Attorney-General, Christian Porter, says there are sensible changes to be considered, but some of your demands include exemptions for journalists from national security and secrecy laws that the Attorney-General says are the outer edge of workability and credibility. What do you say to the Attorney-General.

MM: In terms of the outer edge, I don't think any of our requests are at the outer edge. This is a stage about the media industry where you know respected and professional media are more important than ever before due to the digital misinformation that is directly broadcast. And I challenge our government and officials to point at times when the media have been irresponsible. We sign codes of conduct, we put by-lines to what we publish, and we work with government officials on areas which are sensitive. And so we would make those commitments and any changes as well.

CO: Mr. Miller, I appreciate speaking with you tonight. Thank you.

MM: Thank you.

ND: Michael Miller is executive chairman of News Corp Australasia. He's in Sydney, Australia.

[Music]

Nunavut Winner

Guest: Mumilaaq Qaqqaq

SOUNDCLIP

[Honking sounds]

ND: That is the sound of motorists in Baker Lake, Nunavut, celebrating the election of their very own Mumilaaq Qaqqaq to Parliament on Monday. Ms. Qaqqaq is the new NDP MP for the largest electoral district represented by a single legislator in the world. And at 25 years old, she's one of the youngest members of Canada's 43rd Parliament. We reach Mumilaaq Qaqqaq in Baker Lake.

CO: Ms. Qaqqaq we just heard people in Baker Lake celebrating your victory with a parade on Monday. What kind of reaction -- what are people saying to you across your territory?

MUMILAAQ QAQQAQ: Everybody's super excited and very proud of me being elected as member of parliament. It's been a really really great response.

CO: It's quite extraordinary what you accomplished. You won by more than -- well -- nearly 1000 votes. More than the Liberal who got 3700. You also beat out the Conservative who was a former cabinet minister, Leona Aglukkaq, who came in third in Nunavut. So how did you do it?

MQ: Liberals and Conservatives have held Nunavut since before I was born. And I think Nunavummiuq were ready for a voice that can speak about our realities, frankly. And that's one of my favorite things of being a part of the New Democrat Party, is that I have the opportunity to talk about our realities just as they are and to have a fresh perspective that can validate that there are too many people living in third world conditions, don't have clean drinking water, are in overcrowded housing, have been facing suicide crises for so long. I can and I do stand there and I say that because I know it's unfortunately our reality. And being able to have somebody in the House of Commons that can stand there and say that so many lives have been affected in so many different ways, I think it's a really fresh opportunity for Nunavummiuq.

CO: Is that what you were saying -- when you were campaigning and you had a huge territory to campaign -- what did you say to people? What did they say to you?

MQ: Yeah it was an interesting process. As you said we live in such a vast territory. Some plane rides cost thousands and thousands of dollars to be able to travel. So unfortunately, I didn't get to all. Social media was a great tool to be able to get the message out there. And it unfortunately is often the same situation, the same issues that have been brought up to me as I traveled through communities and through comments on social media: it's housing, it's high living costs, it's lack of health services-mental health services, it's lack of opportunity to pursue post-secondary and to have a job because people are picking between raising a family and having a job or pursuing post-secondary, which is so unfortunate. And I grew up here -- I understand that these things are unacceptable. So I was so appreciative of being able to meet with as many people as I could and being able to hear their story and hear their perspective.

CO: When you say it's unacceptable, that's exactly what you said on Monday. You said that I'm glad Nunavut is up for change. What do you think you can do? What can you accomplish?

MQ: I think one of the biggest things is understanding that just because it works down south, it works in our provinces, it doesn't mean it's going to work up here. Healing might look different. Education might look different. Until a couple of decades ago, we weren't taught in schools and sitting in rows and desks. Like education might look different. I think that's one of the biggest things that's important to bring to the House of Commons is our reality and that solutions can look different and they can work.

CO: I know that during your campaign you made it clear that the disproportionately high suicide rate is top of mind for you. And so how can you deal with that? What do you think you can accomplish there?

MQ: I don't think people are taking into consideration at the level that they need to that these are families, these are friends, these are communities -- we're being affected all across our territory. And unfortunately, some communities so much more drastically than others. And it's not a once in a while occurrence. But I don't think there is even enough discussion around the amount of attempts and follow up and being able to be provided that psychiatry or counseling consistently is something that is so lacking. And I've been thinking about how we talk about how complex the issues are. But it sounds like pretty simple solutions to me. We need to ensure that people can live in a house that's not mold infested. Be able to drink clean water. And be able to eat every single day. So when we hear excuses and barriers and all these kinds of different things to steer away from the discussion that we need to have, I'm going to do my best to ensure that we're on the right track and talking about the right things.

CO: You're going to go to Ottawa where you'll be part of a caucus -- 24 NDP MPs. You're going to be there with hundreds of other MPs -- all with their own needs and interests representing their constituencies. Do you think you'll be able to get people to listen to what you're saying? Do you think that you can get them to care?

MQ: Yes. Because we're all there to assist our riding, but we're all there also to help Canada progress and succeed as a great country. But when we look at the First Peoples of this country, when we look at Indigenous, when we look at Inuit First Nations and Metis, there are so many injustices there. And it's definitely a challenging conversation for some individuals. But I think because we are all there for the same reason, to assist all Canadians, assist our ridings in particular, that it's not something that can't be done.

CO: All right. We will leave it there. We'll be watching you. Ms. Qaqqaq thank you.

MQ: Thank you so much.

ND: Mumiaaq Qaqqaq is the NDP MP elect from Nunavut. We reached her today in Baker Lake.

[Music]

Superfan Nav Bhatia

ND: The Toronto Raptors started out their season as the reigning NBA champs with something everyone was hoping for: a win. Last night, in front of a sold out crowd, the team beat the New Orleans Pelicans in overtime. But before the basketball began, the team celebrated last season's ultimate victory with some gigantic jewelry. Canada's first team to win the championship can also now say they have the largest championship rings. Now, considering he's never missed a game, it seemed fitting that Raptors super-fan Nav Bhatia would get his own bling. Here he is speaking to the media after accepting it yesterday.

SOUNDCLIP

NAV BHATIA: Thank you Masai. Thank you very much. I'm a little bit nervous. I'm really...I don't believe I'm here. You know? I mean this is an unbelievable feeling. I always dreamt for a championship, but I never thought I'll be here among all you guys accepting this beautiful championship ring. I'm really honored and humbled. Everybody knows about my passion of basketball -- about Raptors. You know, I have never missed a game. I've never been late for a game. And I've never left a game early. And I'm not going to stand here and brag about my married life because I've missed a lot of my wife's wedding anniversaries, birthdays and other things. Now, you know, this basketball -- why I love it..this is more than a game. Especially with this organization, which is so inclusive. And I will accept this on the behalf of all the fans, world fans, which are everywhere. I just came from India, Japan, and other places in Newfoundland, and New Brunswick, and all over Canada. I just had a couple of months of trips -- and I tell you, we have Raptors fans everywhere in the world.

ND: That was Raptors super-fan Nav Bhatia accepting an NBA championship ring from the team.

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

October 23, 2019 Episode Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode