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 2021

The AIH Transcript for May 7, 2021

Hosts: Carol Off and Chris Howden

Prologue

CAROL OFF: Hello. I'm Carol Off.

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

[Music: Theme]

CH: Tonight:

CO: Pipe rally. Michigan's governor says it's an environmental time bomb that should be shut down next week. But an Ontario mayor says the Line 5 pipeline is a crucial conduit that puts people to work and planes in the air.

CH: Bad news travels fast. Nimat Rawan was a household name across Afghanistan. And our guest says the murder of the former TV host this week sends a chilling message to the next generation of Afghan journalists.

CO: Curtain re-raiser. The governor of New York announces Broadway will be back in business by September. But our guest says safe post-pandemic theatre will take some serious dress rehearsals.

CH: Fishes circle. A fisherman on the small island of Jersey says he feels caught in the middle after the UK sends in Navy ships in a spat over fishing rights with France.

CO: Re-crafted dinner. Engineers have created noodles that are packed totally flat but spring into 3D shapes once boiled -- an innovation so carbon efficient it makes your old noodles a real faux pasta.

CH: And using the tools at his disposal. To draw attention to pot holes, a New Zealand man has been drawing male genitals around them. But his penile arge may have violated the penal code. As It Happens. The Friday Edition. Radio the guesses he would never have expected that at first glance.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: Line 5: Sarnia Mayor

Line 5: Sarnia Mayor

Guest: Mike Bradley

CH: Sarnia, Ontario, is a city under threat. On Wednesday, Gretchen Whitmer, the governor of Michigan, doubled down on her demand for Enbridge to shut down its Line 5 pipeline. That pipeline pumps Alberta oil through Michigan under the water along the border and into Sarnia, where it's turned into fuel for southern Ontario. But Governor Whitmer says Line 5 is an environmental ticking time bomb that threatens to pollute her state and the Great Lakes. She's given Enbridge a deadline -- a deadline that expires next week. Mike Bradley is the mayor of Sarnia.

CO: Mayor Bradley, how are people in Sarnia feeling about the Michigan governor's deadline?

MIKE BRADLEY: Well, they're upset and there's a lot of anxiety. It's diminished somewhat because of the great effort that's been made at the federal, provincial level, locally, to try to get across the message to the American government and to Michigan that this is not the right decision and it will have a huge impact on our relationship.

CO: Give us a sense of on the relationship, first of all, what impact it will have.

MB: Well, I look at it this way that we've always had a strong relationship with Michigan. There's 90-billion in trade. I mean, the Blue Water Bridge here in Sarnia Point Edward is the second busiest truck crossing in Canada. This is the first time we've seen an action by a Michigan governor that basically is ripping up the relationship and saying on this one issue, we're going to do this. And I don't know, post-COVID, how we repair that relationship because we are integrated on trade, we're integrated on tourism. And as we recover, I just don't know how we get that relationship back.

CO: If this pipeline were to be shut down, what would it mean for Sarnia?

MB: Well, it would mean a lot to Sarnia because we're talking 3000 to 5000 well-paid jobs in the community. But it's much more than just a Sarnia issue, Carol. It's a huge issue for Canada. We're talking about propane that goes to Quebec and to Ontario. We're talking about jet fuel to the Toronto airport. It supplies about 40 percent of the energy needs that come through here to the rest of eastern Canada. So it has huge consequences. And that is what is so disturbing that those impacts do not seem to register with the Michigan governor.

CO: Can you just tell us a bit about this particular piece of pipeline? Very very small -- only about five or six kilometres long that's at issue here. Where does it go? What is its significance?

MB: Well, it's been in place for over 70 years and it comes from Alberta, obviously through Michigan and into Sarnia, where it's dispersed throughout eastern Canada. It has not had safety issues. I mean, Enbridge is hard to defend because of some of their record. But on this one, they've done all the right things by proposing a half a billion dollar covering, cement covering, to go in to cover this five mile piece of the pipeline. And I wouldn't be supporting this if they were just going to go with the status quo after 70 years. But in this case, they're making a real commitment to cover it. So there will be no damage to the Great Lakes if there ever was a problem with the pipeline.

CO: But some have pointed out, environmentalists are saying that, well, if there was no problem with the pipeline and we're perfectly safe -- why would Enbridge be spending half a billion dollars to build this casing around it?

MB: Mainly because those same environmentalists have been making this an issue. And I have to agree with them in the sense that in 70 years, it does need to be upgraded and covered. We have a portion of the pipeline that comes across from Michigan into Sarnia, south of Sarnia, and it was recently totally upgraded for the same reasons.

CO: Does this come as a surprise to you that the governor has said this? Does this come out of nowhere? Has this been something that you have seen coming?

MB: Well, as a border city mayor, obviously I'm very connected into what's happening in Michigan. And in this case, yes, the governor mentioned this during the election, but not with the fervour that she's carried this forward with. There's been numerous times she could have bailed on the issue, but hasn't. And I guess some will give her credit for that. But the damage she's doing to our relationships, I think she's just not understanding. The other part of this, she's very hard to communicate. I've written to her several times in the last two years saying, 'can we talk about this?' And no response at all. I feel like St. Paul writing to the Corinthians -- it's just an endless series of letters and no response coming back.

CO: Why is Governor Whitmer now so strenuously on the case that she's threatening to shut down the pipeline?

MB: Well, there are some that say that's all about national ambitions and that she's trying to develop a national stature. And she was being considered at one point to be the vice president candidate for the Democrats. But in this case, I just don't believe that the governor has looked at the wider implications about the relationship. And it was just in 2018 that Ontario and Michigan signed an agreement to boost that relationship, to get more trade between the two of us. So I can't fathom the thinking because as a politician, you always try to figure out, okay, why are you doing this? What's the motive and what's the end game? And in this case, I just can't figure it out.

CO: But you must have your own concerns about the health and welfare of those lakes -- I mean, not just for tourism -- it's just an enormously important environmental location, isn't it?

MB: Yes. I've been a fairly long serving mayor at 32 years and I've been an advocate for protecting the Great Lakes, and I've had to fight off, ironically, issues in Michigan where they weren't respecting the Great Lakes. And I've always believed that we can't treat it like a toilet bowl. In this particular case if Enbridge wasn't coming up with half a billion dollars to in case the pipeline, I probably would not be in this game advocating that this pipeline should continue. It is an issue for all of us protecting the Great Lakes, but this is not the way to build a relationship to do it. It's a shared waterway. We have lots of issues that go on the Great Lakes. We've had to fight off from Michigan years ago, oil drilling in the Great Lakes. So those are the type of things we should be working together on and looking at how we protect them environmentally, not this type of confrontational approach which will, if it happens, cost thousands of people their job directly in the middle of COVID. And that makes it even worse.

CO: What is Ottawa doing about it? What assistance can they give to you at this point?

MB: The biggest assistance they can give us and Minister O'Regan has been very good in keeping in touch and communicating to the local community here is to get into the courts, join Enbridge and others to fight this at that level. I have every reason to believe, speaking recently to the minister, that that's going to happen. And that would then bring much more in the sense of resources and sending a clear message to the Americans. And I think the one issue that's being lost in all this to some degree is this isn't just about a pipeline. Here we have a new administration and an administration you would think that would be compatible with Ottawa. And yet here we are off to this dreadful start. And that's not good because that'll impact on other trade issues too.

CO: This is all going to end up in the courts one way or another. But do you think that it will be resolved in courts before the government actually acts on the shutdown?

MB: Well, I don't know if the governor, Carol, has the ability to shut this pipeline down. It is a federal pipeline. But the fact is, I would prefer to see a mediated solution. And that's what's going on right now, because that's the best -- anyone that's in politics or government knows -- that's the best solution versus confrontation. But if that fails, then I would hope our federal government, our prime minister, would step up, stand up and defend Canada's interests, because if they bail on this one then the Biden government has them under total control for the next four years.

CO: All right. We will be watching. Mayor Bradley it's good to talk to you. Thank you.

MB: Thank you Carol.

CH: Mike Bradley is the mayor of Sarnia, Ontario.

[Music: Guitar Music]

Broadway Return

Guest: Victoria Bailey

CH: When they cancelled NBA basketball, when a campaigning Joe Biden stopped shaking hands, when Tom Hanks got it -- there are many ways of marking the moment COVID-19 first felt real. But for a lot of people, and certainly for New Yorkers, there's one in particular.

VOICE 1: [SOUNDCLIP: Heartbreak for Broadway fans.

VOICE 2: Tickets to Broadway to go see a show. Well, as of tonight, that will not be possible for obvious....

VOICE 3: It was announced that all Broadway theatres would be shut down until April 12th.

VOICE 4: Shows will now remain dark through at least January 3rd.

VOICE 5: And in a sign of how long this road to recovery could be, the Broadway League today cancelled its summer season, announcing theatres...]

CH: Broadway's shut down was a turning point in New York's fight against the virus before it became an early epicentre. And now, after more than a year and multiple extensions, Broadway's back. Or it will be. This week, New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo announced that theatres can welcome full capacity crowds beginning September 14th. Victoria Bailey is the executive director of the Theatre Development Fund, which runs the famous TKTS booth in Times Square. We reached her in Brooklyn.

CO: Victoria, can September the 14th come soon enough?

VICTORIA BAILEY: [Chuckles] Oh, I can't wait. It's been, as high as everyone knows and it's true all over the world, it's been a long haul. And the theatres have already been closed essentially for 14 months. It'll be 18 months or so by the time we get reopened. And it's just so exciting to finally have a date that we can point to as the beginning of the re-emergence and re-entry on Broadway. So I'm really excited.

CO: And everyone, of course, as you point out, has been going through this. But you're in an industry that you have to show up, you have to be there, it's the collective, it's the buzz, it's the electricity. I mean, to be denied that, I don't know.

VB: It's really been quite something. I mean, as folks say, we were the first to close and we're basically probably going to be just about the last industry to reopen. And there's the economic hit and there's also for all of us who work in the arts, it's what keeps us going, it is where we get our energy, it's where we get our sustenance. And we haven't had that for 14 months. It's been really hard. But I think at the end of the day, also, folks have figured out how to do some stuff virtually, so the muscles have been flexed a little bit in the downtime.

CO: Now it won't at least immediately be business as usual. What are the protocols? What will be put in place in order to make this happen?

VB: In terms of the protocols, those are evolving. But I imagine that there will be, in a lot of instances, there will be people wearing masks. I don't know where we'll end up on things like vaccinations -- but I think in terms of the not instantly back to normal. The other thing that's important to understand is that it's not going to be like a light switch going on. On September 14th, we won't suddenly have a roster of 25 shows running on Broadway. I think it's going to be like turning lights on with a dimmer. And there's a question about how big will the audience be overall at the beginning or how many folks will there be to see how many shows. It'll come back but it won't be normal overnight.

CO: Live theatre, especially Broadway Theatre, is very expensive to make. And so is it possible to actually get as many shows up without all the seats having a bum in them, all the bums in seats there?

VB: Well, I think the thing that's essential, you're right it's an expensive proposition. The thing that's essential is that shows have the ability to sell seats to everyone, right, to have every seat filled. And so that's why September as opposed to why not start in July? Because what the governor has said, the significance of what happened this week is the governor said that he would authorise theatres to operate at 100 percent capacity. So that was the key distinction. Shows will be able to break even at less than 100 percent. And I think they're you know, they may sustain some losses at the beginning. It's a question of how quickly it comes back. But it is absolutely the case that for Broadway productions, you can't take a thousand seat house and turn it into a 300 seat capacity -- it just doesn't work. The sports teams can operate at limited capacity because they have TV revenue. But the theatres, they rise and fall on the money they take in every night at the till.

CO: I guess we have this idea that somehow you just start calling people up and see what they're up to and "Hey come on, let's build a barn and put on a show." [VB Laughter] But lots of people have left. We've spoken with people in the industry who had to give up their apartments, couldn't afford to be in New York, went home, reinvented their lives. I mean, so once the call goes out, are they going to come?

VB: I have friends not in the theatre who said to me, why does it take so long? And you're absolutely right, a lot of folks have left. And I think that's something that will become clearer over the next month to two months. And obviously, the New York City needs its creative community. We need our theatre makers. We need all of the folks in the industry. And I've said before, it's easy to give something up when it's not happening. It's harder to give it up when it is happening. So I think some people who have said, no, I'm not going to do this anymore, maybe once we're up and running, they'll change their minds about that. But that's why it's going to need a few months, because individual productions have to assess how much of the company is coming back. And if they've got folks who aren't coming back, then you have to cast to replace those roles.

CO: There's lots of talk in not just the theatre but with everything, the idea that it's never going to go back to what it was, that virtual performances are fine, that many would say that to sit in a room and watch theatre on the screen is called television, it's not called theatre. But there's a lot of talk about, well, some of these productions don't need to go, we can work with this new innovation of the virtual theatre.

VB: I think it's not an either or. I really think this is an and. And I think certainly virtual theatre, virtual performance, artists had begun to explore with the medium before this pandemic. The pandemic accelerated it. And what might have taken eight or ten years has taken a year. I think that, I believe deeply there is nothing like the experience of sitting in the theatre in a live performance with an audience, there are all sorts of folks for whom that is not necessarily an opportunity. And the ability to watch from home for free or at very low prices in a way that you're comfortable is actually opening this up. And I think that it's not about scarcity, it's about abundance. So I'm really hopeful that we will actually see some positive change out of this and that we'll be able to motivate people who have been watching theatre at home to give it a try in the theatre when they're ready.

CO: All very inspiring. Victoria, it's great to talk to you. Thank you.

VB: Thank you so much.

CH: Victoria Bailey is the executive director of the Theatre Development Fund, a non-profit that oversees Times Square's TKTS Booth. We reached her in Brooklyn.

[Music: Piano Music]

NZ Penis Artist

Guest: Geoff Upson

CH: For years, Geoff Upson has been flagging potholes along Auckland's roads by drawing around the damage with spray paint. Some are small, others are big. To Mr. Upson, size doesn't matter. But to the local authorities, it really does. We reached Geoff Upson in Auckland, New Zealand.

CO: Geoff, can you describe what you have been driving around potholes in Auckland?

GEOFF UPSON: I've been drawing giant fluoro green penises on potholes and other unsafe areas of the road around where I live and other roads that I drive on every day in hopes that maybe our council will get on to fixing them.

CO: Why a penis?

GU: Well, actually, I saw what was done over in the UK. Somebody did it. They've been nicknamed Wanksy. And I thought, hey, it's worked before, we'll try the same again. And so far I have had some success. Sometimes council just spray paints over my drawings and leaves the pothole behind unfortunately.

CO: How many of these penises have you actually drawn on the roads of Auckland?

GU: I actually haven't been keeping track. I don't record everyone and I don't even photograph everyone. And sometimes I just draw a circle or I just draw the outline of the pothole just so that drivers can see it easier to avoid hitting it and damaging the wheels. But I estimate that I've drawn on well over 100, but not always do I draw a penis. Sometimes it's just a circle.

CO: But lots of penises.

GU: Lots of penises. Yes. [Laughs]

CO: And so how big are your penises?

GU: Depends on the size of the pothole. So I'm always very very careful to keep my drawing within the area of the road, which needs to be replaced.

CO: Okay, so how big are the potholes?

GU: [Laughs] Some of them are quite big. There were two really big potholes right next to each other. The total length of the potholes was 48 metres long, about 1.2 metres wide.

CO: Cars could disappear into that.

GU: Just a bit. I watched the school bus drive over it, the kids were bouncing off their seats. So the kids were actually getting airborne on their seats as the bus driver, you know, she had an absolute petrified look on her face as she realised she was about to hit these huge, big potholes. But luckily, that road was actually fixed right after I drew on it.

CO: Was that look of horror because she was seeing a giant penis on the road?

GU: Actually I'm not sure. I thought it was because of the pothole and the fact that the bus was was bouncing over all these potholes.

CO: And not the sheer horror of what you had drawn on the road?

GU: [Laughs] I'm not sure.

CO: [Laughs] Right. Okay. Now do you think it's working yet?

GU: Yeah, most of the time. Usually what I've noticed will happen is the council will -- I'll notify them, hey, there's that there's a pothole. But if it doesn't go in the media, they just spray paint over it. But if the media does pick it up, then they fix it very quickly.

CO: And when they spray paint over it, I mean, you're using neon colours with these drawings. So how do they cover it up?

GU: Oh they just use a can of black spray paint and they just cover over it with black spray paint. And then it just blends with the road around it.

CO: Does it make it harder to see the pothole before you hit it?

GU: Yeah, well, that's half rhe reason I do it is because it's saving - driver's -- their wheels and their tyres. There's so many potholes where I'll be driving at night when it's the most difficult to see the pothole -- and there are drivers, they've pulled over, they have to change the wheel because they've popped a tire. And it's not just one pothole here and there. There are a lot of potholes. And I cover a lot of road too.

CO: How much of your time do you spend doing this?

GU: Not much. Not much. I'm on the road for work anyway. So when I'm driving around and I see a pothole, I just pull over and mark it out.

CO: [Laughs] So you're driving around and you see a pothole or you hit a pothole and you pull over and you get your spray cans out and you start making penises on the road.

GU: Yeah, yeah. I put my hi--vis on so that drivers can see me. And then I just stop on the side of the road wherever I can safely and mark them out with my spray can.

CO: Just go to town. Now you have another problem though, right, because the Auckland transport is now threatening to take legal action against you, is that right?

GU: Yes. Yeah. And I am a little bit worried, but because obviously there could be some serious negative consequences for myself, including a big fine, maybe community service or whatever. But I'm trying to be optimistic. At this point, I'm remaining optimistic that Auckland transport will just fix the road and they will accept that the only reason I've drawn on the road is because the road was unsafe to start with. So I'm hoping they don't proceed with the legal process. But I went into the police station last week to give them a formal statement and I was open and honest with the police. I haven't tried to deny it. I've been very open and transparent with what I've done and the reason that I've done it.

CO: And what do they say are the reasons why they would actually charge you?

GU: As unfortunate as it is, there are actually one or two people in the community who have been upset by my drawing. And that wasn't my intention at all. I don't want to upset people and make people feel angry with what I've done. I'm just trying to get a positive result. I just want the roads fixed and I've tried other ways. You know, I've tried getting in touch with the local councillors, you know, the people that we voted in. And I've tried contacting Auckland Transport directly. And quite often I feel like they just simply ignore me and ignore other road users complaining about the potholes. And so I've just tried something else. I sort of feel like I've run out of other options.

CO: Well, maybe if you get sentenced to community services, you can suggest that you might be using that time going around, pointing out the potholes to them.

GU: [Laughs] That would be a very very effective community services, wouldn't it?

CO: Geoff, it's good to talk to you. Thank you.

GU: Awesome. Thanks Carol.

CH: Geoff Upson is a road safety campaigner who has been spray painting penises around potholes in Auckland, New Zealand.

[Music: Guitar Music]

Pasta

CH: Listen, it just happened. There's someone new. And I've far-fallen hard. I never wanted to hurt you pre shaped traditional pasta. We did our best to keep it saucy, you noci we did. But sometimes things have to reach a boiling point before you really see how strained things have become and nothing lasts forever. Orzo I've been led to believe. We've got to be open to new -pasta-bilities. So I'll just say itL it's ravi-over between us. It's not you. It's the engineers at Carnegie Mellon University who have just debuted a captivating new shapeshifting pasta. It starts off flat, nearly two dimensional. But when you cook it, it transforms into 3D spirals, curls, boxes, saddles, and waves. The researchers worked out how to apply tiny grooves to an otherwise traditional dried pasta. And because the grooved surfaces don't expand at the same rate as the rest of the pasta, cooking becomes transformative. Magical. And the ability to ship this new pasta in its flatpack form gives it a delicate little carbon footprint to boot. In the words of the engineer who developed the computer model that determined where the grooves needed to go, "It's more complex than just swelling." Which is as true of love as it is of the reaction of once flat fettuccini in boiling water. Pasta la vista, old friend. And remember this: It's not your fault. You just couldn't shape up.

[Music: Flute Music]

Part 2: Jersey fisherman says regular folks are caught in the crossfire of post-Brexit fishing row

Afghan TV Host Killed

Guest: Bilal Sarwari

CH: Nimat Rawan was already a household name in Afghanistan. But the former TV host's name was on everyone's lips this week for a terrible reason. Mr. Rawan was driving in Kandahar City this week when he was shot and killed by two unknown assailants on motorbikes. It's the fifth time a journalist in Afghanistan has been killed this year. Nimat Rawan hosted a popular TV talk show on Tolo News before recently taking a communications job with the government. No one has claimed responsibility for the attack, but the government has pointed the finger at the Taliban, who have been blamed for a wave of assassinations on prominent members of civil society. Bilal Sarwari is a freelance journalist in Afghanistan.

CO: Bilal, how dangerous is it to be a journalist in Afghanistan right now?

BILAL SARWARI: It's actually extremely dangerous. If we look at the last few years, media have come under quite brutal and brazen attacks, they have been deliberately targeted, especially the younger, more vibrant and capable generation within the Afghan media. So it is heartbreaking to see them being attacked, to see them being forced out of the country. There are people relying on these media outlets and reporters to give them a voice across the country.

CO: Tolo News is an agency that is very well respected. They've always been very helpful to even foreign reporters who were in the country. And now this leading member of Tolo News has been assassinated. Can you tell us about him?

BS: So Rawan was a popular TV presenter on Afghanistan's Tolo News, which is Afghanistan's biggest and most popular TV station. But before that, he was a reporter in the city of Kandahar. He worked his way up. Then he became a household name, becoming a presenter on a leading show. Then he actually also was able to gain a massive place in the social media. He was seen as an idol by many young Afghans. He was gregarious, he was articulate. He knew how to ask questions. He cared about the country and the topics. But when you talk about someone like Rawan, you talk about an Afghan family who has worked so hard to educate their son. And it's incredibly important to have people like Rawan from southern Afghanistan to tell us in the world about the war, about the fighting, about the poverty, about the fears, the hopes of remote communities and districts that we would otherwise not know.

CO: And when you speak of Kandahar, this is very well well-known place for many Canadians because this is where Canadian soldiers were based, where so many losses of life for our own forces. So this area is important for us as well. And so what kinds of stories was Mr. Rawan doing in southern Afghanistan?

BS: His focus was actually quite extensive. He knew the area better than anyone else. Obviously, at the moment that I am talking to you, the city of Kandahar is literally surrounded. There has been a massive amount of fighting in the district of Arghandab. And then about three months, the Afghan and the American Air Force alone dropped at least 600 bombs and rockets from the sky. The Taliban brought in factories of roadside bombs and the Taliban also dug up tunnels, filling them with explosives. There was house to house fighting. And Arghandab, actually showed how complex the battlefield today remains.

CO: I just want to ask a bit more about Mr. Rawan, because the government of Afghanistan says that the Taliban is responsible for his assassination. Why would they want to kill him? Why would he be targeted? Do you have any thoughts on that?

BS: What we have seen is a dangerous trend since the Americans started talking to the Taliban in what was a US-Taliban exit deal, we saw the targeted killings of civil society, women rights activist, judges, prosecutors and more crucially, at a district and village level, it was government officials. And the Afghan government throughout complained that, look, we've been forced to release 6000 Taliban leaders and commanders, they've returned back to the battlefield, they are going after people taking revenge and grievances. But we have seen a deliberate campaign to silence the Afghan media. The loss is irreparable. And my heart goes out to my colleagues in the provinces because they are at greater risk. Their families are there. So they have to really work around a lot of unsavoury characters and individuals and figures.

CO: So many young, bright, educated Afghans in all walks of life are leaving your country. Why do you stay? You could work anywhere. Why do you remain?

BS: I think I've got a massive attachment to Afghanistan. Having travelled to all over the provinces, I would say I've spent most of my time doing that. I am extremely grateful to the Afghan people in some of the most remote corners and districts who have opened their homes. And more importantly, for me, as an Afghan, this is also about the colleagues that I have lost over the years, both within the BBC when I worked there and other friends. So for me, it's sort of a moral dilemma. I must stay. I must give the Afghan people a voice. But I know the risks. The risks have been extremely clear to me, and I also did because I remember my time as a child in the 1990s when we had a civil war, we went through a lot of hardships. And, yes, there were international correspondents, people like Lyse Doucet and others who told our story. But it's up to us now.

CO: You mentioned the 1990s and the brutality of the civil war that you saw at that time. What are your greatest fears as to what is going to happen when the Americans finished their withdrawal, which they say will be September 11th of this year?

BS: Well, we are already seeing massive amount of Afghans who are forced to leave their homes, leaving behind their livelihoods, their cattle, their agricultural farm. I am afraid if the withdrawal takes place and there's no peace process or a comprehensive ceasefire, Afghanistan will experience another chapter of brutality, unprecedented levels of violence and brutality. Already we see a devastating wave of attacks every day. Suicide truck bombs, car bombs, airstrikes, roadside bombs. The Afghan countryside is literally burning. But should the US leave militarily, then you will see another level of carnage and bloodshed. One thing that continues to break my heart, as you hear often, and it's perhaps the new normal, quite tragically for Afghans, that an indiscriminate motor attack or there's a roadside bomb or an incident is taking place where entire family is killed. So how can you have an entire family vanish just like that? And I think that's the tragedy for Afghanistan in the year 2021, that for the next generation there will be no peace. And violence is something that they would grow up to. And I think that is more and more a tragedy that has been occurring to several generations in this country.

CO: Bilal it is such a despairing picture that you paint of what's going on in Afghanistan right now. I'm glad you're there to tell us and others what is happening. And I appreciate you speaking with us tonight. Thank you.

BS: Thank you. Good to be with you.

CH: Bilal Sarwari is a freelance journalist in southern Afghanistan.

[Music: Guitar Music]

Vaccine Access

CH: If you're looking to clarify Canada's position on patents for COVID-19 vaccines, you won't get that clarity from our prime minister. Justin Trudeau has been under pressure to respond after the Biden White House called for the suspension of the patents in an effort to speed up production. But so far, Prime Minister Trudeau has been coy, as has his trade minister, Mary Ng. So when they appeared at a press conference this afternoon, reporters asked Mr. Trudeau whether he thought that lifting the patents might improve vaccine access.

JUSTIN TRUDEAU: [SOUNDCLIP: We know that we don't end this pandemic anywhere without ending it everywhere. That's why making sure that we are providing access to vaccines to countries around the world -- is not just in their interest, but in our own interest as well. That's why we are participating in these discussions and why we hope to get to a solution. But I will turn to Minister Ng to follow up.

MARY NG: Thank you very much, Prime Minister. We certainly are going to be actively participating in these negotiations to waive intellectual property protection, in particular to COVID-19 vaccines under the WTO agreement on TRIPS. We are going to work at the table with our colleagues and with the WTO and we look forward and hope that those dialogues will result in a speedy resolution. But ultimately, the work we have been doing and the leadership we have been providing is very much about removing all barriers to vaccine access, whether it be production or supply chain or export restrictions. And that's the work that the Ottawa Group has been doing through the Health and Trade Initiative, which we have introduced into the WTO. So this is really work that we're doing with our colleagues and we will continue to be doing that.]

CH: That was Canada's trade minister, Mary Ng, and before her, you heard Prime Minister Trudeau speaking to reporters this afternoon.

[Music: Drum & Bass Music]

Jersey France Dispute

Guest: Josh Dearing

CH: A fishing spat between the UK and France now involves the British Navy. The UK has sent two patrol ships to the island of Jersey, which has seen a blockade by dozens of French boats and threats from members of the French government. At issue are the rights of French fishermen to fish in the waters of the British dependency. And now France is refusing to let Jersey fishermen land their catch in some French ports. Josh Dearing is a fisherman on Jersey and that's where we reached him.

CO: Josh, first of all, can you describe for us what it was like to look out in the harbour this week and see this blockade of French boats?

JOSH DEARING: Yeah, I mean,it was quite a sight and very impressive, to say the least. I woke up about 4:30 in the morning and I looked out my bedroom window, which looks over the south coast of Jersey, and I could already see the lights on the horizon coming from France. And then I made my way down the harbour. And as you say, there was about 70 to 80 French vessels there with their lights on and flares with a few hundred French fishermen on board.

CO: Wow. And what was their point?

JD: So there's a big sort of disagreements at the moment with some sort of historical fishing rights. The French are allowed to fish in certain areas of our waters because they have records of catching fish and shellfish, and that allows them to have permits in certain areas of our waters. And those have been granted to those that are entitled to their permits. And the ones that haven't received their permits are a bit annoyed, should we say.

CO: It sounds like it. But now , in addition to all these boats, the British Navy is now on the scene. So tell us about that.

JD: Yeah. So we're a really small island -- we are 100,000 population. We're nine miles by five miles. We don't have any police vessels. We don't have any Coast Guard vessels. We are very sort of unprotected. And it was very nice of the prime minister of England, Boris Johnson, to send down to Royal Navy vessels to help protect the island.

CO: Well, you are a British protectorate, so you would expect at least that they would protect you, right?

JD: Yeah, I know -- it was quite worrying. You know, we were unsure whether the French were going to come. We didn't know if it was sort of empty threats by them just to try and make a bit of noise. But obviously it wasn't. And luckily, the the Navy left the south coast of England at a fast pace, and they got down here for the morning.

CO: Tell us about some of the threats -- this is not just from the people out there, but the French politicians are talking very tough too.

JD: Yeah. So the minister of the sea, they've threatened to cut off our electricity to the whole island as we are supplied by undersea cable from France all over, you know, fishing.

CO: The fishermen from France say they're being treated unfairly. And do you have any sympathy for what they're saying?

JD: Yeah, massively. Like fishing, it's the most dangerous job in the world. I would sympathise for any fishermen across the globe, and I would never want to see harm to come to anyone as well financially, because it's a tough game to be in. Every fisherman risking their lives every day they go to sea. And it would be a shame to lose out financially for any one French or Jersey boat. But the rules are the rules. And the permits and licences have been given out fairly by EU regulations. And I think the French are just up in arms about it.

CO: But the French say that the United Kingdom is violating this trade and cooperation agreement that would allow this fishing that was struck just last year, I guess, coming out of Brexit. What do you say to that?

JD: Yeah, I mean, after Brexit, obviously, lots of things were up in the air. We had sort of like a cooling off period which came to an end last weekend, hence all of what's going on at the moment. But I mean, there were deals on both sides. We were still allowed to land France. Like I say all of our exports, eight percent of the catch in Jersey's land is to France because the French love shellfish. But they never stuck to their side of the deal originally, which was to allow us to carry on landing. And they were continued to fish our waters, which were more plentiful than their own. And yeah, they kind of broke their side of the deal first.

CO: So in addition to his declaration of war against Jersey from the government of France, the French ports are turning away the fish that the Jersey boats are catching. Is that right?

JD: Yeah, that's absolutely correct. I just read the news before coming online. And yeah, the ports up and down the coast closest to us have shut off to us. One of the Jersey fishermen went across yesterday, Jason Bonham, to land his catch of cuttlefish. And he was then greeted by a hundred angry French fishermen telling him to politely go away from the harbour wall. And he had to come back to Jersey with his hull of a few hundred kilos of fish and he was unable to sell, and he ended up just giving it away from the goodness of his heart to the locals just so that it wouldn't go to waste.

CO: Can this be resolved? Can you see an endgame in this?

JD: It's really hard. Obviously, it's a much higher level than a lowly fisherman like me. But the ministers are talking and we just hope that our governments and the English government can stay strong and not say, let's down the river like we were with Brexit.

CO: And we should point out that you did not get a vote on Brexit in Jersey, did you?

JD: No, that's correct. So Jersey wasn't in the EU originally, so we weren't involved in Brexit at all. So we've just sort of ended up getting unravelled in it really.

CO: Does it seem that the small operations, even the larger boats that are going out are still small, relatively, that somehow these these sort of independent businesses are being squeezed, even whether they're French or their Jersey or whatever. It's the same in Canada. The smaller operations really struggle and they don't seem to get the attention they need from governments when they're making these decisions. Does it feel like that?

JD: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, obviously, the bigger you are, the louder you can shout. And the small people do seem to get forgotten. In Jersey, we don't get any financial support from the government at all where as European vessels to get given lots of money for new equipment, safety equipment. We don't even get given, you know, a life jacket, for example. More people are definitely affected because they don't have the backing.

CO: Well, Josh, I hope you can get out and get your scallops again soon. And I appreciate you speaking with us. Thank you.

JD: Thank you. Take care.

CO: Josh Dearing is a fisherman on the island of Jersey. That's where we reached him. And you can find more on that story on our webpage: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Pop Music]

Rona Ambrose

CH: Today, Justice Minister David Lametti sent thanks to the former interim leader of the conservatives, Rona Ambrose, and said that a bill that was given royal assent last night owes its existence to her. After passing the Senate Bill C3 has come into force. It mandates that newly appointed judges on provincial superior courts must take training on sexual assault law. Mr. Lametti says it will send a strong message to sexual assault survivors that the justice system will treat them fairly and respectfully. The passage is a long time coming for the former MP, whose private member's bill was the basis for the new law. Back in 2019, Ms. Ambrose spoke with Carol after the bill died in the Senate.

RONA AMBROSE: The majority of senators supported this and were extremely frustrated that they were not able to help get this through and they did their best. But a couple of very powerful senators refused to let it through. I'll never understand why. And I guess I have to look forward and not look back and feel good that while my bill died the issue has not. And that the elected leaders have stepped in to actually make sure that this is carried forward.

CO: Okay. But those few senators were Conservatives, were they not?

RA: Some of them were yes...

CO: But the ones you were saying -- the key ones who opposed it -- that would not let this...because you had support in the Senate. Why could you not get the Conservative senators to support you in this and to see this through?

RA: I can't answer that. I mean I guess they didn't support the bill. But to be clear there was blame all around. You know this bill was held up in a number of different ways for a number of different reasons for 18 months.

CO: But why couldn't this have happened -- if the leaders were supportive, I know you wanted to see Conservative leader Andrew Scheer, talk to the Conservative senators, and tell them this was an important bill and it had to go through. Did he do that?

RA: Yes -- my understanding is that he did. I know that Justin Trudeau did the same thing --speaking to his senators or senators that are affiliated with him. There was a lot of support. But there were a couple of people that just decided they wanted to play politics with this so it's...

CO: But why? What was the political game here? What was the brinksmanship here?

RA: Well at the final end of this session the Conservatives didn't want the Indigenous rights bill to pass. And if it didn't pass then neither would any other bills including mine. So mine got caught up in that. So you know I guess it's...

CO: But just finally what I want to ask you, remind people what it is that inspired this? And why you felt you needed to put this bill into law?

RA: Well I mean I go back to the numbers that only 1 in 10 Canadians that experienced sexual assault will report it, and they say when asked that they have no confidence in the system. And we have a number of examples starting from probably the most high profile one of a judge in Alberta who said to a young rape victim, why didn't you just keep your knees together? Just recently, the Supreme Court has overturned two cases of sexual assault where the judges made massive errors. We shouldn't have to have that happen. These are extremely complex traumatic cases. And when a victim has to go back to court and be re-victimized and go through this whole process again because a judge who should have the experience and training in the law -- in the basic law -- makes a basic mistake about something like consent is unacceptable. And sexual assault law today is not a mandatory training for judges that actually preside over these cases. And that has to change.

CH: From our archives that was former Conservative MP and former interim party leader, Rona Ambrose, speaking with Carol in 2019.

[Music: Calm Music]

Part 3: SF Same Sex House

SF Same Sex House

Guest: Terry Beswick

CH: In 1955, Phyllis Lyon and Del Martin purchased a small one bedroom house on a hillside at 651 Duncan Street in San Francisco. Phyllis pursued her career as a journalist, and Del worked alongside her at the same magazine. They were the first same sex partners to legally marry in San Francisco, and they co-founded the Daughters of Bilitis. The group began as a social support group for lesbians, but quickly turned to political activism. Phyllis and Del's little house on the hill became ground zero for the lesbian rights movement at that time. On Tuesday, San Francisco's Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to give landmark status to the home of the late LGBTQ activists. Terry Beswick is the executive director of the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual Transgender Historical Society, which pushed the initiative forward. We reached him in Palm Springs, California.

CO: Terry, congratulations on this accomplishment. What does it actually mean to have this house designated as an official landmark?

TERRY BESWICK: Yeah, thank you. It's a significant thing culturally in San Francisco to have a building landmark, and it does provide some protections against out and out demolition. It's forever recognised as the home of Phyllis Lyon and Del Martin. And it creates a process that we're going to embark on now for planning for what we're going to do with this site.

CO: Can you tell us about the two women who lived there?

TB: Yeah, you know, I came of age in San Francisco in the 1980s. And by then, Phyllis Lyon and Del Martin were widely recognised as leaders in the LGBTQ community. But also, you know, in the women's rights movement, they had been leaders nationally. And they were just really, you know, recognised in San Francisco as being kind of like our grandmothers already by then of the movement. And they were also just, you know, a really warm couple that mentored a lot of folks.

CO: Now, that's the two women. The house itself became a refuge for a lot of lesbians, wasn't it? Because at the time, 1955, when they bought the house, it was difficult for a lot of the women to do, finding a place to go to feel accepted, right?

TB: Yes. And so Phyllis and Del, actually, the same year that they bought the house in 1955, they co-founded the Daughters of the Bilitis with a few other lesbian couples. And initially it was as a social organisation, you know, just to organise gatherings mostly at the house. They really didn't have many choices of places where they could go and be open about who they are and, you know, affectionate with their partners in front of other couples. Just having that the residence was significant for them. And it was really part of their decades long love story. But it was also a place of safety and gathering for other women at the time.

CO: And it also became the official office of the Daughters of Bilitis, didn't it?

TB: Yeah, that's right. I mean, it's hard to imagine, but at the time, it was not even legal for people to love one another or to have sex with one another if there was the same gender. You know, attire was supposed to be conforming to the sexual identity. And so I think it's probably a lot of young people may not appreciate that, just how enormously courageous it was just to reveal your sexual identity to anyone. You know, you risked losing your job, your family, your housing. It was even remarkable for the two, for Phyllis and Del, to buy a house together. But yes, they had their office there and that's where they did the work and they had the typewriter on the table and they cranked out their newsletter, which we have in our archives, along with all the other papers that Phyllis and Del have contributed to us and other artefacts.

CO: As you point out, it's hard to imagine now what it was like for those women. So how will this address, 651 Duncan Street, pretty ordinary little house -- is it some place where you picture people going to make a pilgrimage to go there to see, to find out, to learn? Will there be anything there that can connect people with the story of these women and the time they came from?

TB: Well, we're really grateful that the new owners of the property have supported the landmarking and they're going to be working with us. We do have ideas that we're kicking around and, you know, certainly it'll be on various walking tours as a point of interest. And also, we're hoping that the house will become a permanent place for young students to do research into lesbian history, women's rights, history, and the LGBTQ history more broadly, the social justice. And so we're hoping to create a fellowship program where, you know, students will be able to stay there and do research in our archives and other facilities in the city.

CO: What do you think that Phyllis Lyon and Del Martin would think about their house becoming this landmark?

TB: You know what? I don't think that they really care too much about it [chuckles] from what I've gathered. I actually think that they were a pretty humble couple. And at the same time, you know, they recognised their place in history. And I think they would be proud to know that the city has taken this measure and that activists gathered together to make sure that they were remembered and recognised. I don't know. I hope that they would be proud, but that's only my speculation.

CO: Well, good work, Terry.

TB: Thank you so much Carol. Thanks for calling.

CH: Terry Beswick is the executive director of the Gilbert Historical Society. He was in Palm Springs, California.

[Music: Guitar Music]

Encore NB Syrian Refugee

CH: There's a date in Rehman Abazid's calendar that fills her with both grief and gratitude today. Ms. Abazid is a refugee in St. John, New Brunswick. January 30th, 2016 was the date she and her family landed in Canada. It was an extraordinary emotional moment, a day Ms. Abazid will never forget. But three years prior, January 30th, 2013 is also an unforgettable day for Reham Abazid. That day, her home in Daraa, Syria, was bombed, sending Ms. Abazid into labour. She was carrying twins, a boy and a girl. Her baby daughter, Rous, was alive and healthy. Her son Hamza did not survive. This past March, Ms. Abazid, who's now a mother of three, spoke with Carol in a feature interview. She talked about the grief of losing a child and the gratitude of becoming a Saint Johner. On the eve of Mother's Day weekend, here's an encore presentation. And a warning: her story contains some graphic details.

CO: Reham, what memories come back to you when you hear the prime minister Trudeau welcoming Syrian refugees to Canada?

REHAM ABAZID: It reminds me, absolutely, when the United Nation choose my family to travel to this amazing country, you know, I will never forget this moment when I was jumping beside my husband, when they were talking to him, like, if you would like to have this chance, it's open for you if you would like to go to Canada. I was jumping beside him and said, like, yes, say yes. He said, like, we don't have anyone there. We don't speak the language. I don't care. Like, it's a very bright future. That's what I know. Like, let's do it.

CO: And you did.

RA: Oh, yeah, I did. I did.

CO: Could you have imagined back in March 2011, 10 years ago when you were living in Syria, that you would be living in St. John, New Brunswick?

RA: Never, never. Like, you know, I, I have never think about to leave my city, not my country. But, you know, sometimes lots of different circumstances take you away from many, many things you love.

CO: Your husband, you said, was saying at the time, we don't know anybody there. How can we go there? How difficult were the early days and months when you did arrive in Canada? What were the hardest parts for you and your family?

RA: That was the language more than, we don't have anyone. The language was the big step for us because when we arrived, we doesn't speak any English except like, thank you, you know. And yeah.

CO: But your English is great. Now, how did you manage it?

RA: Like me and my husband, both of us. We decided not to stay on like social assistance, never. And we decided to find a job and work because, like, Canada gave us a chance to have a better future than many, many millions of people. And we need to build a future for our kids also to like to help other people. We improve our English by volunteering, attending English classes. And for myself, I used to stay in Tim Hortons for three hours every day.

CO: Tim Hortons, what were you getting in Tim Hortons besides coffee and doughnuts?

RA: You know, it's a very popular place in Canada. And I know, like, they love to talk and always like I used to have my pen and a sheet of paper and write that the word. They repeat many times I have to write it in Arabic and when I get home, I have to use Google Translate to say this word and know the meaning and how I can write the English that's how.

CO: It can be some pretty bad words spoken in Tim Hortons.

RA: [laughter] I know.

CO: what vocabulary did you pick up there?

RA: You know, Canadians. They are so famous and like say sorry and apologise. Thank you. They are... love to talk about whether too.

CO: So true, you've nailed us. And so you said you spend three hours a day picking up language in Tim Hortons. And so it was helpful then?

RA: Oh, it was very helpful because when you are with the community, you learn many things. You know.

CO: You did find work, you and your husband, how important was that for you?

RA: Oh, it's very important because we improve our English more than other people and more doors were open for us. We need a job too, you know, and we felt very welcoming because when we arrived the first like, couple of months, St. Johner's, let's say they saw us at the Tim Horton's staying in the table. They are offering a free coffee and that's like feels more welcoming, you know, and that's lovely.

CO: But it was important for you to get work that you were passionate about. Did that happen?

RA: Oh, yes. Through my one of my friends had that he finds a job for my husband. My husband's a mechanic and he's working with Ford. And I found a job through the YMCA of Greater St. John. That's where I used to learn English. And I used to be volunteering with them for one year before I started work.

CO: And did you feel that the St. Johner's have embraced you and your family?

RA: Oh, yeah, absolutely. Yes. Yes, they opened their arms and their hearts for us. So much like I appreciate each one of them, you know, like I wish if I can give them anything they need, you know, they are so sweet.

CO: You came with two children. You had another one while you were in Canada. You're Canadian, baby, and how have they fared?

RA: Oh, you know, when we left Syria, when we left sorry, Jordan, we left the rest of the family still there. And it's very important for them to have somebody to take care or to say like grammy to anyone. And they found that here. And I'm so thankful for a couple of my friends who opened their heart for them. They are in a good school. They are learning English and French. They are settling so good, like more than me, to be honest. You know, like they don't kids is very important. But at the same time, they don't care about many, many things. They are always taking care of their snacks, that's their life, and they are so happy here.

CO: You are listening to As It Happens. And today I'm speaking with Reham Abazid. She is a refugee. She is a Saint Johner. She lives in St. John, New Brunswick. She is reflecting, we are reflecting on 10 years since the Arab Spring reached Syria and sparked the exodus of six million people. A third of the population left their country.

CO: Reham, 10 years ago. Your home was Daraa, Syria, where the first protests we covered the story for the first time out of Daraa when these young people wrote graffiti on the wall criticising the regime. Did you feel the spirit of revolution? Did you get caught up in that?

RA: Oh, yes, because the first thing happening in Daraa, it's my city. And I was so close to them when the kids, a couple of them, they are from my family and their cousin to my sister's husband. That was terrible. Terrible because they are kids in the end, you know, and it was crazy and like, unacceptable,.

CO: Unacceptable, because the reaction on the part of the regime of Bashir al Assad was to crush that revolution.

RA: Oh, yeah. Like they bombed and they abused people a lot, especially these kids. Like, I saw one kid in Jordan when I used to be there. I met one of them. But he is in a very bad situation. Like if the door is knocked, he will screaming and scared so much his injuries and his face or his legs, it's still there. It's crazy. Like, I can't find any words to explain this, this little one.

CO: People were arrested. They disappeared. They were tortured to death. They were bombed, barrel bombed, chemical bombs in January of 2013. You went back home to the neighbourhood you'd left in order to get some things. You were pregnant with twins. What happened?

RA: Yeah, I went there like I used to sleep with my family in a different house than ours because our area was so dangerous, especially at night. We received lots of bombs. We used to sleep over in somebody's house. He gave it to us for free. And around five thirty in the morning, my husband received a call from his cousins. It says, like you, if you have something very important at your house, you have to grab it right now because the soldiers are in the front of the streets. You have to go right now, pick your stuff and run away from them. My husband, when he stand up, I told him, no, no, you're not going there. I will go with my father, alone, because if they found him alone at home, they will kill him or they will take him and he will never get back home. I went with my dad, around five, 30. And we have to take all the documents like passports or certificates of birth or something like that. But only five minutes after we saw the tank in the street and we were stuck home, we see a lot of bombs around our homes and we can like hear the screams of people around us. But around twelve thirty, everything was quiet. I went with my dad like I told him. Let's see if there is no one outside. We went, but we saw the tank on the corner of our house and you can't imagine what they did. I told my dad like, let's run, go back. When we run, we run like around twenty maybe or twenty five metres. They bombed where we used to stand.

CO: They were firing on you, targeting you.

RA: Yes. Yeah.

CO: Were you visibly pregnant?

RA: Oh yes. They know and they don't care. Even if I have a child like. One day old, they don't care.

CO: They targeted you for that?

RA: Yeah, after an hour, we received a bomb in our homes. It was only two metres away from me. And I am bleeding so much. And I ran with him. And after we left, we received also five bombs from a helicopter. It was, like we saw the helicopter when they bombed our house.

CO: You were eight months pregnant after this. This attack, the two attacks, you were bleeding and you went to hospital. What happened at the hospital?

RA: We went there and my husband was with me. They did an emergency C-section for me. The doctor was my friend and she came with the baby girl. Her name is Rose. She said, like, here you go. Here's the first one. This is a girl. She's in good health. I took her and said OK, where is the other one? Like, I know I'm expecting a boy and girl. She said, like, I'm sorry we lost the boy. And in the same time that the army came with a sheet of paper, it says like they said we have to sign it. The papers, says it's not the government who killed this baby, it's ISIS. And that's not true because I saw like who did that?

CO: The government people came to the hospital and told you you had to sign a document saying that your baby was not killed by the government, was killed by ISIS?

RA: Exactly.

CO: You refused?

RA: Yeah, I refused. I refused to sign it. And they said, OK, if you refuse to sign it, you are not allowed to bury him. And that time, my friend, the doctor, she said, Reham, you have to go right now from the hospital. You have to run away. I don't like how. She said, like, OK, I will take you from, like, the employment door. We run there.

CO: So you went out, the doctor, helped you escape from the hospital. You had your girl with you, Rose. And the baby that was dead was with you, too?

RA: Yeah. Yeah.

CO: This is just after you gave birth?

RA: Yes, exactly. After maybe half an hour. The boy's name was Hamsa, right?

RA: Yeah, Hamsa.

CO: Were you able to bury him.

RA: I decide to bury him in my home under a lemon tree in my house. And it was a very hard moment in my life. You know, it's hard. Like, I can't explain how hard it is.

CO: Reham, You don't have to. It's just I'm so sorry.

RA: Yeah, thank you. Thank you so much.

CO: But you were able to bury him under this lemon tree in your neighbourhood.

RA: Yeah. Yeah, exactly. And 18 like after 18 days I told my husband like I can't stay here anymore. Never, I can't because I can see like my other twin playing and her brother, you know, under the tree. And no, I can't. I decide in that time to leave to Jordan.

CO: You and many others. Just hundreds of thousands. Millions. We're leaving your country and many of them going into Jordan. You already had another child, a young son. You had this baby girl. What was life like in Jordan for you?

RA: Oh, it was very hard. You know, as a refugee, I am not allowed to work. And I used to work under the table, me and my husband, and they took my husband two or three times to the jail because he's working. And with eighteen days, baby, it was difficult because she was in formula, like she has to take milk and she used to drink water with sugar because I don't have money to buy her milk. And that was hard.

CO: And she was only, she was eighteen days old when I left for Jordan.

RA: Exactly.

CO: Then came this call. As you just told us at the beginning, a call came from the Canadian embassy.

RA: Yeah, exactly. Even if I don't have any idea where I am going, but I know, like something good coming up.

CO: What gave you that feeling?

RA: You know, I know like I feel human in the end. Like somebody will communicate to me as a human, not as an animal, you know? And of course, for my kids, I need to build a future for my kids. That's not their fault.

CO: Do you remember that moment when you crossed into Canada through the gate at the airport? Do you recall that moment?

RA: Oh, of course. Yeah, I thought, hey, can you imagine we are here? He said like, oh, I think so. I told him, Yes, yes, yes. We are here and I met many, many people at the airport waiting for us. We don't know them. That's like that's kind of people I have never met in my life. We cried a lot at the hotel. On the first day we cried a lot. But my kids, they don't have any idea why, you know, but someday someday they will know.

CO: You're listening to As It Happens. And I'm speaking with Reham Abazid, a woman with her family who came to Canada from Syria. Now settled, lives in St. John, New Brunswick. And we're talking about that moment when she came. And there are approximately... There are more than 80,000 people from Syria who settled in Canada. You came as a government sponsored refugee, many of them sponsored refugees, brought people in, did everything they could to help them settle. So lots of people listening to this are thinking about their own Syrian friends now here.

RA: Absolutely.

CO: But as you know, refugees don't choose to leave home. They are forced to. And for many, it's hard to make the transition, isn't it? Hard to...For many people, Syria remains home. What is home for you?

RA: Oh, Syria was my home before 10 years ago, but after not. Because home means safe, means love. But I can't find right now anything in Syria like I find it here in Canada. And of course, it's home for my kids more than me because I grew up in a different country. But they are growing here. And like I am so proud to say, I am a Canadian Syrian, not a refugee anymore, and so thankful for that.

CO: Are you all citizens now?

RA: Not yet.

CO: That's coming.

RA: I don't have time to apply. I wish.

CO: But what do you say to others who came as refugees who are now? They're not refugees anymore. They live here. What do you say to others who are having a more difficult time seeing Canada as their home?

RA: You know, for myself, to them, they have only to reach back to babe. Like, no... How I can say that. To be back like one time and see the reaction from people and they can see Canada from a different way because some people, they are here alone. They don't have anybody from their family. It's hard for them. But if they worked so hard some day they can see one of their family here as many programmes the government is offering, like a private sponsorship or something. And please find a job. Like Canada needs more people and there is lots of job chance around, but they need some people to fill this opportunity. If they can focus, they can, they can get the job. They can improve their English. They can feel welcoming.

CO: You have your life that you left back in Syria. You have a baby buried under a lemon tree. Is there anything else of your life still there in Syria?

RA: Maybe half of my soul. Yes. Also, I have my sister in law and my brother in law still in Syria.

CO: Can you see yourself going back someday?

RA: No, never. Where? No, no, I'm like, I am happy here, and it's my home now and no I can't.

CO: And what about your children? Do you want them to have a connection with Syria?

RA: Maybe in the future? I wish someday to take them there, to tell them where I grew up and to show them here, used to be our home here, like for, especially for my oldest son. He used to stay in that house. I would love to show him where he used to play or there is lots of memory. He has to know.

CO: And what are your dreams? What do you hope to do in Canada and St. John?

RA: I would love to have my own house. That's my plan for next year. I am trying to save some money to buy a house and absolutely to open my own business maybe this summer. What business? Convenience store. That's what I'm thinking about.

CO: Why that. What attracts you to that?

RA: I live in a neighbourhood. There's nothing like there's no store. And if I need to buy anything, I have to drive around fifteen minutes away from my house to grab my stuff. And that's going to be helpful for me and for other people.

CO: And so you want to start a store in your neighbourhood.

RA: Yeah.

CO: And what do you think your kids will do? What dreams do you have for them?

RA: I'm always asking them. My oldest son, he would love to be a fireman and my daughter, she would love to be a pharmacist. And hopefully they will get that someday.

CO: Reham, I am so happy to have you in this country. I'm so sorry for the reasons why you had to leave. But you say at the beginning that you wish you could give back to Canada what they've given you. I think you are.

RA: Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

CO: Bye bye.

RA: Bye bye.

CH: From March, Carol's conversation with Rehman Abazid, a Syrian refugee and soon to be Canadian citizen. You can hear that interview again on our website: cbc.ca/aih.

May 7, 2021 Episode Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode