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 2016

The AIH Transcript for February 22, 2017

Hosts: Helen Mann and Jeff Douglas

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

HELEN MANN: Hello, I'm Helen Mann.

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

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight:

HM: The seven wonders of the worlds. In a nearby solar system – "nearby" in astronomical terms, anyway – NASA discovers seven new planets about the size of our own, some of which may be habitable.

JD: Belatedly guilty as charged. Jamal al-Harith was a former Guantanamo detainee who always insisted on his innocence – but now he's died as a suicide bomber for ISIS in Iraq.

HM: Dividing line. There's an influx of asylum seekers illegally crossing into Canada and so far, the government hasn't arrived at a plan on how to deal with the new arrivals.

JD: Not part of the planning – but part of the execution. Lawyers for death row inmates in Arizona are being asked to bring their own lethal-injection drugs to help the state execute their clients.

HM: Anti-flower power. When an Irish politician suggests it's time to call in the army to battle an aggressive plant in a national park, we get the show on the rhododendron.

JD: And...un-pitched battle. It's a time-honoured tradition for major league pitchers to throw four balls if they're intentionally walking a batter – so devoted fans, and players, think an impending rule change is way off-base.
As It Happens, the Wednesday edition. Radio that knows sometimes a walk in the park is no walk in the park.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: NASA discovery, ex-Gitmo detainee, MLB walk changes

NASA discovery

Guest: Sarah Seager

JEFF DOUGLAS: Wow, this is big. And so was that. And so are the five other ones. In all, seven planets have been discovered by NASA telescope and they are big. All of them about the size of the earth. And what's more, three of them are what are called “habitable zone planets” which means that they most likely do have liquid water. The discovery sets a new record for the greatest number of such planets found around a single star outside our solar system. Ask any astronomer or astrophysicist and they will tell you this is huge. For example: Sarah Seager. She is a Canadian astrophysicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MIT and she was at the official announcement earlier today. We reached her at NASA headquarters in Washington D.C.

HELEN MANN: Professor Seager, is this a big astronomical deal?

SARAH SEAGER: Yes actually, this is a big deal. What we have is a seven Earth sized worlds around a star that's not too far away.

HM: And how significant is that?

SS: Well, it's the first time we've ever had this. And the reason we're considering it so significant is that unlike a lot of other planets orbiting other stars, these ones are actually accessible for much more detailed study.

HM: Can you describe the planets and how the orbit works?

SS: Well I think first I should start by describing the star because this star is so incredibly different from our sun. The star’s an ultra-cool dwarf star. It's kind of a funny name because you can imagine a small star, then like a very small star, then a very very ultra small star, and the star is only about a tenth the size of our sun. It turns out that it's easier to find small planets around small stars.

HM: And the fact that it's cool, what's the significance of that?

SS: Well what that means is that if we think about how our own planet is heated by our sun, if the planets are going to be heated by their star in order to have the right temperature for life, they have to be very very incredibly close to their star. And so, being close also means a very short orbit. Some of the planets have periods as short as one day, or two days, or four days.

HM: And they're not just close to the Star, they're close to each other right? How close are we talking about?

SS: Not as close as our moon is to earth, but about four times further than our moon would be. It’s pretty close.

HM: And so, if I were standing on one of these planets, what would I see of the other?

SS: Well you know it would be amazing? You might see a few different planets in your night sky that are as big as the moon. So imagine instead of having our moon, you can see other planets that big.

HM: It's an incredible thought. Now how far away are these planets from us?

SS: Well the whole system. And don't forget in astronomical terms, things are very far away. The whole system is about 40 light years away.

HM: And in terms of miles or kilometers, what does that mean?

SS: OK let’s do miles. So one light year is about six trillion miles. So we would have about 240 trillion miles away. So for kilometers, it's about a sixth of that. So either way, it's really far.

HM: And so based on how quickly we can journey into space these days, how long would it take for us to get there.

SS: Well the funny thing is there's a software that people demonstrated today called Eyes on Exoplanets and it has a little button you can press and see how long it might take you to get there. But honestly, even if we could travel at the speed of light which we can't, that would be 40, four zero years. If we imagining like a jet plane, that's like hundreds of millions of years. So that excitement isn't so much that we found a neighbor we can visit. It's more that something's out there that we can use our sophisticated space telescopes to look more closely at.

HM: We always hear this Goldilocks Zone description of what's required in terms of whether life can exist on a planet. Three of these are habitable zone planets. What makes them that way?

SS: Well what makes them that is that by very simple calculations we estimate how much energy from their star is falling on the surface. And if the planet has about the same amount of energy from there star that Earth has from our sun, we just sort of very simplistically deem them in their habitable zone.

HM: So do you assume there's water on these planets?

SS: Well what's great about this is even though we don't know yet. We hope that in a few years time we won't have to assume, we'll be able to observe water by seeing water vapor in the atmosphere. But I just want to add one thing. Because there are seven planets, even if we got things wrong, because you know scientists, we’re not always right, that we actually have other planets to try for. So if we miss estimated the habitable zone, we can just try and look at other planets and we're going to be doing that. We're going to use the James Webb Space Telescope, and by the way Canada has an instrument on it called NIRISS from the University of Montréal from René Doyon, and we're going to be using that and other instruments on the telescope to try to see water on these planets.

HM: I understand the planets themselves may not actually rotate. They’re static in their orbit?

SS: Well they are orbiting, but they have a very very special configuration where they rotate one time for every orbit. So are rotating just like one time every time they orbit. That would be like as if our day was the same time as our year.

HM: And what does that mean in terms of the planets I guess temperature and light?

SS: Well what it means is that, believe it or not there's a permanent day side and a permanent night side. So for example, if we could visit that planet, you could choose to be where it's always light or you could go somewhere where it's always dark.
It's kind of like, you know how in the Arctic it's like dark for a very long period of time. Yeah. One side is always in daytime and one side is always at nighttime. Now we don't think that's a problem for life because as you know, like on a hot day if you open your door the hot air rushes out, the cold air on a cold day the cold air rushes in. We think that heated on one side, the air on the planet will still flow around and move heat around. So we're not too worried about it being too hot or too cold on one side or the other.

HM: Does it affect your ability to see everything that's happening on these planets?

SS: It's going to be pretty hard for us to see stuff in general. So that won't be our limiting factor.

HM: Right, it's just distance?

SS: It's just distance and just so faint, this type of star is very dim, and the planets are just so small. I mean it feels like it's big on earth. If you think about driving across the country, it takes a really long time, but planets are just so small compared to their star and that's really where the challenge lies.

HM: At the NASA press conference earlier today, someone said that the discovery brings us closer to answering the question “Are we alone out there?” What do you think?

SS: Well it definitely does because these are really the first planets that we have early access to in terms of this, literally, it's not just a lifetime journey but it will take generations to find out all the answers. And this is really our first step in that process.

HM: Do you assume that there is likely life, not necessarily on these planets, but out there.

SS: The thing is, that gets beyond science and into speculation. So sure, you can speculate and say I absolutely believe there's life out there somewhere because there are hundreds of billions of stars and hundreds of billions of galaxies, and we have evidence now that every star has planets. In parallel, we also see the ingredients for life everywhere, we see organic molecules and other things, and so it just really has to come together somewhere out there.

HM: So is it right to say a second birth is not just a matter of if but when?

SS: I agree. All right.

HM: I know you guys are really thrilled about this. It's certainly fascinating to the rest of us too. Thank you very much.

SS: Thanks so much for having me on your show.

HM: Okey doke. Bye.

SS: Bye.

JD: Sarah Seager was at the official announcement earlier today about the discovery of seven Earth sized potentially habitable planets. She is a Canadian astrophysicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MIT. We reached Professor Seager at NASA headquarters in Washington D.C.

[Music]

Ex-Guantanamo detainee

Guest: Lord Carlile

JD: When he was released from the Guantanamo Bay prison in 2004, British born Jamal al-Harith denied ever being involved in terrorism. And after returning to the UK, he reportedly received as much as 1-point-6 million dollars in compensation from the UK government.
Today, a lot of people believe Jamal al-Harith should have been watched more carefully: a video has emerged that appears to show Mr. al-Harith driving off to detonate a suicide car bomb on behalf of ISIS at an army base in Iraq.
Lord Carlile is the former Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation for the UK government. We reached him in London.

HM: Lord Carlile, what did you think when you heard that Jamal al-Harith had blown himself up in this ISIS suicide attack?

LORD CARLILE: Well I thought that we now had the clearest evidence of what I had always suspected, that this person was a terrorist, that he had been a terrorist since 2001, and that he had carried out a brutal attack consisting of suicide terrorism in which innocent people were killed.

HM: Why did you have those suspicions?

LC: Well because of the long history of his case indicated that he'd been arrested whilst he was in Pakistan on what plainly, by any sensible inference, was a trip that was related to terrorism. That was in 2001.
He spent time in Guantanamo and when he returned to the U.K., he was interviewed at one stage, by a North of England BBC channel and his denials of being a terrorist sounded extremely unconvincing.

HM: He said that he'd been teaching English at the time right and that he'd actually been held by the Taliban.

LC: Well he may have been teaching English as well but he most certainly was not merely held by the Taliban.

HM: Many in Britain of different political stripes championed his release from Guantanamo Bay prison in 2004. Why do you think people felt so strongly that he should be set free.

LC: Because Guantanamo was offensive to British principles of justice, because Guantanamo appeared to be a breach of international law. And then Prime Minister Tony Blair in my view was quite right to try and secure the release of British citizens from Guantanamo. I'm much more concerned about what happened to this man when he arrived back in the United Kingdom.

HM: Now Mr. al-Harith said that he was tortured in Guantanamo Bay. Do you think it's possible that some of his radicalization actually occurred or was augmented during his stay there.

LC: I certainly don't think it started at Guantanamo. In fact, I'm sure he was a radicalized long before that. It may have been augmented, but that would have been because he spent time with other radicals.

HM: Mr. al-Harith was also given compensation. It's reported to be as much as a million pounds. Can you explain why that money was given to him?

LC: I'm not sure the figure was a million pounds. That's a speculative figure, but he was certainly given a substantial amount of compensation. The reason he was given compensation was because, under a United Kingdom's civil law, when he brought his claim, at that time it was a requirement that the British government should disclose information to him, which included national security information. The British government quite rightly was not prepared to disclose that information on those documents which would have damaged national security, and therefore it was decided to pay him and a number of other claimants sums of money.

HM: Do you think that people interpreted that payment as a sign that the government believed he was innocent?

LC: No I don't think that was ever suggested. He may have interpreted it in that way, and some other people certainly interpreted the payments that they received as indicating that they were innocent of any terrorism. But as far as this individual is concerned, and we're only speaking about this individual, it certainly didn't indicate that anyone believed he was innocent.

HM: What do you think in hindsight of him being given that money?

LC: Well I think it's appalling that taxpayers’ money should have been given to a terrorist, because that's what he was, and he's demonstrated that by the cruel way in which he brought other people's lives to an end and incidentally his own as a suicide terrorist.

HM: You said earlier that you are concerned about how Mr. al-Harith was treated when he returned. What do you mean?

LC: Well when he returned, obviously, the security services must have kept close observations on him. Our security services are as good as any in the world, and he appears to have gone to sleep as it were, as a terrorist. I suspect that during that period, the security services decided he was no longer a priority. What his death has demonstrated is that silence and inactivity should not be taken necessarily as an indication of innocence.

HM: We're told that he joined ISIS about two years ago. That would be 10 years after his release from Guantanamo. How long can you reasonably surveil people in his kind of situation?

LC: Well that's a very good question, and I would not criticize the security services for not surveilling him. But what this case raises is questions that need to be answered by way of a methodical review. We have something in parliament in the UK, which is called the Intelligence Security Committee. I hope that this committee will look at this case and look at it very soon.

HM: Do you assume that they will be looking at potential other cases and reviewing where those people stand?

LC: Well I don't think the Select Committee, sorry the intelligence and security committee of the Joint Parliamentary Committee, will be looking at other cases, and I wouldn't expect them to. But I would expect the control authorities, the police and I5. That’s the Security Service and the Secret Intelligence Service MI6, to be looking at some of the other cases and reviewing the situation because this case has given pause for thought.

HM: Lord Carlile we very much appreciate you giving us a time to discuss all of this. Thank you very much.

LC: Thank you that's my pleasure.

HM: All right, goodbye.

LC: OK thanks, bye.

JD: Lord Carlile is the former Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation for the UK government. We reached him in London.

[Music]

MLB walk changes

Guest: Paul Spoljaric

This week, the Baseball Hall of Fame announced that a new member will be inducted: Homer Simpson. Specifically, the Simpsons episode “Homer at the Bat”, which first aired 25 years ago this week. It centers around the Springfield power plant softball team.
Now in the three dimensional world of real life, spring training has begun, but the upcoming season is going to look a little different.
We already told you about the Extra Innings rule where a player is placed at second base at the top of the Tenth Inning to speed up an outcome. Well now, another major league rule change was confirmed. This one has to do with intentional walks. Pitchers will no longer have to throw four deliberately high-and-outside pitches to place a hitter at first. Instead, a manager will give a sign from the dugout that his team wishes to put a batter on base.
To get an explanation of, and an opinion on, the change, we called up former Blue Jays pitcher Paul Spoljaric. We reached him in Bolton, Ontario.

HM: Paul Spoljaric, first of all, what did you think when you first heard the MLB was making this change?

PAUL SPOLJARIC: Honestly, I was a little taken aback by it. I understand the idea behind it is to try to increase the pace of play in mind. You know, my next series of thoughts were how's it going to be implemented, are there going to be some certain rules and circumstances where this applies? I had more questions than answers.

HM: Right, well let's back up a bit just in case people don't understand what an intentional walk looks like. Can you take us through it?

PS: Well basically, managers signals to the catcher that you can put him on base, catcher stands up, sticks his hands in one hand out to either side of the open batter's box. And as pitcher, you attempt to throw it over there, which is, believe it or not a very unusual feeling, intentionally watching someone. It's, you know, you're used to throwing balls to well defined targets, and when you're asked to walk somebody it's not your normal protocol that's for sure.

HM: Right. And what's the strategy? When do you do this?

PS: Usually it's done to avoid a dangerous or hot hitter or to set up a double play.

HM: Are there just certain players where you expect, even before the game gets underway, that this is going to happen.

PS: Oh yeah. I mean, before every series you have your pitchers of catchers meetings and you go over the lineups and you know, you definitely determine, this guy is not going to beat us today, under any circumstances. So you know, when that situation arises, everybody knows what's going on before it even happens.

HM: Right. And the ultimate point is here, you'd rather have a big great batter only go one base rather than make it a homerun.

PS: Exactly. You just, you don't want to have the hot hitter the opportunity to win the game for the opposition so you take the bat out of hand by walking him.

HM: Now you said that this is not the kind of thing you train for. I have to say watching the game sometimes I think it looks kind of silly. Do you ever feel embarrassed doing this?

PS: No because it's all part of strategy right? So the hard part is, as a pitchers you work at a certain temperature, speed and rhythm while you're out on the mound, and then you know if you're a guy that throws in the low 90s or mid-90s or whatever, and all of a sudden you've got to start throwing a ball at 75, 80 miles an hour, that takes you out of your tempo and rhythm and it's so unusual throwing, playing catch essentially with a catcher, when you're used to throwing downhill, throwing hard, and going after guys, being aggressive, and all those sorts of things and now all of a sudden you've got to pack it all away off to just, I’m this passive guy and I just got to get the ball you know five feet off the plate so the hitter can’t make a swing at it and it has its challenges for sure.

HM: Yeah. You mentioned that sometimes it goes wrong. Can you think of times where you've expected that there's no way that it's going to get a hit and it has?

PS: Personally, that has not happened to me. I typically make sure that that doesn't happen. I have seen it before. I remember when I was playing in Myrtle Beach, I had a no hitter going and it ended up getting pulled to the pitch count and the guy in extra innings, we got into a situation where we were walking a guy with a runner on third, and he threw a wild pitch and we lost the game. So yeah, it does happen. You know, my thought is initially on this whole thing is, ok I'd get it with a runner on second. Given the intentional pass, nobody, even if you lob one into the screen, nobody’s scoring from second base. Very rarely would you ever see that. However, I would make every pitcher throw every ball with a runner on third just for that exact reason, that the opportunity does exist that if catcher can't catch it, or whatever ball gets away from the catcher, and that runner third has an opportunity to score. So, that would be my way of circumventing the system.

HM: It's been said that Hall of Fame pitcher Don Drysdale for intentional walks were a waste of pitches. That if he wanted to put someone on base, he just he would go ahead hit them with the ball. What do you think of that?

PS: I would argue that that's not a bad strategy, although painful for the hitter, certainly save some bullets for you.

HM: Do you ever been a batter just to do that?

PS: But I'd rather not comment on that. Of course. Everybody does it. It’s part of the game. You know, I don't like throwing at people but sometimes it's just better to avoid them getting a base hit than putting them on base and having a chance at the double plate.

HM: How is this plan, to you know, not have these four pitches going to change the strategy or the game?

PS: I don't think it will at all. The strategy is not changing, it's the execution of the strategy that's changing. You know you're still going to walk the guy in the situation, so not having to throw a ball to speed them up, to speed the game up and save a minute, if that's what they want to do, then you know that's what they're going to do. Right now everybody seems to be trying to find a way to cut down the time of the games and that is one quick way of doing it. Walks are down, intentional walks are down across the board over the last few years, so the amount of savings across the league would be minimal but it does save time.

HM: Paul Spoljaric, it’sbeen a pleasure to talk with you. Thank you very much.

PS: My pleasure, thank you for having me.

HM: Ok thanks bye.

PS: Take care.

JD: Paul Spoljaric is a former Blue Jays pitcher. We reached him in Bolton, Ontario. You can find more on that story on the As It Happens website: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Russia Fake News website

JD: The great Winston Churchill once said, "A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on." And that's as true today as it was when he said it, which was never, because Churchill didn't say it – Mark Twain did, in 1919. Except that he died in 1910, so actually, it seems that remark originated with Jonathan Swift, who said "Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it," back in 1710.
Now if a quote about fakery and truth can turn out to be fake, it shows just how vigilant we all have to be. And when it comes to the current scourge of fake news, Russia is being very vigilant indeed.
Now that might seem hypercritical… hypocritical, because Russia is frequently blamed for fake news. But Russia wants you to know that the "news" about fake news is fake news.
Just days ago, at a security summit in Munich, Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said his country was pursuing what he called a "post-fake era". To that end, his ministry announced a new project: on its website, it would start bravely exposing and debunking fake news.
That project began on Monday, and there are already five stories from western news organizations, including NBC and the New York Times, up on the Russian Foreign Ministry's fake-news-debunking site. All five are about Russia. They've all received a big red stamp that says "FAKE", and an added sentence that reads, "This piece contains data that do not correspond with reality." And...that's it.
No further explanation. No clarification. No actual debunking at all. The site just says some news is counterfeit, without offering a counterpoint. And it's pretty hard to call someone else on the carpet when you've been accused of lying like a rug.

Part 2: Canadian border, Arizona execution drugs

Canadian border

Guest: Mark Holland

JEFF DOUGLAS: The Liberals are standing their ground. The surge in asylum seekers entering illegally from the United States has the government under pressure from all sides. The conservatives want more done to secure the Canadian border. The NDP says that people are fleeing the Trump administration while our government acts as if nothing has changed. Here is the NDP immigration critic Jenny Kwan with a question for the prime minister in the House this afternoon.

SOUNDCLIP

JENNY KWAN: Nothing has changed really. A massive immigration crackdown inside the U.S., hundreds of refugees risking life and limb, to cross the border. And today Amnesty International said Trump's fear is scapegoating has increased risks to human rights. All this and another executive order on immigration is on its way. That's the prime minister agreeing with the minister that nothing has changed and that the U.S. is still a safe entry for refugees.

SPEAKER: Right Honourable Prime Minister.

JUSTIN TRUDEAU: Canadians expect our government to do two things in regards to the United States and indeed the world. We will stand up for Canadian values and defend the principles that have made this country strong free and great. And at the same time, we will work to ensure the protection of Canadian jobs, opportunities for growth, and the success of our small businesses and large businesses. This is the balance that Canadians expect of this government. That is what we will continue to do throughout our relationship with the United States and the world.

JD: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau responding to a question from NDP immigration critic Jenny Kwan this afternoon in the House of Commons. Mark Holland is the Parliamentary Secretary to the Public Safety Minister. We reached Mr. Holland in Ottawa.

HELEN MANN: Mark Holland, what would it take for Canada to reconsider the Safe Third Country Agreement?

MARK HOLLAND: Well the Safe Third Party Agreement was certified by the United Nations. And certainly if there was an issue, the United Nations would raise it. The Safe Third Country Agreement ensures that we have an orderly processing of asylum claimants in both countries and that we're not stepping over each other in creating situations that might be chaotic. And the reality is that agreement is in place, it's functioning well, that the number of asylum seekers that we've seen certainly has increased over the last couple of years but we're well off of the peaks that we saw in 2008. So it's, you know you know from our perspective, we're monitoring the situation very very carefully.
Canada is a compassionate country. We in fact in 2017 will accept 40,000 refugees. That's up from 20,000 so it's double the number that were accepted in 2015. And we're going to keep monitoring the situation. But as it stands right now, we believe that the Safe Third Country Agreement is working as it should.

HM: It's not just the NDP calling for the suspension of that agreement. The Canadian Council for Refugees is saying the same thing, pointing to these people coming across the border in dangerous conditions. They think that that could perhaps be helped if they were required to show up or are allowed to show up at a border crossing and officially register without being sent back. Is that not a reasonable solution to what could be a very dangerous situation?

MH: Well obviously we want people to enter the country regularly not irregularly. So we want them at the border, at ports of entry. That's the way the vast majority of asylum seekers do come to the country. And so we're concerned about people who would choose other means to cross the border. And the challenge with not having the Safe Third Country Agreement is that you get people applying in multiple locations and perhaps you know being rejected in one and going to another and that doesn't facilitate a very orderly dealing with the situation.
In the United States, their system is evaluated by the United Nations and other agencies and we are going to continue to monitor the situation and see how it moves forward.

HM: OK but you know, the agreement means that if they present themselves legally they're more likely to be turned away because the assumption is they should have declared refugee status in the States. Isn't that the incentive for them to be crossing illegally?

MH: Well I think you have to make an election. I mean if somebody is going to claim refugee status, it's important you make that election in the country that you determine that you want to do that. If we don't have a Safe Third Party Agreement then you have a situation where we're going to be tripping over ourselves and it's not going to facilitate an orderly dealing with refugees.
And certainly we want to ensure that Canada has really been a world leader not just at a federal government level, but really at a community level in welcoming refugees and reaching out and ensuring that people who are vulnerable, people who are in situations where they're fleeing persecution of war, receive adequate protections. But we also have to make sure, at the same time, that that our system is orderly and that people are being processed properly, and that we're not tripping over ourselves and that we're not creating a situation that would be chaotic.

HM: We spoke last week with someone in Minnesota who deals with the refugees from the Somali community. People who are feeling uncomfortable living there feel like they will be expelled by the Trump administration and that person we spoke with, said that he felt this agreement was a problem because it had people from his community putting their lives at risk because they don't feel that the U.S. is any longer a safe country for them.

MH: Well the situation as it exists today is one where others a lot of uncertainty and that a lot of question marks that people have. But we deal with the reality on the ground and what we're seeing happening . And right now, the reality is that the Safe Third Party Agreement, which is operated not at a political level, it's operated at a bureaucratic level, is operating the way that it should operate. And we're obviously to continue monitoring that. If their situation changes or if we feel that it isn't, if the United Nations, as an example, revisited the issue, we would clearly listen to that.

HM: We are hearing from asylum seekers who are pointing to the Prime Minister's tweets about welcoming refugees. And they say that they feel like, you know, they're welcome in this country and that that welcome mat has been put down for them. And so they're pouring in. Do you think it's time for the Prime Minister to revise that welcome?

MH: I think Canadians spoke very clearly in the last election, and that is Canada is a nation that extends its shield to the most vulnerable people in doing its share. We can't protect everybody. We can't intervene in every in every tragic story but we have to do our share internationally.

HM: So should the Prime Minister be more clear with these people who are looking with desperation to our country to be a refuge for them and may be misinterpreting what he meant?

MH: I think when we talk about war anybody tries to begin the process of seeking refugee status, that we are very clear in terms of what our priorities are, what our numbers are, how many people that we will take. And I think anybody will understand that Canada is a nation of 35, 36 million people. That is not going to be able to accept everybody. I think that the message though, the message that we sent out that we are a welcoming country, that's punching above our weight, that is helping those who are most vulnerable, is an essential message to be to be out there in the world. That it sets it sets the bar for other countries and encourages other countries to follow suit. And on that basis I think no, it wouldn't be responsible to change that message. I think it's essential that the countries and nations of means have that message. Because I think it's part of our global responsibility to help those who are who were most vulnerable and most persecuted and to do what you can. I think people understand that that doesn't mean you do everything but it means that you do what you can.

HM: Mark Holland, thanks for talking to us.

MH: Thanks so much, Helen.

HM: Bye bye.

MH: Bye.

JD: Mark Holland is the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety. We reached him in Ottawa.

[Music]

Arizona execution drugs

Guest: Dale Baich

JD: BYOD – Bring Your Own Drugs. That is not from a party invitation. That is what lawyers for death row inmates in Arizona are being asked to do. Arizona's Department of Corrections recently published its new protocols on executions. In it the inmates’ counsel are asked if possible to provide their own pentobarbital for the execution of their clients by lethal injection.
Dale Baich is an Assistant Federal Public Defender in Arizona, where he represents numerous inmates facing capital punishment. We reached Mr. Baich in Phoenix.

HM: Mr. Baich, when you saw this new protocol from the state of Arizona, what did you think?

DALE BAICH: I was flabbergasted when I saw that the state of Arizona was saying that lawyers could buy or procure the drugs to be used for the execution of their client.

HM: What exactly is the state instructing you to do?

DB: Well the state is giving prisoners the option of providing drugs to be used for their execution. In other words, the state will try to go out and get drugs but if the prisoner or his lawyer wants to get a certain drug, pentobarbital and purchases it, the state would then take possession of that drug and use it during the execution.

HM: Where would you be expected to source enough pentobarbital to kill someone?

DB: Well it's illegal and impossible for me as a lawyer to go out and purchase drugs and then turn those drugs over to the Department of Corrections to be used for an execution.

HM: Have you ever heard of anything like this before any other protocol anywhere else along these lines?

DB: This is unprecedented. No other state has a provision like this that allows for an attorney to go out and buy drugs.

HM: Why do you think is going on here? Why is the state doing this?

DB: I have no idea. When the protocol was published in mid-January, we read through it and saw this provision, and we were shocked to see that.

HM: Are they trying to put off the acquisition of drugs that they can't get themselves to someone else just because they know how impossible it is to get them?

DB: Well that might be what they were thinking. But if a state wants to have the death penalty, it has the duty to figure out how to do it constitutionally. The state cannot pass its obligation on to the condemned prisoner or the condemned prisoner’s lawyer.

HM: How do you even deal with this as a defense attorney being put in this position?

DB: Well it would violate my ethics as a lawyer to do something like this. I have a duty to protect my client. So I don't have a duty to work with the state to participate in the execution of my client.

HM: Has the State Bar Association taken a position?

DB: This provision just came out and I'm not aware of anybody going to the state bar to ask for an ethical opinion.

HM: Is it something you're discussing with fellow attorneys though?

DB: We're all sort of scratching our heads over this. And, as I said, I don't think any ethical lawyer would do this. We have a duty to follow the law, and under the law, we cannot go out and buy drugs and then turn those drugs over to someone else. And we also have a duty to protect our client.

HM: Even proponents of the death penalty have been debating more recently about how inmates should be put to death across your country. What are your thoughts on that?

DB: If the states want to have the death penalty, it's up to them to figure out how to carry it out. Some states have taken a step back and taken a more broad view of the death penalty and are deciding whether or not to keep it on the books. A number of states over the last few years have ended the practice of the death penalty, but those few that want to continue with it will tinker and experiment with different ways to carry out the sentence.

HM: But we've heard of some pretty horrific results from that tinkering and experimenting.

DB: In 2014 there were three botched executions. One in Ohio, one in Oklahoma, and one in Arizona. And late last year there was a prisoner in Alabama who struggled to breathe for many many minutes as the state was trying to carry out his execution.

HM: Given that do you wonder perhaps if the clients you represent on death row wouldn't be better served by having someone get pentobarbital for them?

DB: Well the States have the duty and responsibility to carry out the death sentence. And if they cannot do it then I think that they need to re-evaluate whether it's good policy to continue with the death penalty.

HM: How will you now challenge the specific protocol. Do you have options?

DB: We have had a case pending in the federal court in Arizona since Mr. Wood’s execution and this will be an issue that that will be litigated as the case moves forward.

HM: All right. Mr. Baich, thank you very much for taking us through all of this.

DB: Sure. Thank you Helen.

HM: All right, good bye.

DB: Bye.

JD: Dale Baich is an Assistant Federal Public Defender in Arizona. We reached Mr. Baich in Phoenix. There are currently 119 inmates on Death Row in Arizona. It's been two-and-a-half years since the last execution. The prisoner Mr. Baich just mentioned, Joseph Wood, who took nearly two hours to die. And if you'd like to read on this story, it is on our web page: cbc.ca/aih.

Rhododendrons rescue

JD: An Irish politician is sounding the alarm on a growing threat that he says has been ignored for too long. Often lauded as peaceful and beautiful, it is in fact – according to the representative for County Kerry – an insidious force. One so dangerous it may now require military intervention to be beaten back.
Earlier today, in Irish parliament, Michael Healy Rae made the case for a swift and aggressive response to this clear and present danger.

SOUNDCLIP

MICHAEL HEALY RAE: Kilarney National Park in my opinion, is being neglected, because not enough resources are being put into the maintenance and care of it. The rhododendrons are taking over completely, despite the programmes of work over the years to cut them. There is no place better in this world than Kilarney on its national park. It's crying out for maintenance, minister. When trees fall in the National Park, they are left to rot inside there, and what I've been told is all it's good for biodiversity to have it rotting in the ground and have the snails and the creepy crawlies growing through it. That's rubbish. We need that timber to be taken out of there and clean it up. The rhododendron situation in Kilarney National Park has gotten so bad, no minister. Nothing short of calling in the army is going to put it right because the resources are so much needed there to put it in order. And it is a magnificent resource. It is something that we've, and Kilarney people, Kerry people, have prided themselves in over the years. I am pleading with you, Minister for the necessary resources in place.

JD: That was the member of Irish Parliament for County Kerry, Michael Healey Rae speaking in parliament earlier today unless you dismiss his call for urgent action against the rhododendron explosion in Kilarney National Park, I direct your attention to Exhibit B, our interview with Jimmy Barry. In June of 2014. Mr. Barry and other members of the South Eastern Mountain Rescue Association in County Tipperary responded to a distress call from a couple in their 50s. They had become lost in a rhododendron forest while hiking in the mountains. Mr. Berry began by stressing to Carol how quickly and easily one can lose one's way among the flowers.

SOUNDCLIP

JIMMY BARRY: It's very easy to do because the rhododendron is growing behind a lake. It's a lake, and it's a quarry lake, formed by the ice many years ago and it's very steep at the back. And they went up the mountain behind it and then they decided to take a kind of shortcut down. And they were drawn in, like many people are drawn into steep ground, and they just keep coming down, keep coming down the road. The rhododendron was growing knee high, shoulder high, and then all of a sudden, at about five o'clock in the evening, they couldn't. They found they couldn't get through it. And they were stuck. Literally stuck.

CAROL OFF: And what did your rescue team have to do?

JB: We got called out by the local police here in Ireland on a 999 call and we arrived very quickly. Within 15 minutes we were at the scene, and we can we could actually see, we made contact with the people by shouting across the small lake at them, and we could see where they were because they were shaking one of the rhododendron trees. We estimated that it was only 400 metres in from the side of the lake and at the back and 100 metres up. Very simple. We’d go in on the right hand side and we go across and this will be over in one hour.
Unfortunately for us, we had never been in the rhododendron forest, I had never been in a rhododendron forest before, and when we started in, within 10 meters of going into the rhododendron, we knew things had changed because there's no light in there. All the ground covered that was outside. Everything was dead and as it turned into basically Marsh. Everything rotten and everything smelly. It turned into a jungle. And I didn't know we had jungle in Ireland but I soon realized it and we kept going. And within half an hour, we had only traveled 100 meters.
We had to do the same as they did. We had a spotter on the other side of the lake and we had a radio contact with him and we shook the trees as well. So he let us know your hundred meters from them, your 200 meters from them. Turn left come down a bit. And that's how we actually got it, so it took us two hours shaking the bushes and literally crawling underneath.
We reached him and they were delighted to see us and we were actually delighted to see them because we were fed up with it as well. And so the easiest way we could go was down through the rhododendron, down to the lake beneath us. 100 meters a rhododendron forest, which we actually walked from branch to branch to branch all the way down, and we never actually touched solid ground on the way down. It was all branches.
When we got to the lakeshore, we were still sitting on branches above, but our bass team across the track had acquired a motorboat, a small dinghy, came across and they took us out two by two. And we literally, because the rhododendron was growing out ten foot out into the lake, we literally had to cut the branches off, get the boat in, and fall into the boat, and they took us across the lake.

JD: That was Jimmy Barry a volunteer rescue worker and County Tipperary speaking with Carol back in June of 2014. And if you would like to see some photographs of just how dense these rhododendron forests can be, we have some photographs of that rhododendron forest in Tipperary and the full interview incidentally, on our website, cbc.ca/aih.

Part 3: BC prescriptions, Norma McCorvey obit

JEFF DOUGLAS: For Sam Panopoulos, there's no debate. Pineapple pizza is delicious. And, frankly, he doesn't care if the President of Iceland thinks otherwise.
Last night, we called up the retired London, Ontario pizza maker. In the 'sixties, Mr. Panopoulos invented the Hawaiian pizza – you know, the one with pineapple on it. So we wanted his opinion on what the president of Iceland, Gudni Johannesson, had said about that particular topping. Which is that he wanted to ban it. And he prefers seafood toppings instead.
After our interview, many of you joined the heated pineapple "Pizzagate" debate online.

HELEN MANN: On Facebook, Rheal Benoit wrote: "My favourite pizza! Never knew it was a Canadian Invention." Barbara Holmes added: "Pineapple Forever!!" And on Twitter, Tom Henheffer wrote: "SEAFOOD? This man has no right to comment on pizza toppings."

JD: But other listeners agreed with the president. Marie Hurley wrote: "I'm with Iceland. Pineapple on pizza is abhorrent to the laws of nature." And Doug Gregory emailed to say: "One of the best pizzas I have ever had was at Iceland's Keflivik Airport. And what, you might ask, made said pizza so wonderful? Lobster. Yes, a lobster pizza. This pizza transcends excellence to border on the spiritual."
And a listener with the username Scandinavian Kitchen went further – too far, perhaps in fact – tweeting, "My fave Swedish pizza is banana, peanut, prawn and curry."

HM: Finally, Jeremy Rumbolt saw an opportunity. He tweeted: "Moving to Iceland to start a pineapple pizza revolution. And wear lovely sweaters. And hang out around volcanoes."

JD: Thank you to everyone who wrote. To read more about the Canadian inventor of Hawaiian pizza – and the Icelandic President's position on it, go to our website: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

BC Prescriptions

Guest: Ailve McNestry

JD: Over a few months, ten doctors in British Columbia gave him more than two dozen drug prescriptions. And he was able to find ten pharmacies to fill them.
In a new case study, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of BC lays out the unnamed man's troubling story. It concludes that doctors and pharmacists, quote, "inadvertently perpetuated his substance use disorder."
Dr. Ailve McNestry is the deputy registrar for the College of Physicians and Surgeons of B.C. We reached her in Vancouver.

HM: Dr. McNestry, what are you able to tell us about the man in your case study?

AILVE MCNESTRY: I can tell you that we’ve altered every detail that we thought might identify the patient. But this is not a composite, this is a real case study. It was a specific patient. So we identified a patient who was 39 years of age and he was taking a high dose opioid called oxycodone and he was also taking a benzodiazepine called Alprazolam, and over the course of several months he basically continued to get a lot of different prescriptions from different doctors. Even though the underlying diagnosis should probably have been identified earlier as being a substance use disorder.

HM: Do you know how he started abusing drugs?

AM: I think, as in most cases, it started out with a prescription of an opioid medication for chronic non-cancer pain. And that was just maintained over a long time, and then additional symptoms led to his being prescribed additional types of medication like benzodiazepines for anxiety or post-traumatic stress disorder.
But when you looked at the whole picture and in particular when you looked at the whole picture with the context of all the medications he was getting from all the different doctors, you realized that this patient really had a pretty clear diagnosis of a substance use disorder.

HM: You said 10 physicians were writing him prescriptions. 10 pharmacies were filling those prescriptions. How does that happen?

AM: Well unfortunately it happens still too easily, and that's one of the reasons why we wanted to provide this case study to our registrants of this college. And as you know, we brought out a safe prescribing document, standard and guideline document last June 2016. And some people have said, well you know, we're making too much of this. That actually physicians are not prescribing that carelessly and the problems that we're having on the streets with the current opioid crisis are not related to physicians prescribing. But I think looking at a case like this, we see quite clearly that 10 physicians, 10 prescribers and probably also 10 pharmacists who are dispensers, might have taken a deeper look at this patient's profile and realized what was going on.

HM: What tools did doctors and pharmacists have available to them that they might have used and didn't.

AM: Well the tool we're using today, the telephone. So if a doctor doesn't have access to PharmaNet for a minute in their office, which many do, but some still do not, it's still possible to pick up the phone, call the pharmacist, the pharmacist who has dispensed or in fact any pharmacist could check for a minute and could see. I think any patient who's seeing a large number of doctors for prescriptions for oxycodone or benzodiazepines or both. Any patient like that, the dispensers and the prescribers should be looking at carefully to make sure that everything is being treated appropriately.

HM: Tell us about this PharmaNet database.

AM: So the PharmaNet database is a database that's owned by the Ministry of Health, and every medication that is dispensed to a patient in a community pharmacy, it doesn't include the hospitals, but a community pharmacy has to be entered into the PharmaNet database. We hope that all doctors working in walk-in clinics or in methadone clinics, they are obliged to have access to PharmaNet in their clinic. But we're trying to encourage you know broader, there’s 12,000 doctors in B.C. We're trying to encourage more physicians to get direct PharmaNet access in their practices. If you access PharmaNet database, you can get a lot of information about a patient.
You can see exactly on what date they picked up a drug. So if a patient comes in and says they've run out of their oxycodone prescription, you can actually look in for a minute and say, “Well you received 150 tablets on this particular date. So if that was last week, that would be problematic in a lot of cases.” It's very accurate data.

HM: This is obviously a big concern both in your province and elsewhere in this country. It's going on. How, in this instance, did your college become aware of the particular case?

AM: Well, through PharmaNet review, and you have to you have to recognize that not every province even has a PharmaNet database equivalent to what we have here in British Columbia. The Pharmanet database is really a wonderful tool, and we would like to be able to do more review of PharmaNet, but the review that we do, even on the limited basis we're doing it now, allows us to pick up sometimes cases like this. What we can't guarantee is that we that we're picking up every case like this. It is a concern that with all that information in the database it's not being more utilized.

HM: Now have the doctors and pharmacists who gave this particular man drugs been disciplined?

AM: Oh no, we wouldn't…we would not. We don't discipline doctors usually for prescribing. We enter them in a prescription review program, which is a remedial educational program to try to highlight for them the risks and consequences of careless prescribing.

HM: And is that mandatory that they attend then?

AM: I would say it's a very strong suggestion. If we asked a physician to enroll in the prescription review program and they refused, we would send that matter I think to the complaints department. I don't recall anybody refusing to engage in what's what is a remedial program.

HM: And in terms of the study in broader terms, what are you hoping that other health care practitioners in the province get from this?

AM: Well this puts more of a face, if you like, on the prescribing issues that we're trying to address as a college. When we issue safe prescribing standards and guidelines, people see that as a document of rules and some people's reaction to that is unfortunately a little bit negative or they tend to push back. But by putting the same issues into a case study like this, we hope that people will realize gee you know I could have done that or I could I should have done that or I had a case like this. They see themselves in the mirror. I think a bit more clearly than they do when they just look at a set of standards and guidelines.

HM: Given the extent of the drug problem, we're seeing these days. Are you surprised by that pushback that you're seeing from some physicians?

AM: I am. I sometimes think that the physicians who are pushing back in conversations they're having with me, most of them haven’t read a newspaper or looked at a news site for months. I find it very difficult to understand that some individuals don't get the extent of the problem.

HM: Well clearly you’re trying to get the message out and I appreciate you sharing the findings with us. Thank you very much.

AM: Thank you.

HM: All right.

AM: Goodbye, Helen.

HM: Bye.

JD: Dr. Ailve McNestry is the deputy registrar for BC's College of Physicians and Surgeons. She's in charge of drug programs. We reached her in Vancouver.

[Music]

Best teacher

JD: Maggie MacDonnell says that if you grew up like she did, in small-town Nova Scotia, you'd have a hard time being called “the best in the world” too. But she may have to get used to the embarrassment. From an initial field of 20,000, she's been named to a short list of 50 contenders for the million-dollar Global Teacher Prize.
Ms. MacDonnell was nominated for her work with at-risk youth at the Ikusik high school in Salluit, an Inuit community way up in northern Quebec. Or at least, that's where her job begins.
Here is Maggie MacDonnell speaking with CBC Quebec's Marika Wheeler about the nomination.

SOUNDCLIP

MAGGIE MACDONNELL: The definition of a teacher is not narrow. It doesn't just happen between 8:45 and 3:45. It just doesn't just happen in a classroom. Here the definition of teacher is very broad. Just like almost every community member’s role is quite broad. So you're still a teacher when the bell goes off and you're out to the co-op grocery store in line getting your groceries here. You're still a teacher on your walk back and forth to school. You're still a teacher on the weekends when you're out running or doing physical activity or coaching a basketball practice or etc. So to me, for myself being a teacher here, it's broad, it means I'm a teacher quote unquote in the classroom but I'm also a coach, I'm also a mentor also a bit of a motivator. And for some children who has seen me, I'm somewhat of a parental figure, maybe an older sibling, an aunt, an extra mother to have around.

MARIKA WHEELER: The prize comes with a million dollars. What would you do with the money?

MM: See now you've got me dreaming again, as if I could actually win the million dollars. But if I did win the million dollars, I would want to create an environmental stewardship program focusing on Inuit youth, starting it right here in Salluit, of course. And drawing upon cultural traditions to reawaken a love for the land. What that looks like in practical terms, is I'd love to create a kayak program for the youth here.
So many people have lost the knowledge and the comfort of being in a kayak. It's very rare to see them in the village. Yet it's probably one of the most wonderful legacies that come from that culture. I've been lucky enough to live in many parts of Africa. I've traveled to quite a few countries in the world, and I've seen a kayak every place I've gone. And yet when I come here, I very rarely see them. So I'd love to help bring back that tradition because I believe for young people, it can be super powerful for them to reconnect with that. And it's also such a wonderful and affordable form of mobility. They'll be able to access the land much easier. They will be able to go to their parents or families cabins in the summer, be able to spend time there, which is such a relief from some of the stress that's in town at certain times. They'll be able to fish and hunt and camp more easily.
When I imagine it I also think it can be quite symbolic in terms of if you had a group of people chained together who felt comfortable kayaking and had reclaimed that tradition, you could do wonderful expeditions from one village to the next, which could also be partnered with raising awareness on certain issues.

JD: That was Maggie MacDonnell of the Ikusik school in Salluit, Quebec. She was speaking with CBC Quebec's Marika Wheeler after being nominated and indeed shortlisted for the million-dollar Global Teacher Prize.

[Music]

GOP town hall

JD: U.S. Congress is on a bit of a break right now, which means lawmakers travel back to their home districts to face residents. And yesterday, some GOP representatives didn't just face some tough questions – they met town hall crowds that were downright livid.
In Virginia's 7th congressional district, Republican Representative Dave Brat endured a verbal beating for more than an hour. And it didn't matter what question the moderator asked.

SOUNDCLIP

MAN: Do you agree with President Trump when he states that “everything is running smoothly?”

[Sound: Laughter and applause from crowd]

DAVE BRAT: Thank you for that. The answer to that is given the obstruction –

[Sound: Booing and interruption from crowd]

JD: And then, the most contentious topic of the night: Obamacare.

SOUNDCLIP

DAVE BRAT: The problem is, Obamacare has just collapsed.

[Sound: Crowd shouting I disagreement]

DB: Let me explain this–

MODERATOR: Please let him finish, please.

DB: The facts do matter here.

JD: Representative Dave Brat was not the only town hall host to face questions about the Republicans’ plan to repeal and replace Obamacare. In Iowa Falls, Republican Senator Chuck Grassley got an earful from residents on the same topic. Here's some of what people said, starting with a pig farmer in Iowa.

SOUNDCLIP

PIG FARMER: Over 20 million will lose coverage. And with all due respect sir, you're the man that talked about the death panel. We’re going to create one great big death panel in this country that people can't afford to get insured. And you tell me these families who have medical conditions or don't even have a medical condition, how are they going to make it work on $35000a year?

RESIDENT: December 4, 2014 my husband fell 35 feet while hanging lights and nearly died. Had my husband died that day or been disabled, I sat in the waiting room, incredibly thankful for the Affordable Care Act, because it would dramatically change our life.
Privatization puts people above profits. The whole model is set to deny rights in order to make a profit margin. You can't affect necessarily what's happening in Iowa and I'm aware of that, but I find it unconscionable that Paul Ryan believes that he can make a change to the Affordable Care Act in four weeks. He's been talking about putting it fast track through in March. That is horrible. So you please don't rush that. And please don't privatize. Please don't privatize any of those programs. I need them.

[Sound: Crowd saying “We all do” in agreement, applause]

JD: Residents in Iowa Falls, Iowa challenging Senator Chuck Grassley about the Republicans’ plan to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. Senator Grassley responded by saying no concrete legislation has been introduced and that he will have more answers for his constituents once it has.

[Music]

Norma McCorvey

Guest: Tony Kaye

JD: For years, she was only known as "Jane Roe". As a young woman, she was the anonymous plaintiff at the centre of Roe versus Wade, the case that legalized abortion in the U.S. in 1973. But eventually, she revealed her real name: Norma McCorvey – a staunch pro-choice activist, marching alongside Jane Fonda and Gloria Allred for abortion rights.
But then, an anti-abortion group called Operation Rescue moved in next door to the women's clinic where she worked. And Ms. McCorvey spent the last two decades of her life as a vocal anti-abortion activist.
Ms. McCorvey died last the weekend. She was 69-years-old.
Director Tony Kaye interviewed Ms. McCorvey both before and after her conversion, for his sprawling documentary on abortion, Lake of Fire.

SOUNDCLIP

NORMA MCCORVEY: Someone come by, and they blew out our front windows. They drove down the street. They turned around, they came back. They blew out the back windshield of my car. Plus the storm door. I've been harassed on the telephone. I've been harassed in grocery stores, department stores, anywhere where you find the general public for my stand on abortion. I spent the better part of 14 years in this house locked up afraid to go outside.

JD: That was Norma McCorvey interviewed by Tony Kaye for his documentary Lake of Fire. We reached director Tony Kaye in Los Angeles.

HM: Tony Kaye, in making your documentary about abortion, why did you want to speak with Norma McCorvey?

TONY KAYE: Well I mean, she seemed to hold that the pivotal point of all one of them. You know she became the poster child, if you like, for the world for both sides in the end. First of all, for pro-choice, then for for pro-life. Although I do think that the labels are not right. But Norma McCorvey or Jane Roe as she became, was the center of the massive historic change.

HM: Maybe you could explain to us, pople may not know the details of how Ms. McCorvey became Jane Roe.

TK: Norma had a very troubled life. I don't know… I mean a very abusive childhood, and I believe she was raped a number of times by a relative and she you know, she was bisexual but with more than lesbian slant, and she became pregnant, and Sarah Weddington who was a lawyer, a very up and coming, very smart lawyer, discovered Norma who was looking to have an abortion. And Sarah made it, you know, her life and sort of almost adopted Norma McCorvey, turned her into Jane Roe, and that became Roe versus Wade, which went through. You know, and that that went through and abortion became legal.
And then when she came, when she sort of accessed that mantle she was quite viciously attacked. But eventually, you know it was a different approach, a much softer approach from what was Operation Rescue, that they moved into somewhere where Norma was working. They befriended her in a number of ways and then Norma basically slipped on to the other side.

HM: Before we get to a conversion, you know the period after the decision was made, she remained anonymous. I mean she was Jane Roe. When you spoke were there in the interviews, did you figure out why she decided to go public and have this period where she was actually an abortion rights activist?

TK: I mean I think Norma… I mean there's different kinds of people you know across the planet. You know some people who want to grace it and be evident and benefit mankind but don't really want to be in the forefront if you like. They don't want to be in front of the camera. They’re more b=behind the scenes types. And Norma was not one of those, you know. Norma I think wanted the limelight in a way, and got it in quite a magnificent fashion. She lived a very thorough full life. It's tragic that she died so young, but I mean she certainly lived 69 amazingly for years, and accomplished massive amounts, and brought focus onto this issue in all kinds of ways. But the problem with Norma was, is I feel that she… if there was a problem, is that she lived a life more as an effect as opposed to a cause. And I think that you know being an effect sometimes means that we're being reactive to things as opposed to proactive.

HM: Well it is a matter of fact, you know, people have suggested she was used as a pawn first by those who wanted abortion rights, and later by those who opposed them. Did you get that sense from her?

TK: Well like as I said, it's kind of ironic that she was used as a pawn without question. A pawn, you know, on a chessboard. Well you know I would say, she was used as a queen actually. A pawn doesn't have any power. She was used as a queen, but nevertheless manipulated by the hand in the brain of a number of human beings. The thing is is that she reveled in it. I think, you know I have to say that I think she enjoyed that, and used it very very well. She was a very good spokesperson for the pro-choice and then alternatively, she became a terrific advocate for pro-life.

HM: Explain to us how it is that she found religion because this is a woman who converted not once but twice.

TK: I think religion is, there's nothing wrong with religion. You know religious texts are very beautiful things; Muslim, Jewish, Christian, Buddhist. Whatever they are, they're all fantastic things and they're all pretty much the same. All religions are basically filled with there are inner seeds of love. And what Norma McCorvey was crying out for all her life, she was crying out for love. And she got it. She got it from pro-choice. And maybe it was waning a bit so she flipped on the other side and got it from pro-life.

HM: Was it hard for her do you think to have helped make something legal that she had later come to oppose so deeply and so profoundly.

TK: I think she was a very tormented soul. I think she had, you know certainly, in her middle to late years she had a very full life and she made a difference in an enormous way, and that's how she should be remembered. As a very important very important figure in American politics and culture. She was a good person.

HM: Mr. Kay I appreciate you taking the time to talk to us. Thank you.

TK: Thanks for your time. OK, and God bless Norma.

HM: Bye.

JD: We reached director Tony Kaye in Los Angeles. Mr. Kaye interviewed Norman McCorvey several times for his documentary about abortion called Lake of Fire. Norma McCorvey, Jane Roe of Roe versus Wade died on the weekend. She was 69 years old.

[Music]

As It Happens fan

JD: Finding the right voice for us is very important. Producers scour the web. They scroll through social networks, they cold call people all over the world in an attempt to find the right voice for each story to connect you to the story. But just as much as we like to make those calls, we love it when you return the favor and call us.

SOUNDCLIP

[Sound: Beep]

Hello Talkback. This is Alison Asbury, from Val-David, Quebec. I listen to your show whenever I can. I don't have a computer so I'm using the radio. It means a great deal to me, and I want to thank you for all your wonderful work. I’m an elderly person with a terminal case of bone marrow cancer. So I've been sick for quite a while, but I always liked your program, and tonight was just, I could say in French, “Elle m’a tremble d’émotion” when I heard when I heard you talking with Mr. Sean O’Leary from Kanata about his 16 year old daughter's huge problem with drugs. What a heartfelt interview. Thank you so much. And then hearing Robert Hilliard, talking about the family of a murdered Mexican boy right at the border there, it just so much to me that you care about these things too. And that's what I hear about the collapsed snow fort in Nova Scotia, I'm almost crying hearing about the golden retriever dog tugging on his coat there. I have a big dog too and I'm all alone and somehow I feel like dogs are wonderful. But that neighbor who helped him too was really something, and I was so glad they all got out alive. It's just amazing.
And then the best thing when you talked to the planetary geologist Kevin [Kirby] Runyon I think it was, talking about the marvels of our beautiful solar system, it's fascinating. My father was a geologist too and one of the first questions when I visited my youngest granddaughter in Pennsylvania, I think she was about four. It was a huge storm and her parents were out and I was babysitting. So I put her… terrible thunder and I put her into the parents’ bed beside me and the first thing she asked me is “Grandma, what’s in the middle of the earth I want to know what–“ [Sound: laughter]I said, “I don't know.” But anyway now I know, you have to ask a planetary geologist.
Anyway thank you so much for your work. I’m really enthusiastic and you're one of the marvels of our Canadian communications system. Thanks CBC. Bye.

JD: Thank you Alison, Alison Asbury for your kind words. They meant a lot.
To comment on anything you hear on the program, good or bad, you can find us on Twitter and Facebook. Both those accounts CBC As It Happens. Or you can e-mail us aih@cbc.ca. But please, we really really do love to hear your voices. So do give us a call – 416 205 5687.

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

Feb 22, 2017 episode transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode