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 2017

The AIH Transcript for November 1, 2017

Hosts: Carol Off and Jeff Douglas

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

CAROL OFF: Hello, I'm Carol off.

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

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight:

CO: It started with one accident. It ended with a wall of fire that enveloped 14 vehicles, including two fuel tankers. Our guest describes what she saw last night on Ontario's busy Highway 400.

JD: Somebody up there doesn't like them. The Premier of the North West Territories has a message for politicians down south, when it comes to Arctic drilling: you're not the boss of us.

CO: They're literally powerless. After Australia cuts off electricity and water to the Manus Island Detention Centre, hundreds of detained refugees refuse orders to leave — because they have nowhere to go.

JD: Double-cross examination. 73 years after someone gave away the hiding place of Anne Frank and her family and friends, a retired FBI agent sets out to discover who exactly betrayed them.

CO: Shake that anti-shaking thing. New York moves to stop busting people for busting a move — finally repealing a 91-year-old law that prohibited dancing in most of the city's clubs, bars, and restaurants.

JD: And...stolen moments. Author David A. Robertson wins the Governor General's Award for an illustrated children's book about a young girl and her grandmother, and the pain of residential schools.

As It Happens, the Wednesday edition. Radio that knows sometimes you can judge a book by what it uncovers.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: Highway 400 crash, Manus Island detainees, Governor General Award-winning author

Highway 400 crash

Guest: Luba Zariczny

JD: A stretch of highway 400 is still strewn with twisted metal, charred vehicles and the black soot. The busy highway runs north from Toronto to the city of Barrie and farther north to Ontario cottage country. And last night, it was the scene of a deadly multi-vehicle collision, where police say a fuel tanker slammed into traffic. It caused a 14-vehicle pileup, enormous fires and multiple explosions. At least three people are dead. Luba Zariczny was southbound on the 400 when the crash happened. We reached her in Mississauga.

CO: Luba, at what point did you realize that there was this horrible pile up on the highway?

LUBA ZARICZNY: I was probably I would say about 200 or 300 meters away from the actual accident, when I saw emergency lights as well as a big flame. But I didn't realize how massive this thing actually was until I got up really up close and personal with the actual flames. I was just on the southbound lanes, driving by. The heat was immense. The moment I pulled over, I could see a fuel tanker as well as multiple cars just completely engulfed in flames.

CO: And why did you stop?

LZ: I, personally, stopped just to see if the people beside me were OK. But as well as to take the video so that way people knew like what exactly was going on on the highways. Hopefully prevent people from getting stuck in the traffic. It looked like it was just a bunch of mushroom cloud explosions of fire going up into the sky — a lot of black smoke covering the top as well. I witnessed sparks flying off from the whole accident. I'm only assuming it's from the electrical, but there were people just off the side of the road. There was a bunch of cars just stalled like people just dropped their cars and just went off to the side. There was one car I had witnessed that had its emergency lights but no people in it. So I'm assuming those were the people that that you know got out of their cars fast enough.

CO: And you could see what they're describing as this extraordinary tangled and twisted wreckage that was there that where people who were in this accident who didn't get out in time. That's also the case.

LZ: Honestly, I would not be surprised. When I was recording the video, I even parts of it off because, near the end, I was saying that there's definitely people who have passed. I only saw maybe a few people, but I would not be surprised if there was more.

CO: There was already first responders there because there had been another accident with three cars on northbound highway. That’s the reason why traffic was slowed, and perhaps, the reason why this accident happened. Did you see the first accident as you were coming south?

LZ: I actually did not see the accident. But it when I did pull over, I normally checked my Twitter to see like the updates for the traffic. And that's when I noticed OPP had reported that there was already an accident about a half-hour prior to that with a car in the left lane blocking. And then, soon after, there was another post saying that there was a collision, multiple vehicles involved and that's when I was looking to my left-hand side and there it was.

CO: And we know that multiple vehicles — 14 vehicles — involved in this: Four trucks, two carrying fuel. So that was the fireball you saw. It was the fuel trucks, right?

LZ: Yeah, and, like I said, I only really ever saw the one fuel truck in about six to seven cars. So to know that there was a lot more involved is just insane.

CO: The truck that plowed into this pile up — that actually sort of started this accident — was a fuel truck. I’ll just read you a bit of the OPP commissioner statement about it says, “First of all, it's a miracle that we didn't have 25 people killed down there because of the size of it.” And it says all the technology in the world won't help in a case where the traffic is stopped on the road in front of you, and you're going too fast with a full load and not paying attention. Already, even as they start the investigation, they believe this was carelessness on the part of a driver.

LZ: Oh, most definitely. I've seen people on the 400 easily going 140-150 at times. And they're just weaving in and out of traffic, not caring for anybody else beside them.

CO: And you’ve seen this of trucks as well?

LZ: A few trucks. I've not seen way too many of them speeding, but they still are definitely going over the speed limit, especially with construction on the roads and it being 80 kilometers an hour. If you're going 120, there's not enough time to completely break and make a full stop.

CO: Last night was a clear, dry night, wasn't it? I mean there was a good, strong moon and there was nothing on the road, was there?

LZ: When I had left Barrie, I’m not too sure in Innisfil, like the roads seemed clear for me when I was driving, no problems. In Barrie, there was a little bit of rain at the time when the kids were trick or treating. But nothing that wouldn’t of you know potentially dried up by the time I left.

CO: I mean when you witness something like this you pulled off to do to take some video. It must be affecting you. I mean this is something that you don't see every day?

LZ: Well, definitely not. This is the first of its kind that I've seen. I figured it's so intense — somebody must see it. And I just wasn't expecting it to catch so many people's attention like that so quickly as well. But I was just glad that I was there at the time, so that way people can see you know what happens when people are either distracted or speeding like we all need to just take our time. There's no rush to get anywhere.

CO: I'm sure everyone in your family is happy that you're OK when you got home. And I am too. Luba, it's good to talk to you. Thank you.

LZ: Perfect! Thank you so much.

JD: Luba Zariczny was a witness to a fatal pileup on highway 400, an hour north of Toronto last night. We reached her in Mississauga. For the latest news on this story, go to: www.cbc.a/news.

[Music: Prog rock]

Manus Island detainees

Guest: Nick McKim

JD: The government of Australia has officially shuttered its immigration detention centre on Manus Island. There is no electricity, no running water, no staff. But more than 600 refugees and asylum seekers are refusing to leave. Australia has refused to take them, and detainees fear for their safety outside the centre itself, where refugees have reportedly suffered violent attacks. Farhad Rahmati is an Iranian detainee who has been on Manus Island for five years. He sent us this recording via WhatsApp on Wednesday morning.

SOUNDCLIP

FARHAD RAHMATI: This morning, they are turning the heat on at the maximum level. And they cut our power and electricity and water. There is no toilets, no food since yesterday. Basically, Australia is running us into hunger strikes — to starve us and kill us here. We call it “Dead City”, basically, it means when you have no hope at a future. So yes, it's Dead City here.

JD: That was Farhad Rahmati, an Iranian detainee on Manus Island. Nick McKim is an Australian Greens Senator who is on Manus Island this week. And that is where we reached him.

CO: Senator McKim, we just heard that clip from Farhad Rahmati, telling us what is going on there. He calls it Dead City; he says they're trying to kill people there. What is the situation as you understand it?

NICK MCKIM: Well, the situation is as we’ve just heard. There is no drinkable water and there is no food going into the detention centre. There is no electricity — that has been cut off — and there is no medication. Over 20 per cent of the people in there are on anti-depressant medication. And there are obviously significant mental health issues facing over 600 people, most of whom have actually been in that detention centre hellhole for over four-and-a-half years.

CO: Including the man we just heard from. He's been there for five years. The Australian government has ordered this detention centre to be shut down. And this comes after the Papua New Guinea Supreme Court ruled that the operation was illegal. So what are these people supposed to do? Where is Farhad and the other 600 detainees. Where are they supposed to go?

NM: Well, that's exactly the point that I am making. In this centre, they've witnessed murder. They’ve witnessed assaults from the guards in the centre on multiple occasions. On Good Friday, earlier this year, the Papua New Guinean navy assaulted the base with submachine guns, firing rounds into the detainees sleeping quarters. They loaded up a naval vehicle and tried to storm the base by ramming it through the gates. But despite all of the traveling of their human rights in that centre, the detainees genuinely still believe that it is the least unsafe place for them. And that's why they're determined to stay, no matter what the challenge. The Australian government is saying they should come into the town of Lorengau, which is the capital town of the Province of Manus Island. Now, locals have engaged in a significant number of quite vicious attacks on the detainees with knives and machetes when some of the detainees have been on the streets in the town. And some of those attacks have been so serious that the victims have had to be medically evacuated. So everywhere these guys turn is danger. And frankly, Carol, I can't describe this in any other why than as a humanitarian catastrophe.

CO: But they're supposed to go to Lorengau, as you mentioned, and there is supposed to have been a facility established. What have you seen in that? What is what is being made available to these detainees if they should move to this other facility?

NM: The Australian government is claiming that there are actually three facilities ready. The problem is that one of those facilities is effectively a prison, and they’re proposing to squeeze three or four of the detainees into tiny, little cells. The second facility is complete, but it is an open-facility with no fences, and the detainees believe that their lives will be at risk. The third facility is still a construction site, and the U.N. HCR representative on the ground visited that site and has made public statements that the site is in no way complete.

CO: We've heard from Australia's Immigration Minister Peter Dutton, who has said that these detainees… he's accused them of what he's calls “subterfuge” in their claims to have safety concerns. He doesn't believe it. What's your understanding? How do you respond to Peter Dutton?

NM: This is just Peter Dutton, he’s been engaged in a years-long campaign to dehumanize people. The conditions in this prison camp, and also Australia’s prison camp on another Pacific island, sit fairly and squarely within the international definition of torture.

CO: What does the United Nations say? What does the international community… how are they reacting to this and commenting on this?

NM: Well, the United Nations has been abundantly clear in saying that conditions on Manus Island are unacceptable, that they constitute a denial of fundamental human rights and they've also been abundant and clear that the men on Manus Island remain Australia’s responsibility. And it is also repeatedly found that Australia is in breach of its obligations to ensure that people are not subjected to torture.

CO: But this has been going on for five years now on Manus Island. The evidence you're citing here has been documented. It includes torture, trauma, mental illness, six deaths, including one murder, violent attacks by locals and the international aid organizations confirming what you're saying about these conditions. So what are the legal obligations of Australia?

NM: Ultimately — even the United Nations has condemned Australia’s actions repeatedly — Australia is currently run by a government that has elements of fascism and racism. We're seeing a reflection of those awful and terrible values in the way that my country is horrendously treating people who innocent of any crime, and arguably who’s only mistake was choosing Australia to reach out a hand to and ask for help.

CO: Many of these people they've been on antidepressants. They're going through psychotropic withdrawal symptoms. They have no food or water. The electricity is cut. Apparently, some of them are digging in the ground to try and see if they can get some water. What do you think is going to happen? What is going to be the fate of these 600 men?

NM: I honestly don't know. I mean it's a humanitarian calamity. It’s just beyond belief that this is happening in the 21st century. I have very grave concerns. Not only for the health, welfare and safety of the 600 men today, but I actually have very grave concerns for their lives.

CO: Senator McKim, we will leave it there. We'll be following this story. I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

NM: Thank you very much, Carol. I appreciate your time.

JD: Nick McKim is an Australian Greens Senator, currently on Manus Island. And that is where we reached him.

[Music: Folk rock]

New York attack follow-up

JD: “He stopped the carnage moments after it began.” That is how New York's police commissioner described the actions of Officer Ryan Nash, who was at a nearby high school yesterday when the attacker drove onto the bicycle path and killed eight people. According to the New York Times, Officer Nash rushed to the scene and fired several shots — hitting the suspect in the abdomen. The suspect has been charged, and officials are calling the attack terror-related. Earlier today, during a press conference, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo commended Officer Nash for his actions.

SOUNDCLIP

ANDREW CUOMO: It's also important to remember that while the leadership of the police departments is top-shelf, Officer Nash, five years on the job, 28-years-old, he was a hero. And the NYPD is not just the leadership; it's the men and women who are out there every day. Who are on the first line and I think Officer Nash really showed how important they are and how talented and how brave. So we all applaud and congratulate him. I spoke to the Homeland Security Secretary yesterday, who pledges full coordination with all the federal efforts and the FBI. I think it's important that we are all working as one. And in this kind of situation, there is no alternative. This is not a time to have politics. This is not a time to point fingers. This is not a time to find blame. It's a time to come together and work for a common goal.

JD: That was New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, speaking earlier today about yesterday's attack in New York City.

[Music: Orchestral]

Governor General’s Award winner David A. Robertson

Guest: David A. Robertson

HD: It’s poetic and it is heartbreaking. And now, David A. Robertson's children's book has won a Governor General's Literary Award. The winners of the GG's were announced today. And Mr. Robertson and illustrator Julie flett won in the Young People's Literature — Illustrated Books category. “When We Were Alone” tells the story of a young Indigenous girl who is curious about her grandmother's past as a student at a residential school. We reached David Robertson in Winnipeg.

CO: David, first of all, big congratulations to you.

DAVID A. ROBERTSON: Oh, thank you so much. I appreciate it.

CO: And this story — this book — “When We Were Alone” in the Young People's Literature category… this is a beautiful book. Thank you.

DR: You know I appreciate it. I mean I love hearing that. For me, like the award — any recognition — it just means more people are reading the book. And for me, that's what's most important: to get it in the hands of as many people as possible.

CO: This is a story for children, and it is a conversation between a grandmother and her granddaughter. Can you tell us about the story?

DR: Yeah. I mean it's just like that. It’s a grandmother and a grandchild. And that's what I think is really important: that intergenerational connection. I think that's where healing comes from. And so this is just a book where a grandchild notices things about a grandmother: the way she wears her hair, the way she wears her clothing, the language she speaks, her connection to family and she asks just innocent questions as children do. And the grandmother answers in two ways. She answers at first by associating it back to her experience at residential school. And then, follows it up always with a statement of identity reclamation and the empowerment for her that comes with it. And so it's really a gentle introduction to the residential school system. And it's really a book about identity and what it's like to lose it and what it's like to reclaim it.

CO: There's another story why do you grow your hair so long? And I wonder if you could just read that for us?

DR: Yeah, I'd love to. So the grandchild asked her about her hair and the grandmother responds in this way. When I was your age, at home in my community, my friends and I grew our hair long. Just like our people have always done. It made us feel strong and proud. But at the school I went too far away from home, they cut off all our hair. Our strands of hair mixed together on the ground like blades of grass. Why did you have to wear your hair like that, Nohkom? I asked. They didn't like that we were proud. They wanted us to be like everybody else. But sometimes in the spring, when we were alone, and the grass had grown so long and thick in the field we would pick the blades from the ground. We would braid them into the shorthair they had given us and we would have long hair again. And this made us happy. Now, I always wear my hair very long.

CO: And you know besides just being a beautiful story in the series of these anecdotes — these conversations — that as you point out, each one ends with this affirmation. And so why was that important for you to include that? To give this not a story about a horrible and tragic moment, but something where part of self was recovered?

DR: Well, we talk about reconciliation and part of that is sharing truths. And that leads to healing and I think it's important to emulate that process through this book. And you know a great example of that as an elder, Betty Ross, who I'm very close with. She’s one of the people that inspired this book. The first time she ever shared her story with me about her experience across residential school when she was done, she said that she had seven grandchildren and that she had never hugged them. And I'd asked her you know how could you never hug your grandchildren? I just didn't understand that. And she had said very simply: it’s because I was never hugged. But then this amazing thing happened. About a month after she had shared her story, she called me and said I just wanted to tell you, Dave. I hugged my grandchildren today. And that came from the healing power of really storytelling.

CO: Who is this book written for?

DR: You know, I think it's written for all Canadians. I think it's written for non-Indigenous children. I think that's an important part of the process of reconciliation that we understand the history and we appreciate and understand the impact of it. But also, for Indigenous children because I think they can find empowerment in this story as well. The first person I read the story to was my daughter. And when we were done reading the story together, she wanted to talk to my dad — her grandpa — who attended day school in Norway House and my grandmother was a residential school survivor. And she got grandpa on the phone and she said Grandpa, will you teach me Cree? And that was this amazing moment of healing as well. So I think it's for everybody. I think I would like every Canadian to know this history.

CO: How old were you when you learned about your own grandmother and your father being sent away to school?

DR: You know, Carol I was a man at that point. I was in my 20s, and my grandmother had already passed away. My dad, when I was younger, was told not to teach us about who we were as indigenous peoples because that was the time that they were in. He thought we would be better off. So it wasn't until we kind of went through our own process of healing that I learned about my grandmother's experience and my dad's experience. And it was a healing moment for us as well. And it helped me to become informed about who I was.

CO: And certainly for children who are reading this — Indigenous children. This would be a way for them to begin a discussion about what happened to their family members. But, as you say, this is not just for Indigenous children. This is for all children. What questions do you think that children, any child, would have reading this book? What would they want to know after they read it?

DR: You know, I've had the privilege of going to hundreds of schools across Canada since the book was published. And kids have such amazing questions for me. They want to know if kids were able to bring stuffies to the classroom. They want to know why kids had to wear uniforms and the difference between wearing a team uniform and a school uniform. They want to know about you know why children weren't allowed to stay with their parents? And that dialogue shows me that they're engaged, but also that they want to learn more. And that's when I think real change happens.

CO: And you know the title is “When We Were Alone” and that last story you talk about not seeing their parents. The kids couldn't even see their own siblings who were there. And the last exchange between the grandmother and the grandchild: why couldn't you see your brother when you were there? And they said well, they had to keep us apart because we had to be separated like day and night. And she says, “But sometimes in the winter, when we were alone, and we were sure that nobody could see us. We would find each other. We would take off our mitts. And the crisp, cold air, we would hold hands so we could be with each other. And this made us happy. Now Nohkom says, as she reached over and held my uncle's hand and mine. I'm always with my family. Do you feel that this will bring families together?

DR: I hope so. I think I really do. And I think part of that coming together is the ability to share stories together. This book is not my story. It is not a story that is Julie's story either — the illustrator. I think we both recognize that it is the story of our survivors and the children who did not survive. And what we were trying to do with this book is to honor their memory. And to honor what they had gone through. And in the spirit of reconciliation and healing, and I really hope that is something that happens from this book.

CO: David, it's beautifully written, beautifully illustrated. Thank you and congratulations again.

DR: Thank you so much for having me on, Carol.

JD: David A. Robertson is the author of the illustrated children's book “When We Were Alone”. Today, that book, which is illustrated by Julie flett, won the Governor General's Literary Award for Young People's Illustrated Books. We reached David A. Robertson in Winnipeg.

Part 2: North West Territories premier, Anne Frank investigation

North West Territories premier

Guest: Bob McLeod

Northwest Territories Premier Bob McLeod is in Ottawa today, with a message for the south. He told federal government officials that the territories can make their own decisions about oil and gas exploration. The comments come nearly a year after a moratorium was placed on drilling in the Arctic Ocean. We reached Premier Bob McLeod in Ottawa.

CO: Premier McLeod you've issued a red alert calling for an urgent debate. What's your beef?

BOB MCLEOD: Well, I guess getting very concerned about the fact that our economy is not doing that well. And specifically, the fact that oil and gas production — we've always been an oil and gas-producing territory, going back as far as 1936 — and for over a year now, for the first time, we have produced zero molecules of oil and gas. So our production is down to nothing.

CO: And when say a year ago, you’re speaking when Prime Minister Trudeau and then President Barack Obama announced this ban on offshore oil and gas activity in the Arctic. And so it was a five-year moratorium put on development in Canada — in the north. So effect is that then?

BM: Let me correct you on that…

CO: Sure.

BM: it's a permanent moratorium, with a review after five years. So that's the biggest part of it. And also, the Norman Wells, which has been producing since 1936, the pipeline requires some repairs. And the National Energy Board has taken over a year to decide what it's going to do. Only now has it been holding public hearings. Now, they've extended them to next year. And, as you know, to get anything done in the north, especially the far-north, it takes at least a year of planning. So if we miss the next opportunity, we're missing a whole year.

CO: So you're looking at a possibility — a strong possibility — that there will not be a return to gas and oil development in the Arctic?

BM That’s right. And Imperial Oil that was operating in Norman Wells have moved and all of their jobs, except for care and maintenance people. They moved them south. And so when the permanent moratorium was announced, there was no accompanying economic strategy, even though we're going to be leaving trillions of dollars of oil and gas and leaving it in the ground. There is no economic strategy. And you know when Newfoundland had a moratorium on fish the federal government was there with nine-billion dollars for training and switching to alternative sectors in their economy.

CO: So what are you asking for? Are you asking to be able to return to the oil and gas production? Or are you asking that the federal government provide some way of developing an alternative economy to a fossil fuel-dependent one?

BM: Well, I think we're asking for all of those things. I think first and foremost, is that northerners should be the ones making decisions on development and how that affects them. We shouldn't be told to shut down our economy so that people in southern Canada can continue to drive their vehicles. And can continue to produce oil and gas. And continue to have thousands, if not millions, of manufacturing jobs that are is issuing greenhouse gas emissions. We're also asking that you know we should have an economic development plan. I just came back from Iceland, where I saw what other Arctic countries are doing. And they have very clear plans for strong, sustainable development in the Arctic. And we think we should do something similar in Canada. Or else we'll continue to fall behind.

CO: All right. So you're saying it's a double standard. That in the south — in Alberta, and out east — they're able to continue with oil and gas development. And you're not allowed to, is that right?

BM: That's correct. And also, that they can decide what areas they could invest in, or what areas they can have development in. And that's been taken away from us.

CO: But in the Northwest Territories, you know better than anyone the effects that climate change is having. And you have said yourself that you've seen the changes in the north. You've seen the lack of hunting, the animals, that caribou herds have been diminished so much. The permafrost is melting. Forest fires are more common. The coastal erosion and the storms that have come from having less ice in the Beaufort Sea. You have cited all these things as the evidence of what climate change has done. So why do you want to continue to contribute to that?

BM: Well, I mean that's why I want to start a debate in Canada because the rest of Canada it doesn't seem to bother them that you know climate change is affecting us. They still want to go continue with their lifestyles in the way things are going. They want to continue to produce oil and gas.

CO: But you do too. You want to produce it too. You want to have an equal opportunity to pollute?

BM: No, I'm saying that our contribution to greenhouse gas emissions is about less than 1 per cent of the total greenhouse gas emissions in Canada. Yet, we're being forced to shut our economies down. That's what I'm saying. They're taking all our jobs away.

CO: What do you want Ottawa to do then?

BM: Well, what I want is we want jobs — good-paying jobs. We want investments. You know I look at the other Artic countries that have the sustainable development and resource development. We think we can have the same thing. We think we need more investments in innovation. And we think we need to move on to diversify our economy so that we can get into areas like the knowledge economy, high tech and manufacturing. But that needs significant investment. The rest of Canada feels that we're not worth the investment because we're only 44-45,000 people, spread out over 33 communities. They feel that we should only be akin to a large National Park, which seems to be what people in the south appears to want. And you're dealing with the symptoms, not the problem.

CO: All right. We'll leave it there. Premier McLeod, thank you very much for speaking with us.

BM: OK, very nice talking to you, Carol. You have a nice day.

CO: Thanks, Premier.

JD: Bob McLeod is the premier of Northwest Territories. We reached him in Ottawa.

[Music: field sounds]

Australian game show couple

JD: This week, a game show called "The Wall" debuted on Australia's Seven network. And it sounds like, basically, a cross between "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" and the Plinko from "The Price is Right." And so, apparently, contestants win absurd amounts of money by answering skill-testing questions, as balls fall through a giant peg-board. A thrilling premise, I know. Oddly though, so far, Aussie's are not buying it. On Twitter, one viewer commented: "This show is so lacklustre my eight-year-old voluntarily went to bed for the first time." Another described the host as having, quote: "the charisma of a carrot". But enter a couple named Jess and Lee. Last night, the two Australians were up by nearly half-a-million bucks when things went terribly wrong for them — and terribly right for the show. Because nothing boosts ratings like a massive fail.

SOUNDCLIP

LEE: Ok, the capital city of New Zealand. This is probably one that I should know.

JESS: I should know that as well. We should both know this.

LEE: I'm leaning towards Christchurch at this stage. Auckland. Auckland, New Zealand. Which one sounds right? What have I heard in the past? Wellington. Wellington, New Zealand. No, Auckland, New Zealand. Auckland is the capital. This is a tough one! I’m going to have to pick one here.

JESS: “A”, darling. Lock in “A”.

LEE: Lock in “B: Christchurch”. Fingers crossed!

JESS: It’s OK, my love. I could be completely wrong.

JD: Yes, you could be, Jess. Or, spoiler alert, you could both be wrong, my loves. But surely no. We're talking about New Zealand, Australia's closest neighbour, right next door. So surely, I am wrong about both of you being wrong. Can we keep this unbearable suspense going just a bit longer with some dramatic music and a recap of the incredibly complicated stakes at play here?

SOUNDCLIP

HOST: If he gets it wrong, and the balls land in the million-dollar slot, this could bring you right back down to zero.

JESS: Yup.

HOST: If he gets it right, it could potentially add two-million dollars. Everybody wants you to get this right. Is it “B: Christchurch”?

[Sound: Probably a sound Michael Bay conceived of for dramatic effect]

JESS: Oh, darling. He’s going to kick himself over that.

HOST: It was “C: Wellington”.

JESS: Oh, no way! Look at me!

JD: Yes, Australian couple of Jess and Lee, losing millions of dollars last night, on the game show “The Wall” in one fell swoop for not knowing that Wellington is the capital of New Zealand.

[Music: Jazz samba]

Anne Frank investigation

Guest: Vince Pankoke

JD: It's been almost three-quarters of a century since Anne Frank, her family, and three other Jewish people were discovered by the Nazis, and sent to concentration camps. Because Ms. Frank's diary was recovered, we know a lot about their time in hiding. But it is still a mystery as to who tipped off the Nazis to their hiding spot behind a moveable bookcase in a home in Amsterdam, where they remained hidden for two years during the Holocaust. Well now, more than 70 years later, a former FBI agent is leading a new investigation into the cold case. His name is Vince Pankoke. And we reached him in Washington, DC.

CO: Mr. Pankoke, what has brought you out of retirement to investigate this 73-year-old case.

VICE PANKOKE: Well, I was contacted by a Dutch colleague of mine from the Dutch National Police, who told me that it was time for me to get out of retirement after about a year of wanting to go on cruises and sitting on beach chairs. He says I have the perfect project for you. And he explained to me that there is an effort being formed where they want a cold case investigation done into the mystery surrounding what led up to the arrest of Anne Frank and the seven others.

CO: All right. So let's just look… for people who need to be reminded of what we do know what happened. And just review this story and Anne Frank and her family, and the others who were behind that bookcase, hidden on that street in Amsterdam. What happened?

VP: Well, what happened was they were in hiding for a little bit more than two years, during the Nazi occupation. They were doing this to avoid: one, being shipped off to the camps. But what prompted them to go into hiding was the call up of Anne’s sister, Margo, to go to a work camp. And often times that spelled certain death. On August 4^th, of 1944, all of a sudden, there was a Gestapo raid at the building that housed Otto Frank's business. And behind the business, there was an annex area where they were actually hidden. So we know that the arrest took place on that date. And we know that a Nazi Gestapo officer by the name of Karl Silberbauer actually led the arrest.

CO: There's this curious detail that people have pondered over for a long time. Anne makes reference to a little knock that she heard months before that raid. Is that one of the things you are investigating?

VP: That is one of the things we're investigating. And if you've ever visited the Anne Frank house, and I encourage everybody to do it, you will quickly see how tight and confined it’s orders were. How the buildings were on top of one another, and how the annex actually faced a closed-in courtyard area that was surrounded in that block of buildings. and that anybody that would have been around there may have heard the arguments that Anne documented between the other family, the van Pels. So that knock is so important. We're going to actually do sound tests throughout that building and the courtyard to determine just how far some could travel.

CO: The case went cold so long ago because, well there were just so many other cases I suppose, but also they didn't have the tools that you have now. What will you use in order to try and find out what might have happened to that family?

VP: We have one of the founders of the FBI’s profiling unit, Dr. Roger Depue on board as an adviser. And we're also appealing to the public, something that wasn't done back in the 1940s in 1960s, when the other investigations went on. But one of the most important things is the use of artificial intelligence computer databases that are going to be loaded with every bit of information that we can find from that time period about the arrest, about all the statements that were given. Everything is going to be loaded into this database. And the artificial intelligence program will be able to make connections and associations of dates, persons and locations that would take a human investigator a minimum of 10 years to come up with.

CO: We know that there were about 100,000 Jews who were deported from Holland — from the Netherlands. There were about 30,000 — almost 30,000 — who were hidden from the Germans during the occupation. And that there is this this this schism in this society between those who were actually those who helped to hide Jews, and there were those who betrayed the Jews. Do you have profiles? Do you have suspects?

VP: We do. We do have suspects. And you bring up such an important part and that is whether there were collaborators, and then there were people that were active and passive resistance that were helping to hide them and feed the people. The point of our investigation is not to judge anyone. We're just presenting the facts and that's it. We're going to it history — we're going to let society — work out whether or not anybody should be judged.

CO: But if you are able to find someone who betrayed Anne Frank and the others, it's possible — even likely that the person's is dead — that you don't you won't have someone to actually question. So what's the point of the exercise? What do you hope is accomplished through this?

VP: You know my daughter sent me a little saying here that she saw on Instagram and that was you know the world will not perish from those who do evil, but by those who stand by and do nothing. And I want to make sure that you know the world knows that there is a conscience out there. And that time doesn't heal the evil. The only thing that can heal the evil is trying to investigate this, trying to show the people of the world that you know we can still have justice — maybe not a prosecution because yes, the person probably has passed away years ago. But if people see that there is an element that we'll never forget, never let it happen again, or always remember and try to seek justice. We think that that will be you know a just cause for going forward with this after 73 years.

CO: Mr. Pankoke, I wish you success in this endeavor. And I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

VP: Well, thank you very much.

JD: Vince Pankoke is a retired FBI agent. He is leading an investigation into who betrayed Anne Frank and her family and friends. We reached him in Washington D.C. His findings will be turned into a podcast, and possibly a documentary, by Proditione Media. You can find more on this story on our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Folk]

Bus resignation

JD: When a reporter got hold of Sydney Hardy yesterday, Mr. Hardy said, quote, "I have no further comment to make." Now, sometimes people say that because they haven't yet figured out a further comment. That's not the case for Mr. Hardy. He has no further comment because he already made the furthest comments. Sydney Hardy ran a bus company in Somerset, England called "Nippybus", he had 17 busses. And until recently, his fleet supplied local transit service and service to local schools. And then, on Sunday night, he abruptly dissolved that company — in much the same way you might dissolve a hot dog in a vat of acid. To the public, Mr. Hardy announced, quote, "Nippybus has ceased operational activity with immediate effect." Unquote. Now, you might assume that the kind of person who would say he'd "ceased operational activity" is incapable of expressing himself clearly. You would be wrong. Because in a memo he sent to staff, Mr. Hardy was clear. He said, quote, "There is a difference between giving up and knowing when you have had enough. I have had enough, and realize I cannot work with you, the people I employ, a moment longer." Unfortunately, he went on, quote, "There comes a time in any relationship when you just have to say 'Forget it'" — he used a different verb there, actually — "say goodbye, and move on. This is my time! I am quitting to pursue my dream of not having to work here." Unquote. Now, it's clear that Mr. Hardy is deeply pleased with his hilarious farewell. But Somerset commuters, schoolchildren, and Nippybus drivers and staff aren't amused. Because this is a bus stop they really can't use.

Part 3: MMIWG report, Cabaret Law, Dennis Banks obit

MMIWG report

Guest: Brian Eyolfson

JD: The commissioners running the inquiry into missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls say they need more time, and they need more money. The inquiry is supposed to wrap up 12 months from today. But repeated delays have left families frustrated. And calls continue for a complete restart. Well this morning, the inquiry's commissioners released their interm report. It blames bureaucratic red tape for their troubles, and it warns against rushing, now that the work has begun. Brian Eyolfson is one of the commissioners of the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls Inquiry. We reached him in Ottawa.

CO: Mr. Eyolfson, the inquiry was supposed to deliver its final report one year from today. How much more time do you think that you and your fellow commissioners are going to need?

BRIAN EYOLFSON Well, at this point, I can't say exactly how much more time. We are scheduled to deliver the final report a year from today. However, we do plan to ask for more time, and additional funds to do our work. Because we think we can do a much better job with more time. There have been, as of recently, over 900 people who have registered to come and share their truths with us. So there's a lot of people that want to speak to us. And I think to do this job well we need more time.

CO: People are very frustrated. So why the delays? What's holding you up?

BE: Well, we did have some challenges in getting up and running because we started with effectively nothing but a piece of paper. And I'm not sure that people realised how much work had to go on behind the scenes to hire staff and get offices in place. But for quite a few months now, we've been running our hearings and meeting with advisory groups. So we started our first community hearing in Whitehorse the end of May and last June. Recently, we had very large hearings in Winnipeg. We were in Smithers. And very soon we're going to Edmonton and Saskatoon, Rankin Inlet. And we will be continuing with our community hearings.

CO: And I want to go to what you're actually hearing. But just on the problem of getting things up and running. So I mean this isn’t the first federally-funded inquiry Canada has had. I mean you can’t get phones to work. You've got red tape delays. You've got all these problems for months at a time. I mean were you're not supported?

BE: Well, we are supported by government. But I mean it is the first time that I've been a commissioner in a national inquiry. And I wasn't really handed a manual on how to do this. So we've been working and doing our best to get up and running, which like I said, we've done most of that work. We've moved beyond that, and we have a lot of momentum now in terms of getting out and meeting with families, having our hearings and hearing people's stories and truths.

CO: What are you hearing? What is the principal thing? Or if there’s a refrain that you're hearing throughout these testimonies, what is it?

BE: Well, there are a number of common themes that we're hearing. We're hearing a lot of people telling us about what they feel they've experienced in terms of racial discrimination or various forms of discrimination, whether they're a combination of racism or sexism. We've also heard about intergenerational effects of residential schools and how that impacts on families. And we’ve heard stories about the ongoing legacy of colonialism and how it continues to affect people today on an ongoing basis.

CO: And these are things we have heard elsewhere. We certainly heard this through the Truth and Reconciliation process. How will you get down to the issue of the actual women — missing women — and the expectations that these families have. They want to see proper investigations into the deaths of the women and girls in their family. They want to actually see police cases reopened. Are you going to be able to show some of the shoddy work that has been done by police forces across the country?

BE: So, as part of our mandate, we can't reopen or reinvestigate police cases. But we can certainly look at the way investigations have been done in police matters. So we can in a sense investigate the investigator. Also with our mandate though where we see information that we feel should be referred to appropriate authorities we can do that. But, in addition, in our interim report, which we just released, we have a recommendation that the federal government work with the provinces and territories to set up a police task force that can look at some of these cases. Because families and survivors really want answers, and I think they deserve that.

CO: And what have you heard? What is your sense of how these investigations have been conducted?

BE: Well, at this point, we're just hearing from the families. Many of them have been involved with police investigations, so we're starting to gather that information. So it's a bit early to comment on that. We're going to continue to gather more information and look at patterns and make findings at a later date for recommendations for our final report.

CO: What do you say to the families and Indigenous leaders who are saying that your inquiry needs a complete reset?

BE: Well, we've put a lot of work into putting this inquiry together and we're up and running and we've been conducting hearings. In my view, those hearings have been going very well. Just last week, in Winnipeg, I think we heard from approximately 104 people at the hearing. And that was over a five-day period. And I think that may be a record for a public inquiry in Canada. So a lot of people are being able to tell their stories. I think by the end of this week, we'll have heard from approximately 330 people. And, like I said, we have over 900 people registered. So it would seem like a shame to sort of put a stop to this when we are going full ahead with a lot of momentum right now and participation.

CO: Well, maybe the past week has been an improvement. But we've heard from many people — witnesses, and people a part of this — who have been quite disappointed in how this this inquiry has been going. So what do you say to them?

BE: Well, I would say you know if they're able to watch you know how the hearings are unfolding, and to observe the work that's being done — to have a look at our interim report. I think we're doing a lot of good work, and we're going to continue to do so in the weeks that come in. And in the very near future. So there's a lot of good work being done.

CO: All right. We'll leave it there. Mr. Eyolfson, thank you.

BE: Thank you very much.

JD: Brian Eyolfson is a commissioner of the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls Inquiry. We reached him in Ottawa.

[Music: Lullaby]

For The Record: Plastic fish

JD: Adam Turnbull's Facebook post reads, "pick up your garbage." His photos tell you why. They show the Alberta angler holding up a good-sized pike. Not-so-good-sized is the plastic bottle wrapper cinched around the pike's guts. As the pike had grown, the plastic wrapper had not, leaving the fish looking like a nightmarish balloon animal, that was all-too-painfully alive. Here's Mr. Turnbull telling his story to CBC Calgary's David Bell yesterday.

SOUNDCLIP

ADAM TURNBULL: When I first seen the fish in the water, I thought that it had potentially been attacked by another fish say another pike or a walleye. However, once I picked the fish out of the water, is when I noticed the plastic wrapper wrapped around it, which put me almost straight into shock. I've never seen anything that drastic on a fish before.

DAVID BELL: Does it make you mad?

AT: Absolutely, it does. I mean for me to say that I've never littered in my past would be a lie. I mean I'm sure we all have at some point. But to see the effects that fish had struggled for years definitely struck a chord with me.

DB: Dumb question, but when you pulled the fish out of the water, it was alive?

AT: Oh yeah, absolutely. It was very much alive. Like I honestly felt like I had just been on the fish on there the way that it was fighting. It didn't show any signs that it had been in any trauma.

DB: So that fish you know was probably in pain.

AT: Right, yeah, for like years. I figure every time that that fish kicked its tail to move, it was in pain. Like that rapper is very thin. But as you can tell, on the wound of the fish, it's actually a little bit wider. So I feel like every time he moves his body, it moved a little bit and just caused him a little bit more pain.

DB: Anything else people should know about your experience?

AT: Not that I can think of. I just hope that anyone, if catch a fish like this, I mean give it the chance to put it back in the water. I've had many comments saying I hope you put the fish out of its misery. Well you know, as soon as that fish touched the water, it took off like a dart. And I actually spoke with a biologist who told me that was the absolute correct thing to do because where that blockage was that fish while having problems was still able to eat. And now, with that removed, he's going to thrive.

JD: That was Medicine Hat fisherman Adam Turnbull, speaking to David Bell, of CBC Calgary yesterday.

[Music: Folk]

Cabaret Law

Guest: Rafael Espinal

JD: It's a law that's been described as "archaic and discriminatory." And for close to a century, it has stopped people from performing and dancing in public spaces. And not in some small town in middle America; in New York City. Yesterday, however, history was made. After 91 years, New York City Council voted to repeal the Cabaret Law. The law was enacted in 1926, and prohibited dancing in public spaces that sell food and drinks without a license. Critics have long argued that the law targeted people of colour, and those in the LGBT community. Rafael Espinal is a New York City Councilmember who has been leading the effort to repeal the Cabaret Law. We reached him in New York.

CO: Councillor Espinal, how did people react when this New York City law was repealed — this Cabaret Law?

RAFAEL ESPINAL: There are many emotions in New York City. There are people who have been fighting this law for decades and were very relieved and excited to see it finally pass the city council and head into the mayor's desk to be repealed. A lot of the young activists who just joining the movement felt as if they accomplished something and were able to use their power of advocacy to move local government to make a real positive change in their city.

CO: Can you take us back… I mean I don't want the whole history of it. But how did this law — this 91-year-old law — come into effect? What was its point?

RE: Well, back in the late 1920s, during Prohibition, the mayor at the time instituted this law as a way to weed out speakeasies. Because they believed at the time that if there was dancing going on in establishments it was most likely they were selling alcohol. And that was their weapon to shut down those businesses and go after what they believed at the time to be bad actors. They also believed that people were running wild in the city and creating qualified complaints. And they, again, blamed dancing for that noise. So it was used as what they believe to be a way to calm the city down from the amount of fun people were having out in their life.

CO: But a lot of these kinds of archaic laws, even if they stay on the books, people forget they're there. And eventually, they just get scrubbed out. But this law has actually been revived many times. They've used it. How over these decades has this law against dancing been used?

RE: This law, unfortunately, was being used unevenly. And mostly to go after marginalized communities: communities of colour, and the LGBT community. During the 30s, they went after the Harlem jazz scene, where we had black musicians sprouting in New York playing jazz music. In the 70s, it was used against the LGBT community, while they were organizing for their civil rights. And in the 90s, when Mayor Giuliani took office, he used it again to erase a lot of New York city's cultural history. And go after the dance revolution that was happening in neighborhoods like the Lower East Side, the East Village and, again, Caribbean and Latino communities, where he felt and believe that the crime that was happening in our city was happening because of those venues.

CO: And over the years, there have been exceptions to it. You have to get a license, which is very difficult if you want to dance. But even performers who would be in these venues had to get cabaret cards and some really extraordinary artists were compelled to do that. And then in some cases not get one like Billie Holiday.

RE: That’s totally correct. At one point in the 60s, Frank Sinatra actually protested and claimed that he wouldn't perform in New York City if they didn't allow his black counterparts to be part of the music scene. What we saw was that the card actually was used as a way to keep black musicians out. They had many strict provisions. For example, you couldn't have a criminal history or past. So that, again, took a lot of the people of colour out of that music scene of the time.

CO: And then the whole Greenwich Village coffee house scene full of dancing and music and everything else. We think of New York as being a place over all these decades where there is no license. You know you can do what you want. That dancing, music, performing, all that is so key to the energy of the city and yet, so many restrictions on that over the years, right?

RE: Yeah, it's ridiculous. I mean we're known and branded as a city that never sleeps. I think it's well known that New York City's culture actually is born through our nightlife, through our music scene and our dancing. So for the city to carry on a law that: one, has suppressed and oppressed many marginalized communities. But two, also gets in the way of New York City to be the cultural capital of the world. You know I think that now it’s important to get rid of this law. I think there was a lot of a lot of the energy that sparked this movement again was the election of Donald Trump, you know a president that is perceived as someone who's looking to oppress and suppress the citizens of this country. And New York City considers itself to be a Sanctuary City.

CO: You mentioned the activists. And I can recall over the decades, there’d always be these T-shirts would pop up: “Dance, New York City”, or “Dance or Die”. And now, I understand that that was because you weren't allowed to. Who are the activists? Who are the people who have pushed over all these decades to get these laws overturned?

RE: Many dancers and deejays from the 90s joined the movement decades ago. But more recently, it was actually a group of young artists and young deejays and young business owners in Bushwick that decided to restart the conversation and organize individuals from the past and from to day and age and get them together. And push their local government to make this positive change.

CO: And I understand only about 97 out of 25,000 establishments have a cabaret license. So what changes now that this this law is struck? How will things be different? How will these venues be changed?

RE: You know, there are still some hurdles that we have to jump over. Zoning laws are in place that regulates dancing to certain areas in the city. So, for example, right now, you can only open a dancing establishment in usually manufacturing areas, away from residential communities. But besides that what this means is that all the businesses in those zones no longer have to go through the excruciating process of cutting through red tape and bureaucratic hurdles in order to get a license to dance. So, again, this is about sending the signal that New York City is a city that's open to everyone. We will not get in the way of allowing you to fully express yourself.

CO: All right, New York. Get out there and dance. Councillor Espinal, it’s good to talk to you. Thanks.

RE: Thanks again.

JD: That was Rafael Espinal, a Brooklyn Councilmember with the New York City Council. We reached him in New York.

[Music: Jazz]

Dennis Banks obit

Guest: Lynn Salt

JD: "It is sad when mistreatment and abuse and neglect and murder against Indian people becomes common. This is where it started, and this is where it's going to end." Those were the words of Dennis Banks, a leader in the American Indian Movement, during a speech in 1973. Mr. Banks died on Sunday in Rochester, Minnesota. He was 80-years-old. Dennis Banks was a member of the Ojibwa tribe. And throughout his life, he led uprisings to protest the treatment of Indigenous people in the U.S. He is known for being a co-founder the American Indian Movement. And he came to national attention in 1973, when he led an armed occupation of the town of Wounded Knee in South Dakota. Lynn Salt was a friend of Mr. Banks. She also co-directed a documentary about his life, called "A Good Day to Die". We reached Lynn Salt in Bakersfield, California.

CO: Lynn, first of all, I'm sorry for the loss of your friend.

LYNN SALT: Thank you so much.

CO: How did you come to know Dennis Banks?

LS: I was always aware of him. I'm Choctaw; my mother spoke to me about him when I was younger. And I happened to have a script with a producer whose name in Los Angeles. And he asked me to read a book and tell him if there was a movie in it. The book was “Ojibwa Warrior” I read the book, I immediately said yes, this is a very important story to tell. And he asked me to write a one page presentation to him about it. And I did. And he sent it to Dennis Banks on Leech Lake Reservation in Minnesota. And Dennis read it and called Fred and said I'm so grateful that someone understands and came down to meet me. He felt it was very important that they dramatize in Hollywood the story with a movie star he said because they're never going to care about me. They're not going to listen to me. And I sat there staring at him saying Dennis, people need to meet you. You're here. Can we make a documentary?

CO: I want to ask you about this man that you got to know through this documentary. Dennis Banks and Russell Means, two names that all through the 70s and 80s, but mostly in the 70s, we heard so much with the American Indian Movement and the activism there. How did he — how did Dennis Banks — see his role in history?

LS: I think he was following his heart. If you know about his childhood, how he got taken away from his mother very young and he was in boarding school. He had a lot of hurt feelings about his mother most of his life. I think it affected him greatly. When we were making this documentary, we found a trove of letters — his daughter did. In the letters, he got to read about how his mother was writing to him asking about his health and they never gave them to him. And I say that because I think it affected his entire life of how he viewed the world. He moved toward activism probably not on purpose. He had children when he did go to prison, and he did, it was for stealing 15 bags of groceries to feed his children. The guy that was with him was a non-native and he was going after the money in cash register. And he did end up in prison for a few years. And he said it was the best thing that happened to me because I met activists in prison, and they told me I need to think more about who I am, learn about my people and become an activist.

CO: Anyone who followed this story in the 1970s, the most extraordinary event that Dennis Banks became so famous for was Wounded Knee. And that standoff — 71 days of occupation — in Wounded Knee, South Dakota on Pine Ridge Reservation. Staring down what… 300 United States Marshals — FBI agents — with armored cars, heavy weapons.

LS: Yes. And they didn't expect to be cut off there. They actually were going there because there was a request from the traditionals. Can you please come and help us? Because the man that was running the reservation was Native also, but he didn't like the traditional way. He was selling the land off to the government without the people's permission. And they called for AIM to help them. And AIM came and they were just going to do what they could. And instead, what happened was the government and everybody surrounded them and acted like these sort of hostile Indians taking over reservation, which was never the case. Once Dennis and Russell were there, they think they figured out this was going to be a good place to make our stand. So America if they will pay attention, and they weren't, if they do, they're going to understand that 1890 was a massacre here that's being called a battle. And we can educate them here to.

CO: Some of those scenes are seared into my own memory and into those of others. And the associations with that massacre you mentioned that happened in 1890. But then we saw Dennis Banks becoming championed by people like Jane Fonda and Marlon Brando. And then there were critics who said that Mr. Banks was kind of a self-promoter. That he was more into that than really leading the American Indian Movement. What did he say about that? What’s your sense of that?

LS: I love your question. Yes, a lot of people did. In fact, when we were asking this tribe of the Wintu Nation in Northern California and I was trying to convince them that they should support this, and they did. And there was a non-native man there who was the other side of the equation. And he actually said to the chairman well, I heard that he's just you know a circus bear. And he’s just self-promoting and everything. And it devastated me because I looked at him and I said you should not talk about someone you have no idea of his history and you don't even know him. And a lot of people have a tendency to do that. He was not self-promoting. What he was trying to do at that point in his life was to earn a living for his family. Anybody who has met him and sat in a room with him could hear his heart and see in his eyes the genuine human being that he was.

CO: He raised awareness not just in the United States, but in Canada. The American Indian Movement had its followers here as well. And this awareness he was trying to raise was about the treatment and the suffering and the conditions in which First Nations Indigenous people were living. Do you think that after all was said and done, after everything that Mr. Banks did, did he see progress through his efforts?

LS: He did. And I did talk to him. I remember we didn't get there, but when he went up to Standing Rock, he knew he was looking back at the people who are rising behind him to take the mantle. He was always saying it's the next generation. Come on you guys, it's your turn. Indian, Native or not-native, he was encouraging of everybody. And I think that is probably the moment in time when he realized the movement did not die. I think that was probably a significant moment in time where he recognized it.

CO: Lynn, I appreciate speaking with you, and hearing about Dennis Banks. Thank you.

LS: Thank you so much for caring. Thank you. Take care.

JD: Lynn Salt was a friend of the late Dennis Banks. We reached her in Los Angeles. Dennis Banks, a leader in the American Indian Movement, died last weekend. He was 80-years-old.

[Music: Bluegrass]

Beer bike banned

JD: In the late 'nineties, someone in Amsterdam had an idea: what if there were a bike that was also a bar? A mobile bar around which people would sit and drink a lot of beer, while also pedaling a long vehicle, actually four-wheeled, as it travels around a city? Oddly, the inventor of the "beer bike" woke up the morning after having that idea and still thought, "Yep, good idea." Which is how these contraptions became a staple in Amsterdam, and in other European cities. Over the years, though, various cities have un-stapled them. It turns out that, when you put a dozen people on a slow-moving vehicle and serve them beer as they ride around a picturesque city, they get a little overexcited about their informative tour. And this leads to an increase in volume — both in terms of noise, and in terms of urine. So residents of downtown Amsterdam are not fans. And now, after several unsuccessful attempts, they've finally managed to have these tours de farce banned for good. In a ruling, Amsterdam's district court said, quote, "The court agrees with the city council that the combination of traffic disruptions, anti-social behaviour, and the busy city centre justifies a ban." And so, as of today, "beer bikes" are no more. Which, like a "beer bike" itself, you could have seen coming: such a brilliant idea was bound to end in a series of extremely wasted opportunities.

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

November 1, 2017 episode transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode