Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2021

The Current Transcript for February 8, 2021

Host: Matt Galloway

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

[fclip]1856437315645[fclip]

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

MORIBA JAH: Just like we're trying to limit single-use plastics on the earth, I would say we need to limit single-use satellites.

MATT GALLOWAY: The garbage is piling up, and it's not just here on Earth. While concern grows about the waste in our oceans, space experts are ringing the alarm about the trash high above us, from old satellites to abandoned rockets. In 30 minutes, the call to flatten the curve of space junk. Also, this morning, it's Carnival season. And in New Orleans and Venice, things look very different. But the spirit of celebration remains. We'll find out how. And later, throughout this pandemic, there has been a shadow crisis shown in the numbers of opioid related overdoses. And now, some people are seeing a measure of accountability for that.

WOMAN: So, our project McKinsey referred to as, quote, turbocharging the sales engine. McKinsey told Purdue and the Sacklers how to sell more OxyContin.

MATT GALLOWAY: The global consulting company McKinsey will pay a multimillion-dollar settlement for its role in the opioid crisis. In an hour, why many believe this could set a precedent for Canadian provinces currently suing "Big Pharma". We begin, though, with Donald Trump on trial again. Good morning, I'm Matt Galloway. This is "The Current".

[Music: Theme]

What Donald Trump’s impeachment trial means for U.S. political institutions

Guests: Kenneth Mack, Karen Tumulty

DONALD TRUMP: [lots of cheering from the crowd] Now it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we're going to walk down, and I'll be there with you, to the Capitol.

MATT GALLOWAY: What happened next won't soon be forgotten. Thousands of Donald Trump supporters inspired by his words, stormed the Capitol on January 6th. Among them, white supremacists, militia groups and Q'Anon extremists, hunting down House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other politicians. Their mission: to prevent Congress from officially making Joe Biden the next president of the United States. This week, Donald Trump's impeachment trial for his role in that attack begins in the Senate. And with it, a reckoning for the former president and the Republican Party itself, but also implications for Joe Biden. Kenneth Mack is the Lawrence D. Beale, professor of law and affiliate, professor of history at Harvard University. And Karen Tumulty is a political columnist for The Washington Post. Good morning to you both.

KAREN TUMULTY: Good morning.

KENNETH MACK: Good morning.

MATT GALLOWAY: Kenneth Mack, Donald Trump is on trial for fomenting insurrection. Just briefly, do you think that the Democrats have a good case in this?

KENNETH MACK: Yes, they... they have a very good case. The facts themselves are not in dispute. You referenced some of them in your introductory segment, Donald Trump's remarks, the attack on the Capitol. And there is going to be a lot of argument back and forth about whether we can call Donald Trump's remarks an incitement. It's going to be arguments about the First Amendment. But the facts are not in dispute. And the fact that Donald Trump certainly inspired the crowd to go down and do that violence and interfere with the peaceful transition of power, that's not in dispute.

MATT GALLOWAY: What are the big challenges then facing the Democrats in this case, if they're looking to impeach Trump, if they're looking to convict him? And given the fact that this is just over a month old, and the outrage in many ways is still fresh in our minds. What are the Democrats up against?

KENNETH MACK: Well, the big challenge is political. Impeachment has always been a political process in the sense that when it comes to the president of the United States, the president, the members of the president's own party and the Senate came to support the president, at least in a few impeachment proceedings we've had. And the members of the other party tend to be in favour of impeachment. In this case, the question is, can we get to the constitutionally required two-thirds of the Senate to vote to convict? And there was a preliminary vote early in the proceedings that went 55 to 45, in which only five Republicans joined Democrats in voting in that early proceeding, which most people think is a proxy for the substantive vote. So the main challenge for the Democrats is political, in that Donald Trump has a lot of supporters within the Republican Party. Many members of his party do not want to break with him, however horrified, and in fact threatened, and actually had their lives threatened during the events on January 6th.

MATT GALLOWAY: Karen, what about the argument that Donald Trump is no longer president, and this trial is bogus because you can't remove a president who is no longer in office?

KAREN TUMULTY: The... that is certainly the argument that... that the former president's defence team is going to be making. Essentially, they're going to be making two arguments. One is that the Senate has no jurisdiction, no standing here to impeach the president, the ex-president, because he's no longer in office. The second being that... that Donald Trump did not incite the riot. But there there is precedent for impeaching people once they are out of office, just not a president. And that they will... the Democrats who are running this argue, you know, they need to do this in part so that he doesn't run again.

MATT GALLOWAY: They're also saying they need to do it because America's constitutional democracy, they believe, was under threat by the insurrection that happened on the 6th of January. How real do you think that threat was, Karen?

KENNETH MACK: I think it was real, and I think it's also, you know, a continuing problem because Donald Trump has convinced of a significant portion of this country that the result of an election that wasn't even all that close were rigged. And I think that it... it really does undermine the confidence that that people have. And, you know, you think about, well, what about when we have an election that actually is close? I mean, what could a president do in his or her final days of office? You know, that... that could completely upend the system.

MATT GALLOWAY: So if it's... if it's that important, then what happens if, as Kenneth was saying, the Republicans, you know, fall along party lines and Donald Trump is acquitted again? What's the symbolism of that?

KAREN TUMULTY: Well, and that is the most likely... likely thing to happen. What's going to happen then is that Trump is going to claim he was vindicated. And, you know, he will go down in history as the only president twice impeached. But it's... that is the real sort of political danger here for the Democrats is how they frame this, because I think it could really hurt them if all it is seen as is an act of vindictiveness.

MATT GALLOWAY: Kenneth, if all of this is seen just as an act of vindictiveness, as Karen is saying, what are the stakes for American democracy? If this was an assault on... on the seat, the heart of American democracy, and Donald Trump is once again acquitted, what's at stake then?

KENNETH MACK: Well, what's at stake are the the political institutions that elect presidents and that govern the transfer of power. The Democrats position is that there's been an attack on that process. And as Karen has indicated, well, there are things that were not done this time. For instance, in Georgia, the Republican secretary of state and the governor were... were content to say that that the election was not stolen. What if next time, that actually doesn't occur and the local officials say the election is stolen. So I think from the Democrats perspective, the integrity of the political processes are at stake. And sure, part of the... part of the job is to convince the not only the Senate, but the American public that that's the case. But regardless of the fact that a substantial portion of the Republican Party is likely to continue to support Donald Trump, those remain the stakes.

MATT GALLOWAY: Karen, where is the Republican Party right now in the lead up to this attack? There was this campaign led by Donald Trump to push this lie, as you mentioned, that the election was stolen. The majority of Republican members of the House voted against certifying the results in several states that Joe Biden won. So what does that all say about where that Republican Party is now in 2021?

KAREN TUMULTY: Well, the Republican Party has become Donald Trump's party. You see what happened last week on the House floor, where a member of Congress who spouts a bunch of conspiracy theories, including dangerous ones, was disciplined. Her committee assignments were taken away from her. But that was done on Democratic votes with the exception of 11 Republicans. This... this party has just been completely remade as Donald Trump's party. And the question then becomes, you know, can sort of establishment Republicans call their party back from Trump now that he's no longer in office? But right now, that he is, you know, he is the most important figure in the party.

MATT GALLOWAY: Despite the fact that he's no longer president?

KAREN TUMULTY: That's correct. And, you know, interestingly, you aren't... his social media platforms have been taken away from him. You're not seeing him much. You're not hearing from him as much. But certainly, he's... he's still there. He's got a lot of money. He's got a, you know, an operation around him. And we are going to continue to hear from him.

MATT GALLOWAY: Take a listen to a bit of a press conference that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi gave late last month.

NANCY PELOSI: I do believe, and I have said this all along, that we will probably need a supplemental more security for members when the enemy is within the House of Representatives, a threat that members are concerned about in addition to what is happening outside.

REPORTER: [from within a scrum of questions] Speaker Pelosi, what exactly did you mean when you said that the enemy is within? What exactly did you --

NANCY PELOSI: It means that we have members of Congress who want to bring guns on the floor, and have threatened violence on other members of Congress.

MATT GALLOWAY: Kenneth Mack, what do you make of that? It seems like an extraordinary statement, the enemy is within the House of Representatives.

KENNETH MACK: Well, it's an extraordinary statement prompted by extraordinary events. Speaker Pelosi was referencing Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, who in fact, has liked statements on Facebook, responded to statements on Facebook before her election to the House of Representatives. She liked the post calling for, quote, a bullet to the head, close quote, of Nancy Pelosi. And statements calling for the execution of FBI agents. So I think, you know, those are the kinds of things that prompted Speaker Pelosi to make that statement. And given what Representative Greene had said, that statement sounds fairly accurate. And Speaker Pelosi is also referencing there is a... there was a period before the civil war, in fact, where there was actually violence within Congress. Most famously, the kcanning of... Senator Charles Sumner was almost beaten to death in the Senate chamber by a member of the House of Representatives named Preston Brooks. So there's precedent for violence to occur within the chambers of Congress at times when the United States is deeply divided. And I think Nancy Pelosi is worried about reviving that kind of an atmosphere with the seating of someone like Representative Greene in Congress.

MATT GALLOWAY: Karen, tell me more about the dance that Republicans are doing around Marjorie Taylor Greene. As Kenneth mentioned, she had called for... or at least on social media, had endorsed these ideas of perhaps violence against other Democratic politicians. She has talked about conspiracy theories, saying that, you know, the mass shootings were staged. Has made ludicrous anti-Semitic comments as well. You've said that the Republicans in some ways struck a bad bargain with her. What do you mean by that?

KAREN TUMULTY: Well, I think that the... the rules were essentially changed, again by Donald Trump. That their willingness to stand by him, no matter what he said, no matter what he did, sort of changed [chuckling] the operating assumptions around other people. So last week, what we saw as the House had this extraordinary session to decide, you know, to... to vote to whether to strip her of her committee assignments, and therefore her legislative relevance. The Republicans did not defend anything that she said. They... they fell back on process arguments, you know? [chuckling] And they... she got up and gave what was not an apology, but she claimed that she was a victim of Q'Anon, this cultlike movement, that they, you know, that they had convinced her of things that weren't true. She claims she didn't hold these beliefs. She told her colleagues she would essentially clean up her act. But they're stuck with her. You know, they... they cannot take any action against her because in large part because they are very afraid of offending the the Trump, you know, the Trump-aligned base.

MATT GALLOWAY: And that she would become some sort of martyr if they were really to give her the boot?

KAREN TUMULTY: She is already becoming some sort of martyr. You know, she... That is how she is portraying herself. She walks around the Capitol with, you know, her COVID mask with the word "censored" on it, even though, you know, she gets plenty of time to speak.

MATT GALLOWAY: Is there a future for the Republican Party if a good part of that party, to Karen's point, refuses to, you know, kick somebody out who embraces conspiracy theories that undermine democracy, but also refuses to accept election results?

KENNETH MACK: Well, there certainly would be a future for the party, but that... that future might not be good for American democracy. I mean, we should also note that certainly what Marjorie Taylor Greene has said and indicated is quite extreme. But in fact, the outgoing Republican president of the United States refused to accept the election results in the January 6th address for which he was impeached. He said that he won enough in a landslide. The impeachment charge references his January 2nd call to secretary of state of Georgia saying, can you find me more votes? So, Marjorie Taylor Greene's statements, conspiracy theorizing might be extreme, but in fact, it's on a spectrum. And the outgoing Republican president of United States is also part of that spectrum of conspiracy thinking. That does not bode well for the future of the Republican Party. If they can't take some kind of action, it's not clear what they can, to suppress, distance themselves, get people elected who don't engage in such conspiracy thinking.

MATT GALLOWAY: Karen, what does it mean for Joe Biden's idea of unity? When he became the president, he talked about, you know, the United States of America. He talked about bringing people together, and said that this was something that he'd done in past in his time as a politician. And that's something in these divided times that he felt was necessary now. Where does that stand, given what you and Kenneth have been talking about?

KAREN TUMULTY: You know, it makes it a whole lot harder. It also makes it a lot harder for him to do things like, you know, build the political consensus that he needs around things that have to get done, starting with this COVID relief package, this gigantic one-point-nine-trillion dollar package that he is trying to get through is as his first big initiative in Congress. It just makes everything a lot harder.

MATT GALLOWAY: If Donald Trump still has the power in the party that you say he does and he is acquitted once again. Is there the possibility, do you think, Karen, that he could run again for president in 2024?

KAREN TUMULTY: There is definitely the possibility. I'm sceptical that he will, but he is going to continue, I believe, to hold out that possibility, in part just to keep everyone off balance.

MATT GALLOWAY: And if it's not him, then who could it be that represents what you are saying is, you know, the shadow party, or the shadow power within the party?

KAREN TUMULTY: You already see potential candidates manoeuvring to sort of position themselves as the legatee to the... of Trump. You hear a lot of it in Ted Cruz, the senator from Texas' hetoric. Or Josh Hawley, the senator from Missouri. Both of whom were, you know, encouraging this idea that the election there was something wrong with it.

MATT GALLOWAY: I just think it's fascinating, there are a lot of people. Obviously, the election was split in many ways. Seventy-plus million people voted in the United States for for Donald Trump. But there were a number of people on the other side of that equation who thought that in Joe Biden winning, they had seen the end and the last of Donald Trump. And you're suggesting that's not the case at all?

KAREN TUMULTY: I think that he is going to continue to be a presence, a large presence in American politics, and I think that he is going to, you know, continue to.. to foment the type of conspiracy theories and the the types of things that he did while he was president.

MATT GALLOWAY: Kenneth Mack, you're a professor of history at Harvard. When, you know, you put that hat on and you take a look at how historians in future will look back at this moment in American history and the actions of President Trump, what do you think people will say about the moment that you're living through?

KENNETH MACK: Well, I think that people will say that the moment we're living through was some kind of a pivot point for the future direction of our democracy. And... and certainly, Donald Trump's actions on January 6th don't bode well for where we're going. But, you know, there have been other periods in American democracy the United States lived through a civil war. It held presidential elections in the midst of the civil war. It enfranchised people who had been enslaved and made them citizens. And that sparked a... a bloody... bloody conflict of itself all through reconstruction. So the United States certainly has been in periods in which its democracy, its democratic institutions have been under siege. We are potentially at such a pivot point at this moment, and it is not clear the direction that we're going to go.

MATT GALLOWAY: But you're not necessarily saying that it's, I mean, there's a hint of optimism in what you're talking about, saying that in past crises, you know, the republic continued through.

KENNETH MACK: Yeah, there is a hint of optimism. You... you certainly would not compare this yet with the crisis of the civil war in which, you know, there was, in fact, a war fought about the future direction of American democracy. We're not there. But where we are is at a point where, you know, Donald Trump and his supporters are fomenting distrust in the core political institutions of American democracy. We've seen this through the election. Like, how do you conduct an election? Well, you have to believe that there's not a vast conspiracy if the other side wins. You have to believe in facts. In fact, there are facts. We've seen this ever since, I think, this goes all the way back to the conspiracy theorizing about President Obama. A large portion of the Republican Party refused to believe he was born in the United States. So we have a crisis about democratic institutions, about facts and about the willingness to believe that the other side could legitimately win.

MATT GALLOWAY: Kenneth Mack, we'll leave it there. It's good to speak with you this morning. Thank you.

KENNETH MACK: OK, thank you.

MATT GALLOWAY: Kenneth Mack, inaugural. Lawrence D. Biele professor of law, and affiliate professor of history at Harvard University. Karen Tumulty is a political columnist for The Washington Post. Your news is next. And then, we're going to talk about space junk. I'm Matt Galloway. This is "The Current". Stay with us.

Why space junk could have damaging consequences

Guest: Moriba Jah

MATT GALLOWAY: Good morning, I'm Matt Galloway. And you're listening to The Current.

[Music: Theme]

MATT GALLOWAY: Still to come, how a landmark legal decision on how OxyContin was marketed in the United States could influence court battles here in Canada and bring some accountability for the opioid crisis. But first, sustainability, 2,000 kilometres above the ground.

[Music: Theme]

MAN: Stage One, press for flight.

WOMAN: Minus 15 seconds.

MAN: Falcon Nine is configured for flight.

WOMAN: Ten, nine, eight, seven, six, five, four, three, two, one, zero.

[the various sounds of a take off]

MATT GALLOWAY: That's the sound of Elon Musk's SpaceX Falcon Nine rocket launching into orbit in January. The rocket was carrying 60 Starlink satellites, adding to the more than 900 currently spinning in low-earth orbit to provide Internet to remote communities. And while the importance of reliable Internet can't be overstated, especially these days, there is a catch. It turns out that since humans started going into space, we've been leaving a lot of junk up there, with no plan on how to clean it up. Moriba Jah is an associate professor at the University of Texas at Austin's Aerospace Engineering and Engineering Mechanics Department. He's been mapping where all this junk is and the damage it is doing. Moriba Jah, good morning.

MORIBA JAH: Good morning. How are you?

MATT GALLOWAY: I'm well, thank you. How would you... I mean, I said space junk. How would you define what space junk actually is?

MORIBA JAH: Yeah. So I would say that space junk pretty much is anything that's anthropogenic, so... so human-made, human-derived that is in orbit, that is not serving any useful purpose. So satellites that stop working, the rocket bodies that deliver these things to orbit, you know, nuts, bolts, astronaut gloves floating around, that sort of stuff, all that could be categorized as space junk.

MATT GALLOWAY: How much is up there?

MORIBA JAH: Yeah, so there's the trackable population of these anthropogenic space objects ranging in size from about a cell phone all the way up to the space station. And that trackable set is about, I don't know, 26,000-plus objects, of which probably about 3,500, 3,000 are things that work. And everything else is garbage.

MATT GALLOWAY: You did a visualization of this. And, I mean, people can see it online. Describe what that looks like. I mean, it just looks like everything is kind of happening all [laughing] at the same time around the Earth.

MORIBA JAH: Yeah. So, you know, this is like a multi-source, crowdsourced database of stuff in space. And, you know, we have things coming from the US Department of Defense, from Russia, from satellite owner-operators, people that have radars like LeoLabs that are tracking these things. And so it's an amalgamation of all these opinions about stuff in space. And so, yeah, it definitely looks busy. I think one of the... one of the unfortunate aspects of it is that, you know, the dots are not to size or when people see all these dots and the size of the dots, it makes, you know, space look really, really cluttered. But the dots are just to show like location of stuff. And yeah, I mean, there is a lot of traffic there, and it's just increasing.

MATT GALLOWAY: If there's a lot of traffic, why don't we see it in photos? I mean, you see photos of space, you see videos of space. Why don't I see this stuff that's flying around?

MORIBA JAH: Yeah. So these things are too dim for the human eye to mostly see. So the human eye can really see dimness of about six visual magnitude. And, you know, the space station for sure is at least that bright. But, you know, the smaller things, the human eye can't see it, but you know who sees all this stuff all the time? Astronomers, [chuckling] they're pretty upset with all this stuff in Earth orbit, reflecting sunlight towards their, you know, large pieces of glass, trying to look at very dim things.

MATT GALLOWAY: And so you say that it can be as small as a cell phone, as large as a space station, and just everywhere in between?

MORIBA JAH: Yeah, and so... and so that's the trackable set. But, you know, actually, there's a hypothesized, I don't know, half-a-million of these objects if we go all the way down to about one millimetre in diameter. So like a, you know, a flick of paint. But the thing is, we can't track things that small. So there's differing numbers between the European Space Agency and NASA as to how many of those things there are because we can't we can't track them.

MATT GALLOWAY: This sounds like an obvious question, but what is wrong with having all of that garbage up there?

MORIBA JAH: Yeah, so as it turns out, you know, the garbage is going at very high speeds. And so imagine that we have these highways in space, call them orbital highways. And those orbital highways are populated by things that work but mostly by stuff that doesn't. And things don't really slow down when they stop working. They still go at the same speeds. And so there's potential for, you know, near head-on collisions and stuff like that. And so the things that work are basically, you know, at the mercy of this garbage that's just, you know, orbiting around. And we could lose services and capabilities that we depend upon on a daily basis.

MATT GALLOWAY: Tell me more about that. When you say they're at the mercy, I mean, on the, you know, the orbital highways, is everything kind of moving at the same speed? And you just hope that it just kind of flows along together, or are things are moving at different speeds? How is that unfolding?

MORIBA JAH: Yeah, so... so in a given orbital highway, things are moving pretty much at common speeds, you know, that's what, you know, the curvature of space-time tells us. But the thing is, these highways crisscross each other, and that's the thing, there are no stoplights or any of that stuff. And so basically, it's like, I don't know, it's almost like imagine two interstates that actually, like, go through each other. And you just hope that when you're at that juncture that you don't get slammed by something.

MATT GALLOWAY: How fast are things moving up there?

MORIBA JAH: Yeah. So the the things that are really jeopardizing, you know, the stuff that works, the relative speeds are like 15 kilometres per second, so like 15 times the speed of a bullet.

MATT GALLOWAY: And so what happens if something that doesn't work hits, as you say, the stuff that works? And you could talk about something large first? Like, I mean, if you know something the size of a cell phone goes crashing into, you know, a space station or satellite, what happens?

MORIBA JAH: Yeah, so, so something the size of a cell phone hitting the space station at these high speeds will totally, like, obliterate a whole section of the space station. Like, we're talking likelihood of of loss of human life as a consequence. If something the size of a cell phone hits one of these working satellites, that's probably game over, you know, for that satellite working. Now, if we go down to millimetre size, speck of paint --

MATT GALLOWAY: Yeah.

MORIBA JAH: That's probably not mission-ending, but it is mission degrading. And so... so it can... it can degrade or cause disruption or at least some partial loss of capability.

MATT GALLOWAY: And when we say the stuff that works, I mean, what sort of satellites are at risk of being hit by some of this junk up there? What would happen here on Earth if that were to unfold?

MORIBA JAH: Yeah, so right now, if we look at like different orbital neighbourhoods, one of them is is called low-earth orbit. That goes, you know, up to about 1,200 kilometres in altitude. And that's where most of the stuff is living. You know, Elon Musk's Starlink satellites and all these things are there, Planet Labs. And so we're talking things that provide Earth monitoring, like, you know, things looking down, taking pictures of the Earth all the time, everything from climate change to disaster relief. Certainly, the businesses of Internet from space, those would be potentially impacted. But if you go higher to, like, mid-Earth orbit, then we're talking position navigation and timing services like GPS, GLONASS for Russia, that sort of stuff. That would be a big.... that would be a huge loss because, at this point, a lot of what we do is automated based on these position navigation and timing services. Like, even financial transactions are timestamped with these space-based services and that sort of thing. [49.7s] So losing that would be a really bad day. And if you go a bit higher to geosynchronous orbit, where we have communication satellites and things like, you know, DirecTV and that sort of stuff, then... then losing those is also a bad day.

MATT GALLOWAY: A bad day is putting it bluntly, I think.

MORIBA JAH: Yes.

MATT GALLOWAY: How often are there collisions in those... on the space highways between the stuff? It seems like you don't hear that often that much about that. But does it happen regularly?

MORIBA JAH: So, you know, the... the... the honest answer is we just don't know how... how often these things are happening. We can say this: given evidence of, you know, at least, you know, astronauts doing their spacewalks and going outside of the space station, this stuff is pitted, man. Like, I have some good friends of mine are former astronauts like Susan Helms. You know, she was saying that the portion of the station that... that is, let's call it, mostly up-wind, the forward direction, she said that she would hear things, you know, like, dinging the side of the hull frequently. And, you know, and that was a bit nerve-racking. And so we know that the smaller things are interacting with these large, trackable things very frequently. But like I said, those aren't necessarily mission-ending. It all depends. But the larger stuff, there aren't so many known collisions of those things happening. I think probably the the most, you know, famous or infamous, as it were, is between a working satellite, Iridium, and a dead satellite from Russia, Cosmos. They... they met each other, you know, in about 2009, and that... that meeting resulted in thousands and thousands of pieces of debris. So when two things collide, they become many, many, many pieces that are smaller. And that's part of the problem. But we have had quite a few explosions of dead rocket bodies and stuff. This is what I call a super spreader events in space because one of these rocket bodies is like a ticking time bomb with, like, maybe extra fuel and that sort of stuff. And when it goes boom, then that one object can... can can easily become tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of smaller pieces.

MATT GALLOWAY: I'd read about some of the, you know, wild ideas, maybe practical or not, that people had to try and get some of this junk out of space, where you have, you know, harpoons and you would reel it in or, you would --

MORIBA JAH: I know, fishing, man!

MATT GALLOWAY: [chuckling] Vacuum thing that you'd suck. Does any of that work?

MORIBA JAH: Yes, so the answer is yes, some of that works, but it all... but it all depends on there's no "Lord of the Rings" like one mechanism to rule them all. It all depends on the type of object. So certain technologies and techniques are most optimized for certain sizes and classes. So you need kind of an all hands on deck, kind of all of the above approach. But the really sad thing, man, about this is that, people need to accept that space will never be clean.

MATT GALLOWAY: Yeah.

MORIBA JAH: And so.. and so, at best, we have to learn to live in our current state of orbital filth, as it were.

MATT GALLOWAY: It's interesting that you were worried about super spreader events. I mean, that's language that's used around a pandemic right now. Do you see, like, a parallel between all of this?

MORIBA JAH: Well, that's exactly why I use it. And so the biggest... so the biggest contributor to the growth of space junk is actually lack of compliance with what scientists have said. Hey, here... here are these guidelines. If you follow these things, we can mitigate the growth of the debris, the spread of the debris. We can flatten the curve, as it were if you follow these things. And it turns out most people just don't comply with that stuff. So the question is, how do we incentivize people to, you know, just like we have here with the pandemic, with the masking, the social distancing, and stuff like that, how do we incentivize people to actually believe that this stuff is really a problem and just follow those guidelines? So that's the biggest thing. And then the cleaning of the stuff that's like icing on the cake. I mean, we should clean some of it. And certainly, these super spreader events, rocket bodies, not a matter of if when those should be removed.

MATT GALLOWAY: How do you convince people that this is important? I mean, we, you know, he played the little clip there at the beginning of Elon Musk's giant rocket taking 60 more satellites up into space. You go to a national park, and the belief is you take your garbage in, you take your garbage out. How do you convince people that that's important if they're putting things up in space, that they need to be responsible for the waste that they leave behind?

MORIBA JAH: To be honest, I really think that the best way to do that is to enroll humanity in the vision. And what I mean by that is this: space people tend to be elitist, man. You know, it's like, oh, we're space people, we're smart, we get it. Space people like having, like, groupies and stuff, you know, people swarming around, people like Elon or astronauts and this sort of stuff. So what I think we need to do, and certainly this is my... my mantra, I'm on this evangelism to normalize and democratize space, make it accessible to everybody, let people know that space is connected to Earth, oceans, atmosphere and climate. We need to be saying near-earth space is a finite resource because, hey, outer space may be infinite, but these orbital highways are very specific where we have the stuff. This is a heritage of humanity. We need to go back to the days where we accepted that we were custodians of life instead of like owners of it. And everyday humans have a right to understand what's going on up there. I want to make that very visible, push that out there, make it difficult for people to not be aware of it. Then people can go and start exerting pressure on, you know, elected officials in that sort of stuff. It's not going to happen by me talking to companies and saying pretty please with sugar on top. Will you do blank? That's just that's just not going to... look at meat, man. You know what I'm saying? For 30 years, people have been talking about, oh, you know, you should probably decrease your use of meat. I mean, it's not the healthiest thing for you, but there's a huge environmental impact with the way we're doing it. People don't pay attention to that. Well, now that you have something that actually tastes like it and looks like and blah, blah, blah, people are, you know, switching because it's more accessible, you know? So I want to make space accessible to humanity. And I think that's the way to do it.

MATT GALLOWAY: The other part of this is that people would say these satellites are providing some sort of valuable service. I mean, that idea that that you could democratize Internet access, that especially in a pandemic where people are stuck at home, that there's a huge digital divide still, and that if you can figure out a way to close that digital divide, that's something worth wrapping your arms around. What do you make of that?

MORIBA JAH: Yeah, I... look, I think that providing global Internet that needs to happen. Most people don't realize that, you know, 50 per cent of humanity doesn't have Internet access. And I think that that makes huge disparities and... and provides significant disadvantages to those that don't have that easy access to information, you know, knowledge, that sort of stuff. So I'm all about evening the playing field when it comes to, you know, being able to have access to that. The... the... the however, comma, that I want to add is it doesn't have to be done in the absence of inclusivity. For all these people that you'd like to provide that and democratize this, that or the other, have a candid conversation. Just let them know, look, this is what I want to do. This is what this technology can do. I want to make some money while at it. There's nothing wrong with that. I can do great things and make a profit by being helpful and providing a service to humanity. But also, here are the consequences of me doing this. It means that when you look up at the sky, you're going to see more stuff moving. It means this, that or the other. It's like, let's have an inclusive dialogue. And my guess is there's a way forward. What I don't like is when people just say, well, the legal framework doesn't say that I have to have the inclusive dialogue, so I'm just going to do what's legal.

MATT GALLOWAY: You said that we should think of space in some ways, you know, is we talk about earth and air and water, that space needs to be part of that larger environmental conversation. We've already done enormous damage to the environment. Are you optimistic that people could be inspired to stop polluting space, to stop leaving their garbage there?

MORIBA JAH: Yeah, I am, I am. I... I believe in it with all of my being. [3.7s] And I think the thing that gives me some evidence that that belief, you know, is... is based on something foundational and of substance, is that especially the younger generation, even my students, they care about this stuff. Like, I'm getting people saying, look, and I have to also say [00:18:51]I think we're... we're... we're walking into a next scientific revolution. I'm calling it a Renaissance encore. I think we're there. And the thing is, this is brought about by wicked problems. So problems that have huge societal consequences and cultural consequences. And, you know, space is a complex system by every stretch of the imagination, I... I think these wicked problems only get solved through transdisciplinarity, where... where all of these different disciplines need to come together and contribute, and I'm finding more and more people caring about that stuff. And it's like nine out of... nine out of 10 times, if you tell people, look, here's... here's how you can do this, but here's how you can do it and be sustainable while you do it and be compassionate in doing this. Nine out of 10 times, I find that people will choose that path, you know, so... so I'm very hopeful.

MATT GALLOWAY: I hope you're right because it's terrifying to think of all this stuff [chuckling] swirling around up above us. Moriba Jah, it's great to talk to you about this. Thank you very much.

MORIBA JAH: No worries, Brother! Any time. Thank you.

MATT GALLOWAY: Moriba Jah is an associate professor at the University of Texas at Austin's Aerospace Engineering and Engineering Mechanics Department. Here's a song about satellites and global positioning systems and existential dread, "Spaceman" by the Killers.

["Spaceman" by The Killers/Pop rock]

MATT GALLOWAY: Coming up after your regional update, the global consultancy firm McKinsey & Company helped turbocharge the market for OxyContin. Now, their part in the opioid crisis will cost them hundreds of millions of dollars. What this means for legal battles in Canada, coming up in 90 seconds. I'm Matt Galloway. You're listening to "The Current" on CBC Radio One. Stay with us.

A landmark settlement in the opioid crisis; COVID-19’s cancelled carnivals

Guests: Mike Forsythe, Massimo Andreoli, Jimi Setchim

MATT GALLOWAY: Hi, I'm Matt Galloway. You're listening to "The Current".

XAVIER BECERRA: They were part of a machine that disrupted, in fact, destroyed lives and families in America. Today, we hold McKinsey to account, 575-million dollars.

MATT GALLOWAY: That's California's attorney general reacting last week to a landmark legal settlement in the opioid crisis. The global consulting firm McKinsey & Company will pay hundreds of millions of dollars for its role in the epidemic. The firm allegedly turbocharged sales of the highly-addictive painkiller OxyContin, not just in the United States, but in Canada as well. Mike Forsythe has been covering this story. He's a reporter at The New York Times. Mike, good morning.

MIKE FORSYTHE: Good morning.

MATT GALLOWAY: What exactly did McKinsey & Company do for pharmaceutical companies in the context of the opioid crisis?

MIKE FORSYTHE: So McKinsey worked with several big pharmaceutical companies that make opioids to find ways for them, in many cases to increase their sales, to find out areas of the market that may not have been penetrated enough or should be emphasized more. And they went into great detail on this. And the main focus of this lawsuit and the settlement has been with one company in particular, kind of the poster child for the opioid manufacturers, which is Purdue Pharmaceuticals, Purdue Pharma in... in Connecticut. And they've been working with Purdue for many, many years, going back to basically 16, 17 years ago, working with them on a variety of issues to increase sales. that ranges from targeting doctors. Finding the best doctors or the ones who prescribe the most opioids, cutting costs, all sorts of issues.

MATT GALLOWAY: Did McKinsey and the people at McKinsey know, the risks of opioid use?

MIKE FORSYTHE: They certainly appear to. You know, McKinsey's a very large firm, very decentraliZed, they like to consider themselves a partnership, although technically they haven't been one since the 1950s. And so one arm of McKinsey in recent years has been talking about the risks of opioid addiction and actually been working with various non-profits and even funding non-profits even, warning about the risks and finding ways to... To combat opioid addiction. Whereas another arm of McKinsey has been working with the opioid makers to increase their sales.

MATT GALLOWAY: McKinsey has said that it did nothing that was against the law. That what it was involved in was lawful. But in this settlement, which it also has admitted, you know, not doing anything wrong, it's going to be paying hundreds of millions of dollars. How significant is that settlement?

MIKE FORSYTHE: It's very significant, I think, for one of the main reasons is that it's very rare for McKinsey to be held to account for the work it's doing. And obviously, there's consulting companies around the world. They usually have some sort of distance between what they recommend and then the actions that their client eventually takes. In this case, the attorney generals of the United States closed that distance and pointed to McKinsey as being responsible in many ways or encouraging and helping to improve sales. So it's... it's significant for the consulting industry in that way. And also, just for the larger fight in the United States to try to find, to get redress for the opioid crisis. Purdue Pharma hasn't really paid out yet. They declared bankruptcy a couple of years ago. And so creditors are going to have to line up. So this, and the attorney generals all pointed this out, this is significant because now we have a big, you know, well-funded American company actually paying out money in this settlement.

MATT GALLOWAY: There are a couple of Canadian connections to this. One is Dominic Barton, Canada's ambassador to China. What is Barton’s connection with McKinsey?

MIKE FORSYTHE: So Dominic Barton was the managing partner, the global managing partner, for McKinsey during much of this period. And so, you know, as I said before, McKinsey likes to consider themselves a partnership. It's not clear how much Mr. Barton knew about what was going on with McKinsey's work at Purdue Pharma while he was there. We haven't really sussed out that information yet. And actually, it's quite ironic or fitting that the week he was leaving, which is around Canada Day in 2018, is when this whole crisis really exploded. It's when there were two McKinsey senior partners who exchanged some emails about possibly destroying records related to its work with Purdue Pharma. So it's not clear, you know, what Mr. Barton's role was and how much he was informed about the day-to-day activities. And it really became a crisis for McKinsey right after he departed or he stepped down from a managing partner role. But of course, he, you know, he's gone on to other things in Canada, you know, being ambassador to China. And before then, he was chairman of Teck Resources. And he brought in many McKinsey consultants into Teck and helped to that company more efficiently destroy or blast mountains in Alberta to smithereens. So, you know, [slight chuckle] Barton has a complicated role here.

MATT GALLOWAY: The other Canadian connection is that there are several Canadian provinces that are suing pharma companies for their involvement in the opioid crisis. And the lead lawyer in British Columbia's effort told the Globe and Mail that Mckinsey is, quote, a serious target and that they expect to have discussions with that company. How do you think what happened in the United States and this multimillion-dollar settlement in the U.S. could affect what happens here in Canada?

MIKE FORSYTHE: I think that, you know, I'm not a lawyer, but I think one of the ways it could affect it is just the trove of documents that have come into the public domain. You know, lawyers, just like reporters, love documents. And there is a just a wealth of information that's already out there in the public domain that, you know, in great detail lists McKinsey's role in helping Purdue Pharma in particular. And as part of the settlement, what's going to happen is that McKinsey has vowed and is under legal obligation to actually disclose tens of thousands of its work, you know, working papers and emails, et cetera, with four pharmaceutical companies that were involved in opioid production. That should be coming into the public domain later this year. So there's going to be a lot more information for the lawyers in British Columbia to look at as a result of this settlement.

MATT GALLOWAY: What do you expect to see in those documents?

MIKE FORSYTHE: Expect to see a lot more information about its work, especially I'm interested in its work with some of the other pharmaceutical makers like Johnson and Johnson, Endo Pharmaceuticals, which also made opioids. So that's what I'm looking for. People here liken it, and then one of the lawyers involved in the case actually likened it as well, said it was inspired by the tobacco company settlements a couple of decades ago. And there's quite a lot of the tobacco company documents going back 20, 30, 40, 50 years even that just kind of outline the history of Big Tobacco's, you know, work to... to stay in business, basically, and to downplay the addictive effects of nicotine and tobacco. So this is... this is similar in that way.

MATT GALLOWAY: You mentioned that Purdue, the pharma company, went bankrupt last year. And it had been scheduled or on the hook for something like three-billion dollars in settlements. Is that correct?

MIKE FORSYTHE: There is... it's actually more than that --

MATT GALLOWAY: More than that!

MIKE FORSYTHE: So, yeah, it's... it's what's complicated is, you know, it's controlled, you know, owned by this family, the Sackler family, family members of the Sackler family. And the settlement is actually for a considerably more than three-billion dollars with the company. The problem is that the company can't pay right now or is, you know, it has to work out the bankruptcy procedures. And there's other creditors that are going to be lining up in those procedures to take... to also get, you know, what they can from the bankruptcy. And so the Sacklers, the family, some members of the family, are in negotiations to pay out about three-billion dollars. Yeah, but but those haven't, those haven't come to pass yet. And what's interesting is that, and this is a positive thing for McKinsey, according to what the attorney general says, McKinsey get to own up to this in the way in the sense that they these were fairly quick, you know, by legal standards, negotiations. And... and McKinsey did... did pay up. And the attorney generals speaking last week, you know, pointed out that maybe Purdue and the Sacklers should draw some inspiration or some lessons from McKinsey and actually pay up.

MATT GALLOWAY: Just before I let you go, I mean, the families of those who have died in this overdose crisis have been looking for accountability. Is this the beginning of that accountability, do you think?

MIKE FORSYTHE: It may be the beginning, you know, obviously some people were disappointed that Mckinsey didn't admit wrongdoing, but, you know, there is real money now going to the states to, you know, to... to at least 49 of the states [chuckling] to to help ameliorate, to help combat the opioid crisis. And obviously, this could presage much larger settlements and much larger payments for... for other firms. And as well, you know, for Mckinsey, it is a lesson, you know, obviously, that, you know, if it is going to embark on helping opioid companies and other companies that do harm that there's consequences for it, monetary consequences.

MATT GALLOWAY: Mike, good to speak with you. Thank you very much.

MIKE FORSYTHE: Thank you.

MATT GALLOWAY: Mike Forsythe is a reporter with The New York Times.

[Music: Ambient]

MATT GALLOWAY: You're listening to The Current on CBC Radio One. My name is Matt Galloway. Can you imagine being packed elbow to elbow, singing and dancing with strangers right now? I think the thought of that gives a lot of people chills. Maybe people were watching the Super Bowl last night and were a little freaked out at the sight of 20,000 people or so in the stands of that stadium in the midst of a pandemic. In the world. Before COVID, though, this week, this week in particular, would see the canals of Venice full of people wearing glamorous masks, not the medical ones. Glamorous masks. Celebrating Carnival. Tobia Dall'Osto is the son of legendary Venice mask maker Gualtiero Dall'Osto.

TOBIA DALL’OSTO: Carnival used to last six months over a year in the past, mostly in the 18th-century Venice was kind of the Las Vegas of Europe. And in a city where everything is so small and the alleys are so, so tiny and people have to cross with each other if you're walking. And in a city where the social classes were quite intermingled, privacy was not really a thing oftentimes. So Carnival gave the possibility to be free, to pretend to be someone else, like the poorer could become the nobleman and vice versa. The man could become a woman and vice versa. So it really gave the freedom.

MATT GALLOWAY: Even the centuries' old tradition of Carnival, though, is no match for COVID-19. And like so many other parties, Carnival has gone online.

TOBIA DALL’OSTO: They want to call it Carnival, even though Carnival is something completely different, where you really participate, where you really purify yourself, where you let things go out of yourself. It's not something you just watch on a screen. But the city is completely empty. And so, yeah, there's really no one celebrating or taking part in any activity.

MATT GALLOWAY: So in a city that lives for this party every year, is an online Carnival really carnival? Massimo Andreoli has run historical reenactments and events for Venice Carnival for over 20 years and joins us now from Venice. Massimo, good morning.

MASSIMO ANDREOLI: Good morning. Good morning, Matt.

MATT GALLOWAY: On a normal year, paint me a picture of what that first day of Carnival usually looks like in Venice?

MASSIMO ANDREOLI: Oh, wow! [chuckling] You know, when we organize a big opening in the carnival, we have two opening, officially opening. One is on the water side, and this is a very big event, a show, and a modern show with acrobats, with floating parades, with jugglers, with fire eaters. So it's a very emotional impact followed by 20,000 or 30,000 persons along our canals. And the second opening ceremony as they started historical one in the St. Mikes Square is the Angel's Flight. it's a girl that's come down as slowly from the bell tower to arrive in the front of the Doge. The Doge is the historical duke. So we officially start the Carnival. Of course, this is the normal way of opening our Carnival, involving thousands and thousands of Venetians and people from abroad. And, first of all, not like only a show that you are sited to see as audience, but something where you are involved as an actor. So like an actor! Nobody is a spectator. Everybody is involved in the action. So, you know, now, it's impossible and the atmosphere is not fitting. The mood in the city [sad chuckle] is not so happy or ready for a Carnival time.

MATT GALLOWAY: What did it look like this weekend when Carnival started?

MASSIMO ANDREOLI: Mean, in the last weekend, we started with the new digital Carnival. And in the normal time, we... we organized many parades, make parades, and inviting people to transform themselves in something different. And now, you know, the problem for the Carnival is the symbol itself of the Carnival, of the masks, that's changed from something to enjoy, to have fun to something of more serious because of COVID. So, in this moment, you have just some people that walk around the streets in small groups without any official programs, but the digital ones transmitting by the net on the broadcast. Some images, some stories, something, you know, to just to keep alive the, you know, the soul of the Carnival, saying we know that this is not the real authentic Carnival spirit, but we are waiting for the next year. Just don't forget that the Carnival's still alive.

MATT GALLOWAY: How difficult is it for you to see that? I mean, there's so much celebration, there's so much joy in Carnival.

MASSIMO ANDREOLI: Yeah.

MATT GALLOWAY: And to see it not just, you know, something that's been put online, but also, as you say, people wearing masks, not because they're beautiful, but because they have to because they're worried about transmitting this virus. What's that like for you to see?

MASSIMO ANDREOLI: Yeah, you know, we... we... we asked ourself how many, many times in the last couple of months how we can transmit the right message of something like a Carnival during the pandemic? And I think that's a nobody has the right answer now. But we can also imagine that the people that live in the city and from many, many years and many generations. So you wait for the carnival time starting from the children, but also the all the grandparents that take the children all around the cities, masked themselves also. So, you know, it's difficult to... to have an answer. We cannot forget completely the virus, but we have to be ready to live with the virus all around us. We have to think a new way to organize in the future.

MATT GALLOWAY: Do you... do you worry about the future? I mean, you know, it's not just the pandemic, but there was the flooding. And then when you have no tourists there in a city where the economy is so driven by tourists, do you worry about the, you know, the survival of that spirit of Venice?

MASSIMO ANDREOLI: I'm not really worried because some roots of... of a city like Venice survive to tourists, to pandemics in the past, you know, so I think that some elements of our roots will survive. But on the... on the economic and tourism side, we have to restart, I want to be optimistic in this way in this moment, because I think that's now that we must stop for the coronavirus, we can also imagine a new way of tourist policy for our city. Now we have to restart the museums. We have to restart the restaurants, the bars, the hotels, accommodations, and we have the chance to sit all around in the city with all of the stakeholders of the different economy and to say, OK, how we can manage for the future to respect other problems like a pandemic, but without stop everything or close everything like we did during the lockdown the last months.

MATT GALLOWAY: But you're optimistic?

MASSIMO ANDREOLI: Yeah, I'm... but this is my nature. [laughing] But also, in Venice, I think that there's a big percent of optimistic people, because if you are not optimistic in this moment what you can do for the new generation, for the next generation, for the young?

MATT GALLOWAY: It's one of the great cities in the world. And I cannot wait until it is back to its full strength. In the meantime, Massimo, enjoy Carnival such as it is. Thank you very much.

MASSIMO ANDREOLI: Oh, you're welcome. And I wait for you, of course, in Venice very soon.

MATT GALLOWAY: I can't wait. Thank you very much.

MASSIMO ANDREOLI: Bye. Thank you.

MATT GALLOWAY: Massimo Andreoli is an event organizer in Venice. Well, from the canals of Venice to the streets of New Orleans.

[Music: The live music of Mardi Gras].

MATT GALLOWAY: Listen to that! For many people, Mardi Gras is New Orleans, whether it's the parade floats, the marching jazz bands or just the crowds of people having the time of their lives. Mardi Gras celebrations start later this week. And while the usual blowout's won't be happening this year, the folks in New Orleans are not letting COVID crush their spirit. Jimi Setchim is the executive chef Broussard's Restaurant in New Orleans. Jimi, good morning.

JIMI SETCHIM: Good morning. Thank you for having me.

MATT GALLOWAY: Thanks for joining us. Your restaurant, right in the French Quarter, on a typical year, [chuckling] what does your view of Mardi Gras look like from your restaurant?

JIMI SETCHIM: It's big, and it's celebratory, and it's it's fun, you know, especially kind of starting this Friday, most locals would... would either, you know, get out of work Thursday night and take Friday off or work a half-day Friday. And then we would really start celebrating and partying all weekend long, all the way through Tuesday afternoon. So the streets will be, or would have been, you know, filled with people in costumes and dancing and drinking and enjoying. Obviously, that's going to be a little bit different this year.

MATT GALLOWAY: I was going to say, the streets would have been filled with those people.

JIMI SETCHIM: [ chuckling] Yeah!

MATT GALLOWAY: How does it feel this year?

JIMI SETCHIM: It feels... it feels smaller, but it still... still feels like it's going to be fun. I think there's a... there's a culture in New Orleans and an attitude that the locals have that just because we've cancelled the parades, and the lack of visitors we're going to have, I think people are still going to celebrate, and people are going to spend more time celebrating in their specific neighbourhoods this year.

MATT GALLOWAY: What does it mean for you, for a business? I mean, we can talk about keeping the spirit alive, but there would be, you know, people would fly in from all over the world for Mardi Gras. And so, you know, running a restaurant, that's got to be a big hit.

JIMI SETCHIM: Yeah, it's definitely... it's definitely tougher. Obviously, we don't have as much business there. We don't have as many people coming in. Traditionally, in the past, where we are in the French Quarter, we would have had a lot of... a lot of tourists coming in all this week and last week as well. But we've been very lucky to... to have our local clientele still coming in. And we've really been supported by locals since we reopened at the end of May. The local community here has made a big push to either eat out or do takeout from local restaurants, support local restaurants. So I think it'll be... it'll be interesting this year as locals kind of explore their cities... their city more and kind of come down to the French Quarter where maybe normally they wouldn't have.

MATT GALLOWAY: What are people doing to keep that spirit alive? I mean, I've seen some photos of people who are still, you know, still decorating their houses and stuff like that.

JIMI SETCHIM: Yeah, it's... it's real fun. So, the whole city instead of, obviously, we've cancelled the parade this year, so there are no floats, but the city has taking it upon themselves to to decorate their houses as floats. So you've got, as I look out my front door right now, there's four or five houses on our block that are all decked out like... like different fun Mardi Gras floats.

MATT GALLOWAY: Like what? Describe what it looks like?

JIMI SETCHIM: You know, covered in flowers. One of our neighbours, they did a big tribute to Alex Trebek, and a big Jeopardy board on the front of their house, that's actually got a... they've got a QR code where you can answer some Jeopardy questions online. [both laugh] It's real fun! My wife and I covered our house and flowers and, you know, those traditional purple, green and gold Mardi Gras colours, make it look lively and fun and. I think this will be... I think it's going to be a tradition that carries on, too, in New Orleans, the city likes to celebrate and likes to play dress-up. So this year, everyone's dressing up their houses. I see people doing it again next year and years after, too.

MATT GALLOWAY: Are people being more cautious, given what happened last year? I mean, there were real concerns that... that Mardi Gras was in part responsible for some of the really rough times that New Orleans had in the weeks and months following. So are people is your sense that people are going to be cautious, given the fact that this pandemic still hangs over us?

JIMI SETCHIM: Oh, absolutely. I think, you know, we've seen it with... with our guests that are coming into the restaurant, you see it all throughout the city, everyone's, or for the most part, everyone's wearing their masks. And everyone's just got to be responsible, right? And wash their hands and use sanitizer. And so I think it's... it's challenging. But the city is very adaptive. And I think you integrate those masks into your costumes and, you know, you make sure you have hand sanitizer. We've probably got more hand sanitizer in the restaurant right now than we do booze. [Matt laughs] So it's.... and we've seen it with our, you know, with our guests. People still come in with their mask on. They'll sit down, they'll order, take it off as their server comes up, they'll put their mask back on, and then they'll continue with the rest of their dining experience.

MATT GALLOWAY: Your city needs the celebration this year, though, right? I mean, it feels like we all need something.

JIMI SETCHIM: Yeah. Need a little bit of a win. And I think, I mean, I think it's there. I think it's just different. The... The attitude's definitely there. People want it. People want to enjoy themselves and want to celebrate, want to get out. And I think the challenging part is people want that interaction with other people. So I think you're going to see it, or we're going to see it on a smaller scale this year. I think people are going to see it in more in their neighbourhoods, in small groups and socially-distant than you would have been packed in the French Quarter before. We've seen a lot of neighbours coming together. We've got a little park by our house. A lot of neighbours coming together and kind of hanging out in small groups. One of our neighbours is a guitar player, so he'll sit on his porch and play music, and people will hang out in the park or on their steps and... and listen and kind of wave at each other. But so you get a little bit of that human interaction. It just looks a little different.

MATT GALLOWAY: The spirit is still there, though. Jimi, it's great to talk to you. Enjoy yourself.

JIMI SETCHIM: Thank you. You as well, sir!

MATT GALLOWAY: Jimi Setchim is the executive chef at Broussard's Restaurant in the French Quarter of New Orleans. And Mardi Gras there begins later on this week. That is it for "The Current" for today. Coming up next on CBC Radio One, it's "Q'. This morning, special tribute to the late, great Canadian actor Christopher Plummer, who, of course, died on Friday. Given what Jimi was talking about, everybody's looking for a win. We'll leave you with the sounds of one of the most celebrated musicians out of New Orleans, this is Dr. John, a song that seems fitting for the residents of Venice and New Orleans right now during this pandemic festival season. My name is Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening to "The Current". Take care. And we'll talk to you tomorrow.

February 8, 2021 Episode Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode