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 2024

The Current Transcript for November 14, 2024

Host: Matt Galloway

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

SOUNDCLIP

CINDY WOODHOUSE NEPINAK: Last year, we had more First Nations children removed from their communities and families than in any other time in Canadian history.

MATT GALLOWAY: A once in a lifetime agreement or not good enough. For years, First Nations across Canada have been fighting for reform of child and family services to address decades of indigenous children being taken into government care. A $48 billion settlement with the federal government was meant to resolve the almost two decades-long dispute. Last month, a majority of First Nations chiefs turned that deal down. In an hour, one chief on why his community needed this agreement. And the counter-argument that saying no isn't a question of searching for perfection, but justice. Also this morning.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: There was a white sedan that was seen at the back of the business. They loaded the butter in and away they went.

MATT GALLOWAY: Not gold, but butter. Given the price of butter these days, you could be mistaken. There have been at least nine incidents where large quantities of butter were stolen from stores in one small Ontario city alone. In 30 minutes, inside the butter black market. And why one baker says there is no substitute for the real thing. We begin with renewed fears over bird flu in Canada. Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway, and this is The Current.

[Music: Theme]

B.C. teen in critical condition with bird flu

Guests: Helen Braswell, Mark Siemens

MG: A teenager in British Columbia is in critical condition after testing positive for bird flu caused by the H5N1 strain of avian influenza. It is believed to be the first human case of bird flu contracted in Canada. How the teen got infected still is unknown. But like any health crisis, job number one is containment.

SOUNDCLIP

BONNIE HENRY: There are extensive and thorough investigations that need to be done to determine: One, if anybody else is sick. And so that has been our priority, to make sure that people who have been in contact with this young person during their infectious period are assessed, are tested, and all of the people who have been in contact, either at, at home or in the hospital are notified.

MG: That's B.C.'s provincial health officer Dr. Bonnie Henry. She says it's likely the infection came from exposure to a sick animal or something in the environment. And while this remains the only reported case in Canada, there are approximately four dozen active cases in the United States. Helen Branswell is a senior writer at the online health and science publication, STAT, covering infectious diseases and global health. Helen, good morning.

HELEN BRASWELL: Hi, Matt.

MG: We'll get to the B.C. case in a moment, but just broadly, start with the basics, if you would. The bird flu basics. What exactly is this virus?

HELEN BRASWELL: Oh, okay. So, this is a virus that nature designed to infect birds. It is found in wild waterfowl typically, ducks and those kinds of things. And it occasionally can spill over into poultry. And when it does, it can be lethal. H5N1 is, is a virus that that causes severe illness in poultry. In fact, they either die or have to be put down. It's this version of H5N1 has been detected since 1996 over that period of roughly, you know, 30 years. There have been occasional human infections across the world, somewhere around 950 now. And about half of those infections have been fatal. So, it's, it's a virus that people who are on the lookout for pandemic threats watch very, very closely.

MG: What do we know about how it's transmitted, both from bird to bird, but also, to your point, jumping to other species?

HELEN BRASWELL: So in birds, it infects their guts and they you know, birds get it by drinking water in a pond that, you know, another duck has pooped in. And that's the way it goes. And I you know, the same would be true about poultry. But occasionally when it gets into other species, either because a mammal like a, a scavenger mammal, like a marten or a raccoon or something might eat an infected bird and acquire it that way. Or, you know, your listeners might have remembered hearing last year about whales and seals off the coast of South America and, you know, dying from this infection, probably the same route of infection. In people, when people contracted it, it's typically, it colours people who work, you know, putting down infected chickens or in the United States now, this virus is spreading in dairy cattle and people who work on dairy farms have been getting infected, probably through contact with infected milk.

MG: Let's talk about this teen in British Columbia. What do we know thus far? I mean, we heard a little bit from, from Dr. Bonnie Henry. But broadly, what do we know so far?

HELEN BRASWELL: Well, so the teen was infected and they have no good explanation yet for how this child came in contact with the virus. Didn't live on a farm, didn't have contact with poultry. And, you know, as far as Canada knows, this virus is not in dairy cattle in, in Canada. In fact, the virus that was isolated from this teen is not the, the version of the virus that's circulating in cattle in the United States. So that would suggest that's probably, you know, not a source. They are looking very hard. The teen did have some contact with domestic animals, dogs, cats, reptiles that, but none of them tested positive. So they're still searching. And, you know, Dr. Henry suggests that there's a possibility they will not be able to find the source of the infection in this child. That said, they've been, as you said in your intro, they've been following very closely the people around the team, people who were in contact with him or her during their infectious period and looking for illness there and to date have found no evidence that anyone else is sick, which is good news.

MG: Why does it matter that this again, there was research that was done here in Canada to figure out the strain of the virus. Why does it matter that it is not the version of H5N1 that is being found in cows in the United States?

HELEN BRASWELL: It only matters to a degree. You know, it's you know, Canada doesn't believe that the cow version of the virus is in cattle in Canada. And if this had been that version, that belief would have to have been questioned. But this child still was infected with H5N1. The child is very sick. H5N1 is a virus that people don't want to see in peop--, in. You know, scientists don't want to see in people because it's, it's, because most of us have no immunity to it. And that makes it dangerous to humans. Yeah. So it's, it's only good news in some ways, but really not, you know, in the ways that matter. People shouldn't be catching H5N1. And the fact that the source of the infection can't be determined or hasn't been determined is a bit unsettling.

MG: The question and the unsettling part is that the concern is this could be not the beginning of something, but the beginning of the beginning of something. And in a piece that you wrote for STAT, you're talking about what Dr. Bonnie Henry said at her media conference yesterday, but also speaking with a friend of ours, Dr. Allison McGeer, who's an infectious diseases consultant in Toronto at Sinai Health. What did Allison McGeer say about those concerns that, again, this could be the beginning of something?

HELEN BRASWELL: Right. So, you know, there are one off cases that there are never explanations for. In fact, in the United States recently there was a person in Missouri who tested positive, no contact with any poultry or cattle. And they're probably never going to be able to figure out how that person got sick. But there is no evident ongoing spread. That's one scenario. That's the scenario you hope for in British Columbia. But you know, anybody who follows flu will remember the 2009 H1N1 pandemic. And the way that first came to light was that California announced that it had found two cases of swine flu in two children who hadn't been exposed to pigs and hadn't been exposed to each other. And, you know, within a couple of weeks, Texas was reporting cases. California found more cases, and the world realised that a pandemic was underway. What Alison said yesterday was that, you know, effectively that every day that passes where British Columbia does not find an additional case is a good day. This, you know, we're getting further and further out from when this child was infectious and in the community and in a position to infect other people if that was going to happen. And so, the longer it goes without more cases, you know, the more hopeful one might feel that this is just going to be a one off.

MG: How worried are you that it won't be a one off? Again, how and the concern is that, that this could be the door opening to something else. We have just lived through something. Some people are still living through that thing, which is a global pandemic. How worried are you about that?

HELEN BRASWELL: You never like to see H5N1 in a human. It's just, it's a bad virus. And it, it's just one that we would not want to see take off. So, it always gets your attention when you see a report of a case and certainly a report of a case where there's no evident way to explain how the exposure happened. That always makes you wonder if there is undetected human to human transmission happening. That said, you know, this recent evidence from Missouri that there can be one offs that, you know, that. I don't know, how worried am I? I'm not, not worried, but I'm not super worried yet. Does that answer the question?

MG: It does. And I mean, you're being very measured in what you say and how you say it, which I think is important. We're about to speak with a farmer in British Columbia who had to cull his chickens. And we'll talk about preventative measures. But from your perspective, are there preventative measures that have been successful over the years to avoid contamination and avoid the possibility of, of this virus spreading?

HELEN BRASWELL: Well, certainly, you know, the best, the industry that has the most experience with it is the poultry industry. They've been dealing with H5 and another highly pathogenic avian flu virus, H7 viruses, for, for decades now. And in the Fraser Valley, they've had a bunch of outbreaks. So, they know how to do this. You know, when those viruses get into poultry populations, you have to cull to contain them. And, and cullers have to be careful about wearing protective equipment so that they don't get infected. You know, people who see dead birds or have a dead bird delivered to them by their, their cat should be careful about any physical contact with dead birds. And, you know, it's interesting to watch what's happening in the United States, the, the watching the cattle, the move, the virus moving through cattle in the United States. It's not. It's something. The virus doesn't kill cattle very often, which makes the incentive to cull non-existent. And that has made controlling it very, very difficult in their, the country is not controlling it. There's been, you know, infection in almost 500 herds now over 15 states. And no sign this is stopping. So, it can be done. But it takes it takes political will and it takes money. And yeah, that's lacking right now here.

MG: It's always good to talk to you. Helen, thank you very much for this.

HELEN BRASWELL: Thank you.

MG: Helen Branswell is a senior writer on infectious diseases with the online health and science publication STAT. She was in Boston.

MG: Mark Siemens is an egg farmer in Abbotsford, British Columbia, who, as I mentioned recently, had an outbreak of avian influenza on his farm. Mark, good morning to you.

MARK SIEMENS: Good morning.

MG: You've had to cull your chickens. Tell me about some of the signs that you first noticed in your chickens when this outbreak began.

MARK SIEMENS: Yeah. So, we in the Fraser Valley of British Columbia faced this disease for several years in a row now. So, when I went into my barn — which the previous day had looked completely healthy — and saw that a lot of the birds seemed to have irritation in their eyes, quickly culled the sick bird line and got my birds tested to see what was going on. And unfortunately, it came back positive for the avian influenza disease. So, we started down that journey, the difficult journey of first of all, watching the birds immediately deteriorate and get incredibly sick over the course of 24 hours. And then inevitably and quite quickly had the CFIA on site and ready to depopulate the farm.

MG: That's I mean, as a, as a farmer, depopulate means that you had to cull the flock. Tell me a little bit about how many birds you lost.

MARK SIEMENS: So on my farm, I've got 30,000 free-range laying hens. And yeah, that whole farm had to be cleared right out.

MG: You've described this as devastating.

MARK SIEMENS: It certainly is. This is our livelihood. And not only that, like, you know, we farm because we love taking care of the animals. And we take a ton of pride in it. Like, these are, these are birds I've raised since they were a day old. And, you know, we're in there as a, as a family every day taking care of them. And so to have to kind of watch this process take place and, and, you know, at the end of, at the end of, of depopulation day or you're, you're looking at an empty farm which, it's something that never happens. We never have empty, all of our barns empty, right? It's, it's just kind of a big shock to us as a family to go through.

MG: What do you know about what may have caused the outbreak on the farm?

MARK SIEMENS: It's, it's the migratory season for all the wild birds. So, they have been really heavy in the area. And one of the things that we notice is, is a pattern. I have also been involved in sort of the emergency response and been managing this disease over previous years, although I have never been impacted on my own farm. I've been very involved in trying to help other farmers and stuff recover and manage it. So, what we all observe is that during migratory bird season, when there is a heavy windstorm, we will often see several farms test positive. You know, five, six, seven days later. And it seems to be an ongoing challenge that we face here in the Fraser Valley due to how much migratory bird activity we see during October, November and into December.

MG: What is it like as a farmer? I mean, knowing that that's an existence that can often be on a knife edge of profitability or not having money coming in. What is it like to live with this thing in the shadows? As you said, this isn't the first year that, that folks in the Fraser Valley have had to deal with this.

MARK SIEMENS: Yeah, it's, it's always a high-stress time of year. For the past few years, your, the anxiety level is high. And, you know, thankfully it's a tight-knit community of farmers and we stay in touch with each other. And, you know, the farmers who go down like, we're going through a devastating time, but then our neighbours who are trying to remain vigilant as much as possible and every day are living with this anxiety of going into their barn one morning and seeing the symptoms. It's a very, very high stress time, incredibly difficult, and we all kind of breathed a sigh of relief once we get to the end of bird season and there's, you know, 7 to 10 days of, of quiet and no more positive farms. And, you know, hopefully those who got through it can enjoy Christmas. It's just crazy what, what this disease has, has become in the wild bird population compared to what we were used to in the past.

MG: Can I ask you if you don't mind about, I mean, financially, how do you recover from something like this? When the entire as you said, the farm is empty, you don't have those moments. That's a huge financial hit. Is there help for you to recover from the cost of, of culling those birds?

MARK SIEMENS: Yeah. Thankfully, the federal government has a compensation program, so they will reimburse for the value of the birds that were in the barn. It's still a gigantic hit as we are left covering all of the cleaning and disinfection fees and, and you still have no income for however long it takes for you to get started. So it's still a huge hit, but thankfully that compensation keeps us going and most of us have a good relationship with our financial institutions who have watched other farmers go through it. And so, typically they will also assist the farmers by, you know, going down to an interest-only payment or something like that as needed.

MG: If you spend any time in rural communities, you will see in front of poultry farms, often you know the signs telling you to stop saying that there are biohazard concerns, what have you, to try to keep people out who have not gone through, you know, disinfectant, decontamination kind of procedures. What can you do to avoid having your birds contaminated?

MARK SIEMENS: You know, so that's, you're pointing to a program that was started back in 2004, 2005, after our first experience with this disease. And that was brought in to reduce farm-to-farm spread as that was sort of viewed as the highest risk factor back then. And we did a fantastic job of, of bringing that down and getting better at controlling disease outbreaks when and if they did occur. Unfortunately, a few years ago, the strain of the virus that was circulating in the wild birds became a lot more pathogenic. And so, it seems to pose the greatest risk now. And we have not kept up with trying to find better ways of mitigating that as an industry. So our biosecurity programs, while preventing spread farm-to-farm and from one farmer to another farmer, it. And does reduce the possibility of the farmer bringing it in. Unfortunately, when a windstorm seems to be able to blow it into your barn now, it has really created a lot of problems for us.

MG: I was going to say, I have to let you go. But there's not much. I mean, if it's wild birds and the windstorm that's blowing and then there's not much you can do about that in some ways.

MARK SIEMENS: Yeah, it's a difficult thing. I know there is research going on. My brother's actually participating in one where it's a new style of ventilation that will hopefully, you know, reduce the likelihood of that blowing into the barn. So, we look forward to seeing how, how that goes in the future.

MG: Mark, good to talk to you about this. The best of luck to you and thanks for, for being here.

MARK SIEMENS: Thank you.

MG: Mark Siemens is an egg farmer. He's in Abbotsford, British Columbia. Your CBC News is coming up next. And then, there are gold heists and then, there are yellow gold heists.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 2: We've had nine separate incidents where large amounts of butter were stolen from local grocery stores. There's no serial number on butter, I don't think. There's no VIN and that kind of thing. So it's a little harder to track it down.

MG: [Music: Theme fading in] There is a butter black market, though. We will talk about the rich history of something we can't seem to get enough of these days. Butter theft coming up in six minutes. I'm Matt Galloway. This is The Current. Stay with us.

[Music: Theme]

Butter’s rich history

Guests: Chad Miller, Marie Miller, Elaine Khosrova

MG: Hello, I'm Matt Galloway and you're listening to The Current. It was like a scene from a movie, a heist, but not for money or diamonds, but for butter.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: There was a white sedan that was seen at the back of the business. They loaded the butter in, and away they went.

MG: And away they went. Almost $1,000 worth of butter stolen from the back of a grocery store in Guelph, Ontario. And it's not the first theft of its kind.

SOUNDCLIP

GUELPH POLICE OFFICER: Since December of last year, we've had nine separate incidents where large amounts of butter were stolen from local grocery stores.

GUELPH POLICE OFFICER 2: It's certainly unusual, but there is a, we believe, an organised crime aspect to it.

GUELPH POLICE OFFICER 3: They're not stealing it in quantities that would be personal use. I mean, they're stealing, you know, dozens or more.

MG: Guelph police say they believe it's happening all over the country with rising costs driving a black market for butter. Butter is in high demand these days. And it's not just that yellow brick that you grab from the dairy aisle. You can get flavoured butter, artisanal butter, wildly expensive butter. There's a British butter named Sublime that sells for $170 a pound. Use sparingly if you're spending that kind of money on butter. Then, there are butter boards, which are just what they sound like, pats of butter on a big cutting board, replacing charcuterie boards all over social media.

SOUNDCLIP

Speaker 3: This is the latest viral food [inaudible]. You're going to see a ton of different flavour combinations out there, but I'm keeping my own pretty simple because it's butter and butter is pretty great already. Start with high quality salted butter, but that's not going to stop us from adding some extra flaky salt. Then top with lemon zest and lavender honey. Most people have been adding toppings or an herb of sorts. I happen to have these dried edible flowers, which I crushed up. This was absolutely delicious and a super beautiful way to entertain.

MG: A headline put it this way: "Butter has become the main character. It's always been the best part of dinner. Now it's the star." Chad and Marie Miller understand the demand and the love of butter. They run the Lofty Butter Company. It's a small batch creamery in eastern Ontario. Chad and Marie, hello.

CHAD MILLER: Good morning.

MARIE MILLER: Hi, Matt.

MG: Marie, what do you make of the story of people stealing butter to resell on the black market?

MARIE MILLER: Well, you know, butter is delicious. And I totally understand, you know, with prices going up and your basic commercial butter blocks being so expensive now, like butter is really good, but.

MG: I have questions about the butter black market. I mean, what do you d--, if somebody's stealing $1,000? Yeah, I know you're not the investigator, but what do you think they're doing with it, with $1,000 worth of butter?

MARIE MILLER: I don't, I don't really know. Like, I can't even...

[cross-talk]

MG: Like, do you melt it down and turn it into a giant butter sculpture? Do you like, what happens with it?

MARIE MILLER: Well, the royal affair just ended, so they're, they have a year to prepare for the butter sculpture-winning prizes, but...

MG: Why do you love butter, Marie?

MARIE MILLER: I love butter because it is so versatile. I mean, you can use it and add it to almost anything. And for us as a small batch business, it was really kind of the vessel of our creativity. So, we offer lots of different seasonally and locally inspired flavours. And it's just a wonderful canvas for, for adding flavour to food.

MG: How did you end up with that canvas? I mean, you could have gone into any number of different businesses, but why butter?

MARIE MILLER: Yeah, that's true. So, Chad and I both just really love food. And we have spent way too many hours watching the Food Network and wondering how we could make food our livelihood. And we were just driving through the hills of Northumberland. And I had mentioned, you know, it might be interesting to try making butter at home. So, as the algorithm seemed to go, my feed started filling up with small batch butter makers on Instagram. And so, I was following them all around the world. And, and then Chad, he went online and ordered a couple books on how to make small batch dairy products. And we started doing that. And then we figured, hey, we don't see these at the farmer's markets locally. We can't get cultured butter. So why don't we fill that gap and start making it more real and selling it at market?

MG: Chad, how do you make your butter?

CHAD MILLER: Currently, we actually just finally got our a large churn and that's allowing us to churn about 80 litres of cream at a time. But when we started out, we were using the 10-quart mixer. We would culture our cream with special lactic culture for about four days, make sure it's cooled down to a certain temp and then turn it up. But definitely, it was a labour of love because back when we were doing it that way, they would take about 7.5 hours to produce 70 pounds of butter. And when we were doing it, it would mean hand-washing the butter. So, like after you rinse off the buttermilk, then you're patting it to get the extra water out. Once you get all your moisture out, then it'll be cooled again. Then we add in our seasons, like if we're just doing unsalted, there would be nothing added. If we get sea salt, we use flaky sea salt. A couple other top ones are like our everything bagel and our steak spice. So then, we would hand mix about two kilos at a time, and then we'd divide them off, roll out with wooden paddles on a marble slab, and Marie would roll them up in the packaging that we have and then head to the market.

MG: You just rolled on past that, you have steak spice-flavoured butter?

CHAD MILLER: We do. We do. It's our own blends that we come up with for our butter. We do all our own seasoning. We acquire all our own spices. So we're not using somebody else's already pre-made spice blends. But yeah, we have a steak spice butter and everything bagel. And they are two of our top sellers.

MG: What makes I mean, just describe how your butter tastes, and the steaks spices, We get that. But I mean, salted butter. How does how does your butter taste, Chad?

CHAD MILLER: It's just, it's so much, we find so much creamier than your typical butter. Like, our butter has never been frozen, butter that comes in the grocery store. It has all been shipped frozen from the factory. We spend a lot of time. It's a lot of love that we put into our butter that we slow churn it, adds when we package it. Like, I'm hand rolling it with wooden panels on a marble slab, so it's not heavy machines pumping it out. It's, it's just easier to spread. It is. You guys notice it's creamier. We use flaky sea salt. So like, when you're, when you're biting into that, like, fresh, warm, sour dough with the creamy butter on top and you get those little crispy flakes of sea salt in there, it's just. It's just the buying. Like, it's just. It's just like a whole new world to food.

MARIE MILLER: And also, if you have been to Europe and have had just like bread and butter with your dinner, then you'll know what good butter is. And so, that is what our butter is for here. So it's, a lot of people say it's better than what they've had in Europe. A lot of people say it tastes like what they remember having on their grandmother's farm, and that's because grandmother's farm butter would have naturally cultured and been a naturally cultured butter as they skim the cream off of the milk and leave it sitting on the counter until there was enough to churn butter. It would have naturally fermented to give you that tangy full flavour taste that, you know, is a butter that a lot of people haven't experienced before.

MG: Chad, how much does your butter cost? Because the process, what you're talking about is not that high level industrial kind of mass produced butter. So how much is your butter?

CHAD MILLER: So right now, our butter is $10 for the rolls that we do a 150. A grand role. And it's, you're looking at $10 for that. And then we do a few other speciality flavours, our seasonals, which we produced upwards of 45 different seasonal butters. We package them into jars at about 160g and you're, you're between $10 and $12 for those depending on the flavour and what we put into them. Just because we, we use local ingredients, we use premium ingredients. For instance, we do a maple whisky and we use 12-year-old Gibson Whisky that's from Canada.

MG: What would you say to people? I mean, life is expensive and just going to the grocery store is expensive. Buying the butter that I need to, you know, bake the pie that I'm going to make is a lot of money at the best of times. What would you say to somebody who says, holy cow, that's a lot of money for butter?

CHAD MILLER: We get that the odd time. It's actually seems to be less when they see that it's like artisanal butter and it's like, it's cultured butter. So they're people that really enjoy the butter, but like we tell people like it's a labour of love and that's it's almost life-changing when you actually try the butter. [MG: Life-changing butter.] Yeah. Like even the bakers, like the ones that use it in their pie crust, they use it in their shortbread. They're like, I've never had something so delicious that they never knew that butter could change the flavour and the texture of their baking.

MG: What's your favourite way? I'll ask you both this before I let you go. Chad, what's your favourite way to use or to eat your butter? Is it is it on a piece of bread? Is it baked into a pastry? The pastry we know will often respond to different kinds and better butter. What's your favourite way to use it?

CHAD MILLER: My absolute favourite is my Everything Bagel butter melted in a frying pan and then, I fry my eggs in it in the morning.

MARIE MILLER: Oh man, I was going to say Everything Bagel butter, too. So, our Everything Bagel butter because it has all of the seeds and seasonings in it. When you use it on a grilled cheese and grill it up, it toasts everything up so perfectly and honestly, the only change you have to make to your grilled cheese is adding our Everything Bagel butter onto it. And it is so good.

MG: I have never said the word butter more in a conversation. It's good to talk to you both. Thank you very much. I'm hungry now.

MARIE MILLER: Thank you. [CHAD MILLER: Thank you.] Thank you so much, Matt.

MG: Chad and Marie Miller run the Lofty Butter Company in Colborne, Ontario. Elaine Khosrova is the order author of "Butter: A Rich History," and she is in Chatham, New York. Elaine, good morning to you.

ELAINE KHOSROVA: Good morning.

MG: Life-changing butter. Does that sound familiar?

ELAINE KHOSROVA: Yes, I mean, certainly life, butter changed history. If you want to really get into it. I mean, that's what my book is about, how butter became this not only utilitarian product, you know, the people used for eating and for cooking, but it turned out to be excellent for waterproofing things back in the day, it was used as medicines. It was used to create ceremonies to honour the gods. So, yeah, life, you know, life can be changed by butter.

MG: How did, how did how did you fall under the, under the sway of butter? What was it that initially fascinated you about this?

ELAINE KHOSROVA: I was the editor of a cheese magazine called Culture for five years, and in my travels I would taste lots of cheese. But I also was in dairy country. And so I was trying different butters around the world and around this country, Canada, as well as, as the U.S. So, I noticed that there were different colours that, you know, there was different tones of yellow on the butter. Some are whiter, some are deep yellow, some are waxier, some were crumblier. And then as Chad was talking about, there were cultured butters that had a little tang. Some were sweeter. So I was fascinated by essentially, you know, a food that's made from one ingredient. It's cream, give or take salt. And you can add flavourings like, like Chad and Marie do. But it's essentially one ingredient. And why were these differences so apparent? So, I was, I went to the library looking for a book on butter making to understand so the food chemistry of it. And I couldn't find anything. There was, there was nothing. There are some dairy manuals, you know, for, for farmers, but nothing that really got into the chemistry and the culture of, of butter making. So, that started my odyssey. It was, it was great. It was a great odyssey. Yeah.

MG: Do we know, what do we know about the roots of butter? Like, how where it started? Do we know the origin story?

ELAINE KHOSROVA: No, we know that it's. It aligns with the domestication of animals. And so, we're talking about the Stone Age. But we'll never, I don't think, I don't think anybody thinks it happened in one place and spread around the world. We think it happened in many places with different animals because the first animals that were domesticated were a goat and sheep and yak. They were not cows. Cows came along much later. So, the first cheeses and milk and butters were quite different than what we have now.

MG: What's the best butter that you've tasted? And I ask you this as somebody who travelled around the world looking at different types of butter making.

ELAINE KHOSROVA: I did have an amazing butter in India. It was made from water buffalo milk cream. And it was, It was all white. It didn't have any carotene in it. So, it was all white. And it looked sort of like a pile of yard, of, of lard. And, but it tasted amazing. It was really delicious. But in terms of what's available, because this was in a tiny village in India, in terms of what's really available, I would, I have to say that it was French butter that really won me over. They have been doing it right for so long, doing the culturing right with lactic bacteria that, you know, creates this subtle acidity, this delicious tang but doesn't take away from the sweetness of it. So it was, it's, it sounds a little cliche to say French butter, but really was has been my favourite, although I have to say, you know, in North America, butter producers are really coming up with their game. Yeah.

MG: There were, there were dark days for butter in the 1980's in the low fat craze. Remember that commercial? I can't believe it's not butter. [ELAINE KHOSROVA: Yes. Oh, yes.] You're all told to eat margarine instead. And the butter was going to kill us dead. How d--, how did you weather those, those dark days?

ELAINE KHOSROVA: Well, that even started earlier in the '70s. I mean, it went on for decades. I grew up in a household with a Scottish mother. We always had butter. We never touch margarine, you know. It was never, it was never appealing taste-wise. But, you know, margarine turned out to be, you know, full of trans fats that were not healthy for us. So. You know, we were able to turn, turn around the reputation of butter. But it was, it was a rough time. I mean, I think the reason that my book didn't exist or any book didn't exist before on the subject of butter before mine was because it was demonised for so long. You know, the culinary world didn't want to hear about butter because it was still, 'Oh, the saturated fat. We got to stay away from that.' So, it's, it's a shame, but it's really come back in a big way, as you can see from what's happening in the butter world now. And the prices, and the, and the, the thieves that are stealing it. You know, I have, I have a thought about that. [MG: Yes.] I have no proof and no way to know if this could be so. But I know that butter is more and more popular in, in Asian countries now, Japan and China. And so I wonder if there's like an overseas. Criminal elements here not to blame, you know, Japan or China, but I think there's an opportunity to send butter abroad and get a really high, high dollar for it. So, it's just, it's just a thought.

MG: A different elements to this intriguing story. In a previous life, you were a pastry chef.

ELAINE KHOSROVA: Yes. Yes, I was.

MG: How important is, how important is butter to baking?

ELAINE KHOSROVA: Oh gosh, it's absolutely essential.

MG: I mean, it is. That's the deal, right? If you want a really flaky kind of shatteringly flaky crust, you need butter.

ELAINE KHOSROVA: Yeah. If you want to make croissants, if you, you know, any kind of puff pastry, cakes, butter creams. It's, it's remarkable what you can do with butter. It depends a lot on it's, you know, whether it's warm or cold or soft. You can do so many different things with this one food.

MG: But it's really expensive, right? And one of the things I mean, I know I do this. I know other people who will look for butter on sale. You'll buy it, and then you'll throw it in the freezer because you could save a bit of money and use the butter down the line. Would you recommend something like that?

ELAINE KHOSROVA: Well, you know, it does slightly change the texture of butter because butter has moisture in it. It has water in it. So when it freezes, the crystals change. And the way it's embedded in the butter changes slightly. But we're talking minutia, so most people won't notice really any difference if they do freeze their butter. But I do want to make a pitch for the fact that, you know, we don't sit down and eat a stick of butter or even a half a stick of butter. Like, we use it pretty sparingly. I think a pound of butter can go quite a long way. So to say it's expensive, yes. But I can get a lot out of a pound of butter. And if I'm making my own pie or I'm making my own cookies, it's a lot cheaper than if I'm going down the road buying it.

MG: Can you settle? We had a discussion in our office yesterday about this. There's a producer here. I don't want to name names, but let's say her name is Willow. And she was saying that shortening is better for a pie crust than butter. Not to be judgy, but, but is she wrong?

ELAINE KHOSROVA: Shortening is very forgiving to work with in, in pastry because it, it doesn't toughen the flour the way butter can if it's, if it's mishandled. This is why there's a lot of fuss about the temperature of butter when you're making pastry. You definitely have to be, you know, more experienced to get a good crust from butter, but you get such a better flavour. So, yes, I, I can see why she would say that. It definitely blends when you have to blend the flour and the butter. It's easier to work with and some people use a mixture. They'll use half butter and half shortening. Not me. I'm all butter all the way. But I've been making pies, pastry for a very long time.

MG: What's your favourite thing to make with butter?

ELAINE KHOSROVA: Probably apple pie. Yeah, probably. I love it, but I use it for cooking. You know, I am a big baker.

MG: Now is the season for the apple pie with butter or shortening or whatever you want to use. Elaine, good to talk to you about this. Thank you very much.

ELAINE KHOSROVA: Thank you.

MG: Thank you. Elaine Khosrova is the author of "Butter: A Rich History." She's in Chatham, New York. What do you love about butter? What are you making with butter? Is it apple pie season in your home? Well, how are you? Butter is expensive. It's really expensive. And as I said, I'm buying butter when it's on sale. You whack it into the freezer and then pull it out when necessary. Your thoughts on butter and if you have any thoughts on what's happening with the butter that's being stolen and where it perhaps might be ending, you could let us know as well. The email address is thecurrent@cbc.ca. Here is Man and the Echo and their song, Operation Margarine.

[Music: Operation Margarine by Man and The Echo]

MG: Operation Margarine by Man and the Echo. Well, coming up after your regional update.

SOUNDCLIP

CINDY BLACKSTOCK: How do we ensure for all generations to come that First Nations children live free of the hardship of Canada's discrimination and communities get a chance to recover from the residential schools?

MG: The Assembly of First Nations has voted to reject a $47.8 billion deal with the federal government. It's a long sought settlement for discrimination in the child welfare system. In 90 seconds, we'll speak with people on both sides of this conversation about the deal, the money and what's at stake. That's coming up. I'm Matt Galloway. This is The Current. Stay with us.

[Music: Theme]

And the push for a new deal on First Nations child welfare

Guests: Chief Derek Nepinak, Cindy Blackstock

MG: Hello again. I'm Matt Galloway and you're listening to The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

CINDY WOODHOUSE NEPINAK: Last year, we had more First Nations children removed from their communities and families than in any other time in Canadian history.

MG: That's Assembly of First Nations National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak speaking last month in Calgary to a room full of First Nations leaders from across this country. They were voting on whether to accept a draft agreement with the federal government on child welfare reform. The agreement was worth almost $48 billion and aimed to address decades of discriminatory funding, underfunding of Indigenous child welfare services. Ashley Bach was one of the people who spoke at the Assembly of First Nations meeting. Ashley was placed with a foster family at birth and had no connection to her Indigenous family. She was in favour of the deal.

SOUNDCLIP

ASHLEY BACH: I was able to do a Freedom of Information request to the B.C. government to access my foster care files. I learned that my biological grandmother, a residential school survivor, had requested to be kept in contact with me. That request was never fulfilled and she passed away shortly after my adoption was finalised. My story really hurts me to share, but I'm not sharing it for sympathy. I'm sharing it because I know that you guys have the opportunity before you today to prevent such stories from happening to other First Nations children in care. Those First Nations children in care right now are at risk of being in care need action. They need it now. And they can't wait decades again for a perfect settlement agreement. And then, they won't be kids anymore. They'll be like me and they'll already have been impacted by the system.

MG: In the end, the deal was voted down. AFN National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak responded this week.

SOUNDCLIP

CINDY WOODHOUSE NEPINAK: Since the results, many have asked me, "What are we going to do now?" They're getting calls all evening, all morning. Our children are watching and continue to wait patiently. And we can't help but think that the kids and families lost something with yesterday's votes because the status quo will prevail. While disappointed with the results of the vote, we know our assembly has come a long way. We have had a difficult discussion, but we are here together, having substantive dialogue about real issues, and we remain united by a common belief that First Nations families should be empowered to look after their own children.

MG: Khelsilem is the council chairperson for the Squamish Nation in British Columbia. He put forward the motion to reject the deal and explained his reasons in a recent podcast.

SOUNDCLIP

KHELSILEM: The chiefs and the leadership was really focussed on: Is this agreement going to help end the discrimination, yes or no? And the contents of that agreement spoke to, I think reasonably the chiefs and proxies and leadership said, I don't think that this is a good agreement that's going to help us end the discrimination against our children. And it's not a good agreement to sign with Canada at this point. There's room for improvement and we're committed to improving that agreement as long as Canada is willing to as well.

MG: Chief Derek Nepinak represents the Minegoziibe Anishinaabe Nation in Manitoba. He supported this deal and joins us now. Chief Nepinak, good morning to you.

DEREK NEPINAK: Good morning, Matt.

MG: Who were you thinking about as you voted to support this deal?

DEREK NEPINAK: Well, because I'm a chief in the community, I'm thinking about the, the grandmothers back home who have for years been advocating for a more localised response to families and children in need. I'm thinking about the advocates in the community who are stepping up to help with the healing process in our community and of course most of all, I'm thinking about our little ones who deserve to have that opportunity to, to live in a safe place, to be with mom and dad and to not be cast into the institution of child and family services where they become disconnected and lose their identity very quickly. That's who I was thinking about, first and foremost.

MG: And so in that context, tell me more about why you supported this deal.

DEREK NEPINAK: Well, it's important to, to observe the AFN for what it is. It is, it is a forum for conversation. It is a forum for, for national-based decision making. But that has a trickle down effect at the community and at the community, we're already implementing some of the budgetary opportunities within, you know, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal decision, factoring in, you know, forecasting budgets that were post-settlement agreement to make sure that we're ramping up our ability to provide quality services to children and families at the community. That's why I was in support of it. We've already been implementing for the past two years the prevention funding, as well as the family representative funding that's there. And with that funding, we're able to hire people to come in and actually start building wraparound services at a local level. And that's why I was behind it. It's very practical, a very practical approach to helping families, and that's why I was behind this agreement.

MG: How do you understand the arguments of those who voted against the deal, who say this is not good enough, that despite the dollar figure, despite the time spent on this, that this is not the finished article, that people feel cut out by the process, but also that there can be more that can be achieved?

DEREK NEPINAK: I think that, the way I look at it is that in a compromise negotiation, there's always going to be something that arrives that's less than perfect. Okay? So, we do the best we can with what we have. And at some point, we have to move beyond the status quo. And the status quo has been resulting in tragic numbers of children not only in care, but, but you know, beyond that, I think that, you know, when we when we look at what happened, I think we look at communities that perhaps are not implementing the services, maybe they don't have the capacity to implement the services at this time because of the budgetary opportunities that are there. It shouldn't be a reason to say no because many of us have, have begun moving forward with implementing these budgets and building the capacity locally. Just because a chief may be unaware that they have budgets in place and they have the opportunity to start building local services, that's not a reason to say no because the status quo is not an acceptable place for us to be.

MG: Do you understand, just do you understand where they're coming from in saying no?

DEREK NEPINAK: I understand that there's oftentimes what I call the low-hanging fruit of politics, and that is you can say, 'Oh, we weren't consulted enough.' 'Oh, we didn't know about this deal.' 'Oh, you know, we have sovereignty and we have inherent rights.' And I agree with all of those angles. But to me, there's a very practical reason why we needed to, needed to accept the settlement. And that's what my focus was.

MG: What concerns you the most about waiting for the process to resolve itself to get a new deal?

DEREK NEPINAK: My concern is that any negotiated type of agreement with the federal government requires a mandate from, you know, the cabinet and from the, from the Prime Minister's Office. And from what I can tell is that it's not likely to, that we're going to see a new mandate to negotiate, you know, arrive at the Assembly of First Nations prior to Christmas and even into the new year.

MG: Why do you believe that is, if you don't mind me asking?

DEREK NEPINAK: I think that the government of the day is really focusing on whether it can survive into the new year. I think that there's a lot of pressure we see nationally for perhaps changes within the Liberal caucus, maybe even an election on the horizon. And if that does happen, this window of opportunity closes and it's difficult to see whether or not any change in government would lead to a new mandate to negotiate the settlement. And to me, you know, we're, we're very, very dangerously close to the uncertainty that, that, you know, that this, this situation has brought.

MG: Dangerously close. I mean, you use that word deliberately.

DEREK NEPINAK: Yeah, absolutely. I'm concerned that if there is a regime change in Ottawa, such as, you know, for example, if the Conservatives come in under Poilievre and the Liberals are pushed aside, that I don't think that this is, this $48 billion settlement agreement is going to be at the top of Mr. Poilievre's list of, of things to do out of the gate.

MG: What would lead you to believe that?

DEREK NEPINAK: Well, it's too late to, to alleviate that now. I think we're facing the uncertainty of what a change in government might bring. And I'm concerned that there isn't going to be a mandate to try to negotiate. I think if it does come forward, it's going to be very, very marginal. It's going to be a very slight adjustment to what's already been decided, if anything. And that, you know, we didn't necessarily need to wait to take that time. We could have settled this last month and we could be, you know, creating certainty around what we're going to do for the future of children and families at the community level.

MG: Have you heard anything from the Conservatives again, leading in polls? The suggestion is by many that they're a government in waiting, that things could change, obviously, when an election rolls around. But have you heard anything from the Conservatives that would suggest that this would not be, to your point, at the top of their agenda?

DEREK NEPINAK: Well, Matt, I've been a Chief for a long time. I was, I was the Grand Chief in Manitoba during the Stephen Harper years. And I've seen and lived through the austerity measures that are put in place impacting indigenous communities and organisations. And I've seen it firsthand. So, I have experience in seeing how Conservative governments have dealt with Indigenous issues, and the cutting back of services and programs that are vitally needed. So, I don't need to look too far ahead to know what I experienced in the past.

MG: And so if we end by going back to that first question that I asked, which is who you were thinking about as you voted to support this deal, who are you most concerned about if a new deal is not signed?

DEREK NEPINAK: Well, I'm most concerned about our ability at the community level to, to reclaim the space for child and family wellness. We're working hard to make that happen now. Rebuilding, you know, inherent rights, rebuilding the jurisdiction of families to take care of their young ones where and when they see fit. And at the community level, I'm so, I'm most worried about the children who are stuck in these institutions, in these systems, these provincially mandated agencies and organisations that tell us how we're supposed to raise our children. I'm most concerned about them, and that's who I was thinking about when I was voting for the, for the agreement. We can't stand, we can't stand in the status quo. I think it's too tragic. There's a lot of tragedy happening every day in jurisdictions like Manitoba where, you know, it's historically been known as the epicentre for child apprehension in North America.

MG: Chief Nepinak, good to have you here. I appreciate your time this morning. Thank you.

DEREK NEPINAK: Thank you.

MG: Chief Derek Nepinak represents the Minegoziibe Anishinaabe Nation in Manitoba. He was in Regina this morning.

MG: Cindy Blackstock is executive director of the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society. She helped launch the discrimination case against the federal government that led to this deal. And she has been listening in. Cindy, good morning to you.

CINDY BLACKSTOCK: Good morning.

MG: Let me begin with the same question that I've been asking this morning, which is who were you thinking of when you recommended that this deal be rejected?

CINDY BLACKSTOCK: I think it's the very same children that Chief Nepinak was thinking about. It's a decision about how do we ensure for all generations to come that First Nations children are lived free of the hardship of Canada's discrimination and communities get a chance to recover from the residential schools? Keep in mind, Matt: This was a 10-year agreement with nothing to follow that was binding on Canada. So, it was and it was already in year one. So, we're really at nine years. And then, it was keep your fingers crossed for the generations to follow after that.

MG: And so given that, why did you feel that the agreement needed to be voted down?

CINDY BLACKSTOCK: Well, you know, when you look at the marquee headline of $47.8 billion, you know, the question becomes, well, why wouldn't you vote for it? Right? But when you looked at the fine print and you did greater scrutiny on the agreement, you realise that none of that money was really that secure. In fact, there's a clause in the agreement that says any and all the funding is subject to undefined approval processes by the Government of Canada. So, Canada could come up with something that says it was a required approval process and it could put much of that money at risk. The other thing is, is that it's not a zero-sum game. We have existing orders from the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal for the types of things that Chief Nepinak was already talking about for prevention purpose majority services which are so vitally needed in the community. So what the agreement would have done is taken away the, the ability to rely on those legal orders and replaced it with an agreement that didn't have strong provisions to ensure the money would be there, that it would be there beyond the 10 years, and that it could be enforced in Canada with Canada if they back select.

MG: The headline is partially around this agreement and the dollar figure is a part of that headline. $48 billion is a lot of money. What would you say to people who say that rejecting this is a case of perfection being the enemy of good?

CINDY BLACKSTOCK: Yeah, I would say no. It's not about that. It's about achieving non-discrimination for kids. That's literally what this is about. That's what the requirements are. The Canadian Human Rights Act. And, you know, we appreciate that nothing will ever, quote, be perfect, but it has to achieve that legal baseline and perfect for all generations to follow. You know, just last week, we lost Murray Sinclair and the top Truth and Reconciliation Commission Call to Action was ending this kind of discrimination in child and family services and reforming the system so it better serves kids. And Jordan's principle, which is another part of this Canadian Human Rights Act case, is was the third one. And Canada is actively breaching Jordan's principle. At the same time, it's asking chiefs to really accept this agreement and get rid of the tribunal. The tribunal has been the only way we've been able to enforce Canada to really make steps to, to better children's lives. And it's a big gamble giving up the sure thing for something that might happen. But there's provisions in the agreement where Canada has wide discretion to say, well, we don't really want to do this anymore.

MG: In the absence of that deal, though, as you heard from the Chief, he says the status quo is not satisfactory, that it's tragic right now, that communities can't wait for this money. What would you say to the members of those communities who say that a deal is needed now and the money that would flow from a deal like that is needed now?

CINDY BLACKSTOCK: All right. So we, we did the calculations with the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal orders. It came to based on the department's Department of Indian Affairs' own figures to about the equivalent of $45 billion over 10 years plus actual costs for things like actuals, etc.. So, it was roughly in the same ballpark. I don't see it as a significant difference between what was advertised and what is already provided for on legally binding orders other than legally binding orders, in my view, are much, much more reliable, particularly if there is a change in government. And it's not, to me, a question of whether the Conservatives are in power or Liberals in power. The issue is that children have a right to be free of discrimination regardless of who's in power.

MG: I'll come back to that in a moment. But in the meantime, back to the Chief's concern that in the absence of that agreement, the status quo is, in fact, satisfactory. Again [CINDY BLACKSTOCK: Right], what is the message to the people who would say this money is overdue and waiting any longer is not, is, I'll use that word again. It's not satisfactory that doesn't meet the bar?

CINDY BLACKSTOCK: Well, I'd say two things. One is, first of all, like we talked about just a moment ago, we're not sure that money was actually in the can. I mean, if it was there, why didn't Canada put it into a trust? It was subject to this annual decision making. And then, the third thing is that the chiefs made that on the 18th two very clear resolutions to take steps forward to really put this back on, on the trail, to plug some of those loopholes that Canada had in the agreement that really resulted in an agreement that would take it below the standard of the Canada Human Rights Tribunal and ensure success for First Nations children beyond year nine. We need, we owe it to the residential school survivors to make sure all children for all generations are protected from discrimination.

MG: You and I have spoken about this issue a number of times over the many years. I just wonder what, what kind of message do you think turning down a deal like this sends to Ottawa?

CINDY BLACKSTOCK: I think what it says to Ottawa that, you know, you have to, you can't contract out of your human rights obligations and you can't contract out of your responsibilities to ensure that all First Nations children, regardless of the conditions of the community they're living in, are able to live free of discrimination. I'm hoping that that's a message from Canada. You know, one of the things that doesn't get talked about a lot in this thing is the governance that was proposed under this final settlement agreement, which is that it would go to a committee that operates completely secretly and they would govern this whole agreement and the money over the 10-year period with no real accountability back to anyone. That type of governance process is not something that we feel comfortable when decisions are being made on behalf of First Nations children across 633 different communities. It ought to be transparent. It ought to be accountable so that we know where the money is making the best difference for children and that we can recalibrate. Right? Because we may be, you know, starting a program that may not work. And we want to be able to shift course to make sure that it's more effective if that's the case.

MG: What are the options that you have now in this moment to force a better deal? I mean, are there conversations that are happening now to get a better agreement?

CINDY BLACKSTOCK: Oh, yeah. There's not only conversations, there's work that's happening to implement those resolutions from the chiefs. And the chiefs have decided that they really want to create a Chiefs' Commission to oversee the whole thing and make sure that this is done in a way that keeps kids at the centre and sets up all First Nations children across Canada for success. And I think that they're going to be able to do that. It's not going to take much more time to do this. We've already done so much work on this that we have a lot to build on, and we have experts across the country and amazing leadership who, you know, have really dedicated themselves to understanding what's happening with their kids in their communities and are working with their experts to propose a better solution.

MG: And if the federal government falls and the Liberals are swept out of power, and, for example, as the polls reflect, the Conservatives become the government, Chief Nepinak was concerned. I mean, he said he's, he's been around long enough that he has seen the effects of austerity before. Are you confident that you will have a partner at the table?

CINDY BLACKSTOCK: Well, if we don't have a partner at the table, we take him to the legal, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. I mean, that's the reality, Matt, is that this is not just a negotiation where that's the only course. This is Canada trying to negotiate a conclusion to a legal proceeding where it's already been found responsible for egregiously discriminating against First Nations children in ways that they lost their childhoods and they lost their lives. So, if they don't agree to negotiate something, then the fallback is they, we'll see you in court.

MG: Having reached would seem to some people to be in agreement, I just wonder, finally and again, I ask you this as somebody who has been a champion for the rights of Indigenous children for years and years now. Is your optimism still sound. Are you, do you believe that you'll be able to get to that step beyond the step that was rejected, that you will be able to get closer to that idea of perfection with it, with a new deal, with a new arrangement?

CINDY BLACKSTOCK: It's not perfection. It's to non-discrimination. That's it. That's what we need to get to. And that's a floor, not a ceiling, by the way. And we, I feel entirely confident we can get there. I've just met so many amazing First Nations leaders and experts on the ground, youth in and from care and families who can be part of this journey. And we have the structures in place to be able to take this across the finish line. In fact, you might remember, Matt: There was a $20 billion deal on compensation and they had made an agreement with Canada, and it turned out in the fine print that it would have leg--, literally taken cheques away from children and care who were already legally entitled to compensation, taken it away from them and given it to other people. Well, that's not, that's not justice. And it turned out that we had to oppose that. And the tribunal agreed that you can't take away compensation for people who were already egregiously hurt just because you want to reach an agreement with Canada. And we were able to get another $3.4 billion on the table to make sure that those kids are taken care of. And that was with the direction and support of the leadership. So, we've, we've done this before.

MG: It's always good to talk to you. Thank you very much.

CINDY BLACKSTOCK: Thank you very much.

MG: Cindy Blackstock is executive director of the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society. That is The Current for this Thursday. Q's up next on CBC Radio One. Before we go, we want to give you a taste of Toronto today. Or should we say "Tay-ronto". Taylor Swift, as you may have heard, is taking over that city. Up to half a million visitors have been pouring in.

SOUNDCLIP

FAN: This is what I've been waiting for all year.

MG: These are the first shows on in Canada on her tour. She's in Vancouver in a few weeks' time. And in the downtown core, where we are, our studio's right across the street from the CN Tower and the Rogers Centre, where Taylor Swift is set to perform six Era tour shows beginning tonight. It is a wild scene. The street signs have been changed. They say Taylor Swift Way. There are restaurants and cafes that are selling Taylor Swift theme items. The hotels are sold out. The roads are closed near the stadium, and there is a giant friendship bracelet that was sent all the way from New Orleans outside of the Rogers Centre. And the Swifties, they are everywhere.

SOUNDCLIP

FAN 2: I've been a Taylor Swift fan, oh, probably since I was about 3 or 4 years old.

FAN 3: Taylor Swift's basically been the backdrop to my life. And I remember being in high school singing along to her debut album.

FAN 4: She's just so huge and I feel like she is the goal.

FAN 5: She's kind of like a romance novel. She makes you believe in love and good things and true friendship.

FAN 6: It doesn't have to be exclusionary in that way. It would just that feeling of like, being together, [FAN 7: Yeah, like solidarity] and bonding, [FAN 7: Camaraderie.]

MG: There's a mad scramble. People trying to get last-minute tickets. And cities like Toronto and Vancouver are hoping for kind of a "Taylor effect." Millions and millions of dollars poured into the city in tourist revenue. Whether you get the hype or not, you cannot deny that this is something, and it's quite something to see all the people who are pouring into this city and will be in Vancouver in a couple of weeks' time. For them and for those who couldn't make it, here's Taylor Swift. Shake It Off. I'm Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening to The Current. See you tomorrow.

[Music: Shake It Off by Taylor Swift]

Thursday, November 14, 2024 Full Transcript

Social Sharing