The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - Your Turn and the Random Ranter

Episode Date: February 2, 2023

Our regular Thursday episode features your thoughts on everything from the NHL to doctors to the cause of freedom to read.  Plus the Random Ranter has his take on waste and who is the worst offender.

And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. You are just moments away from the latest episode of The Bridge. Welcome to Thursday. It's your turn. And the Random Ranter. And hello there, Peter Mansbridge in Toronto for this day. And this day is your day. It's your turn. And as always, we got quite a few emails into the system this week on a variety of different topics. Two main ones this week. As always, you seem to have something to say about the random renter. His rant last week and the week before last. Still letters coming in on that one.

But first up was our topic on Monday. We talked about the freedom to read, right? This is an issue in certainly in some parts of the United States. We hear about it almost every day, usually in the southern U.S., usually in Florida, and whether or not certain books should be allowed to be read in schools and libraries and elsewhere. Well, the question we started asking was, well, what about in Canada? Do we have any of these problems here?

And surprisingly, to a lot of people, it was a surprise to find out, in fact, we did. So our guest on Monday was Usa Kachin. And she is the chief librarian and the CEO of the Halifax Public Libraries. She's also the chair of the CULC. That's the Canadian Urban Library Council. And she was on the program for, I don't know, 20, 25 minutes. And she struck a chord.

It seems like a lot of you were not only listening, you were taking it in and you were concerned about it. And you were very happy that we had her as a guest. And at the end of that program, I suggested to Uss Katchen that we should have another talk at some point in the near future, and a lot of you suggested the same thing in your letters this week. Well, as with all letters that come into the bridge, I'm going to read some of them on the air today. Not all of them. And not all of each letter that I read will I read. Just usually excerpts from it. And that's because, well, we want to get as many in as we can. And some of you love to write, and you write great letters.

But I try to boil it down to a paragraph, sometimes less, sometimes a little more. But that's where we go. So let's get started on the issues that Ussakatchin raised. Don Robertson writes from Edmonton, Alberta, I liked your freedom to read discussion with Ussakatchin on Monday. I found it very interesting, educational, and inspirational. I like Ussakatchin's sensible approach to the importance of freedom of expression for everybody, even if it is disagreeable to some others. I hope you have her on again sometime. Well, I think you can be sure that we will want to do that.

Paula Seidenkranz in Hamilton. I'm a long-time listener, first-time correspondent. Listening to what Ms. Katchen had to say was so interesting and timely, I realized once again how fortunate I am to be Canadian. I appreciate listening to articulate people like her and your regular participants, Chantel, Bruce, and Brian. Keep up the terrific work. Now, a couple of you sent in a link to a story

that was on the site The Verge. And the headline is, Brooklyn Public Library is offering free digital library cards to young adults in the U.S. And this is to counter certain state governments, certain school authorities in different parts of the country who are not allowing certain books to be read in their district. So I won't read this whole story, but I'll read a couple of sentences from it

because it's pretty interesting. The Brooklyn Public Library, it's known as the BPL, is counteracting a ban on certain books by letting anyone in the United States aged 13 to 21 apply for a digital library card. This gives teens and young adults, regardless of their location in the U.S., access to the library's entire e-book collection. Now that's

fascinating. That gets around the problem, right? Can't read it in your school, but hey, you can read it in the library with the Brooklyn library card. And you could be sitting in, you know, someplace in Florida where you can't get access to certain books, but you can get them from the Brooklyn Library and they'll send it to you as an e-book. There you go. So you can be sure if that's starting with Brooklyn, it's going to spread. And it'll probably spread in Canada if it hasn't already, that idea.

Ed Fontaine writes from Vancouver. Loved your conversation with the Halifax librarian about the freedom to read. Being able to read books, whether we agree with them or not, is critical to our humanity and our understanding of what makes us human. Case in point. Now, I don't know this, and I believe Ed is telling us the facts here,

but case in point. The Vancouver Library has three copies of Mein Kampf. That's the book Hitler wrote while he was in jail in the mid-1920s after the Munich Putsch. I'm not sure how much he wrote. Rudolf Hess was his cellmate, and he apparently wrote quite a bit of it, or at least received the dictation from Hitler. Anyway, the Vancouver Library has three copies of Mein Kampf. Interesting to see that those copies have 12 holds on them.

Thanks for a very interesting discussion. Vaughn Stewart in St. Catharines, Ontario. Vaughn writes, I found your Monday podcast with Oussakatchin most interesting. It reminded me of one of the elementary schools I taught at in the early 1980s, where annual debating contests were held for grades 4 to 8. Topics were chosen, and opposing teams drew to see which side of the debate they had to research and argue. What a great way to argue for something you might not agree with,

and therefore see the other side's point of view. And one more letter on our Monday discussion about the freedom to read. This one comes from Megan Rondo. I just finished listening to the episode of The Bridge where you talk with Usa Kachin. I was so excited when I opened my podcast app and saw the topic of your conversation. I'm currently working towards my Master of Library

and Information Studies degree at the University of Alberta. Last spring, I received a scholarship from the Freedom to Read Foundation in the United States to take a course on youth and intellectual freedom at San Jose State University. The course content did have an American focus, but I tried to bring in some Canadian content to the class discussions. Going into that course, I knew book banning and censorship was a big problem in the U.S., especially in the South. But I was surprised to find out how much it happens here in Canada. As an example, the Freedom to Read website in Canada keeps a list of materials that have been challenged in Canada. And you can find that yourself by going to freedomtoread.ca,

challenge, you know, slash challenged hyphen works. Okay, freedomtoread.ca. And you can see a lot of that information. Okay, so as I said, that's just a reflection of some of the letters we got on that subject. Now, there were a lot of letters, again this week, about our friend the random ranter. We call him random because he's random on his topic selection. He's all over the place.

Now, some of you, very few of you actually, there's been a couple of letters of people who've said, you know, why do you let him be anonymous? Well, he's not anonymous to me. I know who he is. And we did this. I don't want to say it was a gimmick because this guy has strong feelings on a wide range of topics,

and they're all over the ideological map. But we wanted to keep his identity secret. Same way, remember the senator's diary on CBC Radio on Sunday mornings? You've got to go back quite a few years for that. But it was the same idea. Never identified, right? Just made it more interesting in some ways. Anyway, what I've said about the ranter is he is from the West,

and I describe the West. I know lots of people challenge this, but I describe the West based on my personal experience in living in the West, anywhere between Thunder Bay to Victoria. And I've lived along that route in very many different places. He is just an ordinary guy. He's not, he's not, he doesn't work for any political party. He doesn't lend his hand to political decision-making or advice or anything like that.

He's just a guy who has strong feelings about different things, and he's funny at times, and he's this and that. He's thoughtful. And I think he's been a great addition to the program, and it seems like many of you feel the same way, even where you don't agree with him. Anyway, let me get to some of these letters. Gary Westall in Picton, Ontario.

He was listening last week when the ranter went after Alex Ovechkin and the NHL for a variety of different things, following the whole issue the week before with Provorov from the Philadelphia Flyers. Anyway, here's what Gary Westall has to say. Last week's random ranter rant read the NHL has spurred me to write. I actually wrote part of this piece a couple of weeks ago in response to a Winnipeg Suns story. It fits with the ranter's view about Alex Ovechkin. So I'm just reading part of this.

It appears that money, fame, glory, and image are motivating the NHL, thus making it a hypocrite. The NHL and Ovechkin handsomely profit from each other. It also appears likely Ovechkin himself may fear becoming a target of the thug Putin. If that's the case, then he's a weak, spineless creature compared to the brave Ukrainian citizens and soldiers, along with the many rank-and-file Russians who oppose Putin. Ovechkin needs to unequivocally call out Putin for his wrongdoing, not post pictures of himself cozying up to Putin

and communicating weasel words, messages about the war. Mike Warkentine from Nanaimo, BC. Thank you for your podcast and all your guests and regulars. I'm writing to specifically thank the ranter for putting the exact words to my own thoughts in regards to the

nhl and alex ovechkin he was a hundred percent correct in my opinion or in hockey parlance he gave 110 for the whole time he was on keep up the good work and good talk Robin Ward from Edmonton. The ranter's comments on the NHL got my own rant going in my head. I love hockey. It's fast and exciting, but more and more I'm leaving the men behind and focusing on the women. Note, I said I love hockey, not I love fighting. The Calgary-Columbus NHL game the other night was very entertaining until two guys decided to switch over to boxing.

Moreover, on the subsequent between periods break, the commentators praised this fight. Sheesh. But not every letter that came in on the ranter's rant on hockey and Vovechkin was positive. Jeff Windsor is in Toronto, but he's a Newfoundlander at heart. He writes, I'm writing about last week, the ranter's rant. I must say I have not heard a more privileged tunnel vision viewpoint

on such complicated issues on this podcast yet, which is part of the reason I listen. Now, Jeff has quite a long letter. I'm just going to read part of it. These are hockey players. They are not hired for their world views, rather to play hockey. If they do something harmful, even through words or actions, I agree they should be disciplined. But to discipline on ideology they are not pushing, but rather they are symbolizing, is a dangerous route for the NHL to take.

Again, on both of these players, they have very different lived experiences than you, and to expect that they would see the world exactly as you see it is such a ridiculous stand to take. Acceptance and education is always better than ridicule and shame, especially coming from an anonymous Canadian. Not anonymous to me. However, Jeff ends, All the best, Peter. I love the show,

and it's gotten me more involved in Canadian politics than I ever have before. Well, that's good. Even when you're mad, it's good. Right? Yes, Purewall from Surrey, B.C. I'm writing regarding last

week's rant for once I disagree with the ranter. People should be allowed some difference of opinions. The ranter contradicts himself when he says someone can have an opinion and then says an employee for a big organization should do as he's told.

We need to stop making everything a culture war. What really happened? A hockey player didn't wear a particular jersey while skating around with a stick chasing a puck. Beware of corporate wokeness. It's all for show anyway. I cringed when my Vancouver Canucks wore Diwali-themed jerseys. Just seemed like people playing dress-up like the Prime Minister's India trip. My family is from India, and I don't need the Canucks or banks to do that kind of stuff.

It seems super fictional and lame. Lastly, how many other NHL players simply played along rather than risk controversy? Dana O'Neill. I listened today to the ranter who was very upset because a hockey player didn't want to wear the pride jersey because of his religious beliefs. I do recall that in Toronto there are hockey games broadcast in Punjabi. So in the true spirit of diversity, there are hockey games broadcast in Punjabi.

So in the true spirit of diversity, should next month all hockey players be required during the warm-up to wear a turban? I don't quite see the connection there. Personally, I couldn't care less about hockey. I haven't watched a game since the last one on strike. The poor fellows couldn't live off of six million dollars a year, but didn't mind me paying a third of my paycheck to take my wife and two young sons to a game. Also, regarding your musings at the start, it's not surprising that mostly liberal

listeners listening to a liberal podcast would agree with a liberal ranter in my opinion. But hey, I'm just a dumb truck driver. You know what, Dana? You're not a dumb truck driver. You're a truck driver. And that's fine. I just spoke to one of the biggest trucking companies in North America last week. I had a great time at their event. Anyway, you're not a dumb anything.

And to suggest everything's liberal slanted on this program, you obviously don't listen. You obviously didn't listen to the last few letters. And you certainly haven't listened to many programs to suggest that. Anyway, we cover all the bases here. We certainly try to. David Clark writes from Ottawa. I'm with the random ranter on his opinion regarding Ovechkin and his friend Putin.

Since I can't attend and could not afford tickets to Sunday's game when Toronto takes on the Washington Capitals, I would hope that some of the Toronto fans would show their displeasure of Ovi by booing placards, etc. I'm not sure they did that, but they sure whooped them anyway. Barbara Esler from Newmarket, etc. I'm not sure they did that, but they sure whooped them anyway. Barbara Essler from Newmarket, Ontario. You asked for short emails. Here's a short one for you.

The ranter's right. End of story. Ian Hebblethwaite. I've only disliked one or two rants, but boy, oh boy, was he spot on today. The only thing I wish is that the NHL would hear it. Ian's in Moncton, and you know what, Ian? I'm sure the NHL did hear it.

Clyde Hillier in London, Ontario. It's a long letter. I'm just going to read part of it. My son-in-law is one of the many orthopedic surgeons who, this is as a result of the ranter's rant the week before on doctors, right? The problem with doctors is doctors. That was his thesis. And one of the things he talked about is how doctors leave the country.

My son-in-law, writes Clyde Hillier, is one of the many orthopedic surgeons who has left. My daughter left with her husband so that Canada lost both an orthopedic surgeon and a family practitioner. To lose physicians like this is tragic and so very stupid, as it is completely preventable. The considerable training costs are completely wasted, and I can personally attest that these fine young Canadians and their families suffer a great deal of anxiety while going through the process. Hundreds of Canadian families have experienced this forced dislocation of their families.

I'm sure that many of our expatriate physicians would return to Canada in a heartbeat if they had a comfortable opportunity to do so. So while it makes good sense to explore all possibilities to ensure an adequate supply of health care staff, we would do very well to start by getting hospitals the funding they need to ensure that facilities are available to fully utilize all the physicians we are putting through our residency programs and the surgeons we can repatriate. Dr. Jane Rusnak from St. Catharines, Ontario. And you may remember that name because her letters sparked many a good edition of Your Turn through the COVID story at its height in the last couple of years. Anyway, Dr. Jane writes, The randoms rant on doctors will require more time.

I have since listened to this week's responses. This was listening last week. Perhaps the reason you're not getting many doctors responding, we did have one, is that we are too busy working. We barely have time to listen to a podcast as a form of self-care, let alone the time to devote to addressing these comments. I thank my colleague who did write in. He is correct.

That is the provincial governments that determine how many spots there are in medical school. We knew 30 years ago when I was in medical school that there would be a shortage of physicians now based on the age of the majority of physicians at the time. But did the government increase the spots? No. The public has been fortunate to not have the shortage of physicians until now, as so many physicians continue working into their 70s and 80s. That is changing, however. The newer graduates are demanding a better work-life balance, seeing fewer patients,

working more reasonable hours, like other professions. Good for them, but that contributes to the greater need for more physicians. Dr. Jane goes on on a number of issues, COVID far from over, as she says. She also talks a lot about smoking, and enough that I'm going to consider doing another,

or doing a show on smoking. She's particularly concerned about vaping. So we might take a crack at that as well. But once again, the ranter provokes a lot of discussion. I'm glad to hear it. Speaking of the ranter, maybe it's time for him to weigh in on today's show before we get to more of your letters. So here you go. The Random Ranter for this week.

Let's talk waste and not solid waste, because even though some will equate the two, I'm talking federal government waste. Tax dollars, that is. And I think we can all agree the government wastes them. But in fairness, there's waste in private enterprise too. I'd even go as far to say there's waste in mom and pop shops, lemonade stands, and no doubt, even your own household. But one man's waste is another man's not waste. It's hard to agree on what qualifies. Excess capacity, redundancy, carrying inventory, to many, those things constitute waste. To others, they represent a critical margin of safety. But that said, I think we can agree that when it comes to the government, there's always room to improve. But it's not that simple.

At home, reducing waste means eating leftovers, shorter showers, or turning down the thermostat. In private enterprise, you have the clarity of profit and the focus of customers. There's a built-in motivation to cut waste. In private enterprise, you have the clarity of profit and the focus of customers. There's a built-in motivation to cut waste. So if you really want to cut the fat, it's not hard to find. Government, however, is an entirely different beast. There's no target demographic for governance. It needs to service everyone.

And on top of that, it needs to be accountable to everyone. There's no built-in incentive for the bureaucracy to streamline because, well, there's no benefit to the bureaucracy in streamlining. As frustrating as the bureaucracy can be, it provides continuity and resiliency to the short-term whims of changing governments. But at the end of the day, while civil servants are an easy target, I don't think they're the ones to blame for government waste, because I think the issue is largely politicians. They're not interested in finding efficiencies. They're not about streamlining. And when they look to reduce costs, their default setting is to cut funding that

doesn't affect their supporters. Or better yet, cut funding that their supporters want to see cut. In my opinion, common sense should determine waste, not ideology and not opinion polls. But that's not the way it works. Because somewhere along the line, the idea of cutting waste in government has morphed into politically motivated, if not politically targeted, funding cuts. Lost in the shuffle are the civil servants. They've got the institutional knowledge to make a difference, but it's being wasted because no one really listens to them. There's not a lot of trust between them and their elected overlords, and why should there be? The conservatives are openly hostile to the civil service.

They're small government types. They think most government is waste. And the liberals? They're no better. They prefer the opinion of paid consultants like McKinsey over career civil servants. Talk about waste. They're just paying someone to tell them what they want to hear. Because in government, consultants are rarely hired to deliver the unabashed truth. They're hired to justify political decisions. And the civil service? Well, they're just not a reliable source of good news. Would the NDP be any different? I really doubt it. They've got their agenda too, and that's the problem with politics and politicizing everything. People stop listening to each other, they stop working together, and the common cause becomes lost.

If we really want to stop the waste in Ottawa, then maybe we need to stop feeding into all the spin and start demanding that our parties tone down their rhetoric and just get to work. Because if you really want to discover waste in government, all you need to do is tune in to Question Period. Oh, yeah. Good old Question Period. Always takes it, right? They're always to blame for everything. Oh, dear.

All right. There's your Ranter's Rant for this week. You got thoughts on it, let us know. The Mansbridge Podcast at gmail.com. The Mansbridge Podcast at gmail.com. We got lots more of your letters, so we're going to get to them right after this. And welcome back.

You're listening to The Bridge on SiriusXM, channel 167, Canada Talks, or on your favorite podcast platform. And tomorrow, if I remember this time to push the button, you can also watch us on our YouTube channel. And you can get the link for that. It's no cost, no charge, by looking at my Twitter feed and my bio on Twitter or my bio on Instagram. All right, let's get back to it with some of your thoughts.

This is the random section of your turn. It could be anything. Barb Demaree writes from Vancouver. First off, I want to say that I'm definitely on Team Ranter. I love his rants. So far, I agree with everything he says. And he has a great voice and delivery. I must be from the Ranter's mother.

I loved your piece on expiry dates. I have jars. We did this the other piece on expiry dates. I have jars. We did this the other day on an end bit. It was great. I loved your piece on expiry dates. I have jars of various things in my fridge that have been there for Lord knows how long. I can't bring myself to throw them out, nor can I bring myself to serve a condiment that's been in my fridge for two years or more. Now I know they're perfectly fine, especially mustard. That's right, apparently mustard lasts forever.

You know, if you can get through that crust that it builds with any spillover from the past. Thank you, Barb. Gus Livingston from Dunville, Ontario. Gus is also talking about expiry dates. I listen with interest about your piece on expiry dates. Well, my grandmother never paid any attention to expiry dates. The only way to tell if eggs were good was to put them in water,

and if they floated, they were bad, and if they sank, they were good. If the cheddar cheese was covered in blue mold, you cut off the mold and kept cutting until you came to the good stuff in the middle. And of course, sour cream stayed in the fridge for months because, well, how can sour cream go bad? It's already sour. Grandma was already right. Always right.

About these things, and I miss her. Yep, turns out Grandma, well, she had an expiry date. Oh, Gus, what a guy. I didn't know that about the eggs floating thing. I'll have to remember that. Neil Rankin writes from Yuma, Arizona. Did I hear right? Fox.com has made your short list of go-to websites?

Wow. Neil occasionally writes and says he doesn't want to hear any more about Trump from me or Bruce or any of us. And he was a little shocked when I quoted a Fox.com story the other day. And Neil writes, I can't imagine how many hours a day you spend searching news websites, but I truly appreciate everything you do. Indeed, you have a passion for news. I think we all do, right?

We all like to be informed. And hopefully we're being honestly informed, right? Catherine Ward writes. Not sure where Catherine's from. But she's reading my book, Off the Record. That was the one that came out a little more than a year ago. Still available, by the way. Number oneseller in canada for a while um i'm reading your book off the record and saw your dad was stationed during the war in lincoln my dad too flew in lancasters

he was a canadian attached to the raf at wickenby I wonder if your dad was at Wickenby as well. I don't think he was. I don't think Wickenby was one of the stations he was attached to. They got, they all got moved around a bit, right? But they're all in the general Lincoln area and there were a lot of RAF pilots and navigators and bomb aimers and crew in the Lincoln area, but, you know, who knows? They may well have bumped into each other. Dave Young from New Westminster, B.C. It does make complete sense that a majority of the conversation on Good Talk

revolves around Trudeau and Polyev. Whenever the next election happens, one of them is most likely to be the Prime Minister afterwards. I'd like to hear more from the Good Talk panel on how Mr. Singh is doing in his leadership of the NDP. His party has propped up the Liberal government, seemingly, though, the next election, through the next election.

But I'm not sure that is gaining the NDP the type of recognition and support that they may have hoped for. What could he be doing better to ensure that his party is recognized for their contributions to this current government? Okay, Dave, I hear you. We've touched on this a little bit at different times on Good Talk, but maybe we should take a stronger look at that. We'll look for a week where that might work.

Doug Clark from Castlegar, BC. A lot of BC letters this week. It's time that Pierre Poliev face the mainstream media. Please invite him to meet with Chantel and Bruce on Good Talk to discuss the state of Canada and how he would fix this broken country. Good idea. We'll invite him to Good Talk. There's an open invitation. There it is, Mr. Polyev. To your staff, who I know tune in every week.

Every day of every week. There's your open invite. Put you on the panel. Sit you down with Chantel and Bruce. Et moi. And we'll have a good time. Ian Moore from Calgary. Bracket, but home is truly in Cape Breton. No kidding, eh? I love there's certain parts of the country where you never are away from home, even if you're on the other side of the country. And that's Ian's case in Calgary, but he's thinking Cape Breton. I wanted you to know that I discovered I began listening to your podcast for the first time late in 2022. However, by the end of the year, it had cracked the number one spot in my podcast,

according to my Spotify. I enjoyed it a lot. It's so nice to hear your voice again. Thank you. The podcast is very topical and interesting with lots of great insights from your excellent guests like Bruce and Chantal. I look forward to listening to The Bridge

throughout the coming year. I want to wish you all the best for 2023. Also, will you be planning a cross-country tour at some point? Some point. Not sure when. Actually, I will be in Calgary in a couple of weeks. I'm speaking to teachers who will be in convention in Calgary. Thousands of them have invited me to come out and speak to them,

and I'm looking forward to that. Noel McCartney, Mrs. Noel McCartney, from tiny Ontario. I should have looked that up before this. I've never heard of tiny Ontario. Really enjoy your podcast, particularly Fridays with Chantel and Bruce. Always a great discussion. January 27th's comments about just transition and the Trudeau government plans to move forward on issues of climate protections

reminded me to recommend to you and your listeners a new book just out, The End of This World, between the lines publishing in Toronto. A great look at paths forward, not only on climate justice, but also on reconciliation, equity, support for fossil fuel workers as we move towards more sustainable green energy,

water protection, migration issues, and a sustainable economy, and solution-based, not just problem-finding, which is not all that common these days. Very positive. You know, I don't usually read out people's book recommendations, but I just found that one kind of interesting and different than the normal parade of books. So out of tiny Ontario, we get that idea. Jason Craig from Conqueror Mills,

Nova Scotia, and Jason's written a few times before. Here's part of his letter. We all should be very wary of populace railing at gatekeepers and whatever might be broken to see what exactly the plan is to address or replace it. We might not like what we see behind the veil. We need to participate in our politics and our communities to see our way through these challenging times. There is no free lunch. Thanks, Jason. You know, if you've listened to this podcast over the time,

that I'm a big believer in that, that if you believe in democracy, if you believe in democratic politics, you have to participate. I remember what I've said this before. The former Prime Minister John Turner used to say that all the time. You want democracy? You've got to participate. You can't just sit on the sidelines and whine and moan all the time.

A couple more letters to go here. Three, actually. They're all short. Well, kind of short. Peter Blizak from LaSalle, Quebec, borough of Montreal. I was listening to the January 31st episode. That's just yesterday.

At the 32-minute, 40-second mark, you almost seemed apologetic for your rambling on past experiences. Please continue the rambles. For myself, it adds so much to the context of the topics, especially with yourself and Brian Stewart. Of course, you and Bruce can scale back on the golf stories, though. Just kidding. The content is rich and educational.

A big thanks to you and all your guests. Thank you. This is from Lisa E. from St. Catharines. And she has her remarks in point form. It's not surprising but still remarkable the quality of your guests. Monday's show was excellent. The librarian was brilliant. Nice to hear from Janice Stein.

The random ranter is great. On Fridays, it's fantastic to be able to hear Chantelle Hebert's full-length thoughtful answers. The end bits either provide something interesting or make me laugh. Both types are appreciated. I've always been envious of people like you that enjoy their work so much that they don't feel the need to fully retire, but figure out a way to keep doing just the parts of their old jobs that they liked and drop the rest of it. You figured me out all right.

Thanks for creating this podcast, Lisa. Thank you for the letter letter and here's the last one for this week comes from ian moore from calgary um actually we already heard from me in once in today's program didn't we renee the fellow from cape breton uh yeah he was the fellow from Great Britain. You know why I know that? Because this is the same letter. So we're going to end the letters with Lisa's letter that you just heard

and her wonderful summation of what we do here on the bridge. All right, folks, that wraps it up. When I start reading the same letter twice, you know it's time to go. So it is time to go. But thanks for everything you've sent in this week. As always, thanks to the Random Ranter. Tomorrow, it's good talk. Chantelle Hebert and Bruce Anderson will be by.

I'm sure there'll be lots to talk about. I say that every week because you know why I say that? Because I don't know what we're going to talk about, but I do know that we've never had trouble filling the show. We always manage to find something to talk about, as we will tomorrow. I'm Peter Mansbridge. Thanks so much for listening. We'll talk to you again in 24 hours. Thank you.