The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - Your Turn -- You Want More Talk On Climate Change!

Episode Date: March 23, 2023

You went after me this week for saying you'd had it with climate change talk as nothing is changing.  You want more talk not less and your many letters made that very clear.  And the Random Ranter is back with his take on AI, Artificial Intelligence.

And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. You are just moments away from the latest episode of The Bridge. Climate change. My gosh, do you guys want to talk about climate change? That's the big thrust in today's Your Turn. And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. A couple of days ago, Tuesday morning, before the Brian Stewart Big Ukraine Russia program, I went on a bit of a rant. I guess, I don't know, eight or nine minutes. I did a rant about climate change

because the latest report had just come out. And in spite of the sometimes half-hearted attempts by governments and individuals around the world over these last 20 years to deal with the threat of climate change. Well, the report was devastating. It was, it's your last chance, folks. If you don't want to live in a world of forest fires and floods and tornadoes and you name it, global devastation is on its way because of climate change. That's basically the thrust of it. It was pretty brutal. And it was pretty frustrating too, because a lot of people have spent a considerable amount of time in these last 20 years at least, trying to find ways to deal with climate change, to prepare for climate change. And governments, some seriously, others not so seriously, have tried to move forward at ambitious targets

to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Now, most of those countries, including ours, have not made those targets, but they've been trying, supposedly. So what are we left with when we get a report like that? These reports have come out every once in a while. And it's a UN-sponsored report. And it basically looks like nothing's changed.

We're still in trouble. And this wave of climate change-induced natural disasters is on its way, heading straight at us us if not already here so i was kind of threw up my hands and said that's it and you know people who i read occasionally and say do a regular segment on climate change and i go like why what's the point nothing different nothing changes uh you weren't very happy with that where a few years ago whenever the topic of climate change would come up you'd get you got a lot of letters from people saying it's all crap it's all baloney it doesn't it's not true it's not real

climate change doesn't exist it's just a natural changing of weather patterns didn't get one letter like that this week not one not a single one in fact there was only one like truly negative letter in all the letters and the dozens of letters that i got emails there was only one negative one and it was sort of saying, why do you still fly? Well, that's a legitimate question. And I raised it myself about myself earlier in the week. But no, the other letters were all about, you've got to keep doing this story and you've got to find an, you know,

innovative ways of telling it. So that's how we're starting today, reading some of your climate change letters. And it's just some of them. It's like your turn every week. Not everybody gets on, and certainly not all of what they write gets on. But I try to take a selection of some. And there are a lot of good letters this week and a lot of long letters, so they're boiled down to either a few sentences or, at the most, a couple of paragraphs.

As usual, appreciate name and address, you know, address in terms of what community you're writing from. And here we go. Adam Archdeacon from Newmarket, Ontario. I heard you leading off talking about struggling with doing a regular segment around climate change because nothing's changing. I have to tell you, my head nearly exploded. Not that I think you're wrong. A lot of things are not changing. Governments are clearly not moving fast enough, nor are many businesses. Then there's misinformation. But, and I know you know this, this is the single largest issue facing everyone. It needs to be talked about more all the time. My issue with how it's talked about

in general is it's almost always described as one huge insurmountable issue. So large it's hard for anyone to really comprehend. But there are components that can be broken down. People can understand. Issues that are pressing today, they can wrap their heads around. Think immigration and migrants are at issue now. It's going to be much worse. Think your grocery bill is high now. Wait until it becomes even more difficult to produce food. Those are two major issues Canadians worry about today, but it's going to get so much worse. Here's another. Drinking water. Drinkable water is threatened across the planet. We can't live without water. Guess who has the most water?

Canada. But I'm sure every other country will be fine with that when they run out. Exactly. Jim Clemmer. We live in Kitchener, Ontario. My wife and I grew up in Perth County. That's kind of around where I live in Canada, around Stratford. Climate change is one of today's biggest problems, but shaming, blaming, and despairing causes many people to tune out, check out, and give up. We need a more balanced and hopeful reporting on our environmental progress to encourage action, not giving up.

There's a fine line between climate scaremongering causing hopelessness and ringing the alarm hard enough that people are motivated to act. Most of us need a sense of progress and optimism to keep pushing the big rock up the steep hill. Bill Morrissey from Newmarket, Ontario. I can think of so many subtopics for you and your guests to tackle. How much positive change are we seeing both in Canada and around the world? What countries are seeing the most positive

improvements and why and how? Best practices for ordinary Canadians. Buy fewer discretionary things. Switch from consuming products that are particularly bad to those that are good. What should government be doing in terms of subsidies for consumers, subsidies for manufacturers, subsidies for switching to green energy production, subsidies for research and development. What are the positions of each of the political parties with assessments of each by climate change experts? How can citizens volunteer and donate in climate change? You know, I asked for ideas.

Well, I didn't even ask for ideas. I guess it was kind of implied, but man, the ideas were coming in. Derek Dillabo from Ottawa. I followed your career and that of many others, like David Suzuki, for example, who have reported on climate change, and I share the tremendous frustration on the slow progress humanity has made on the subject over the last many decades. The reality is climate change is here now. The severity of the changes are possibly still to be determined, but the focus should in large part change to remediation. Of course, we should continue to decarbonize our energy sources and collaborate worldwide to shift to

greener energy urgently. However, to some extent, the cake is already baked in our climate future, and we have to get prepared at best we can for the problems that we are inevitably going to be confronted with. Included in those problems could be the mass migration of millions of people. I believe we need to direct our thoughts, plans, and resources to remediation now. That is the very least we can do for future generations. Neil Rankin writes in from Yuma, Arizona. There's no doubt in my mind that gloomy scientist reports are not the answer. Excuse me. We need to bombard Canadians with social media, with pro-environmental tips daily.

Perhaps you can dedicate at least one end bit a week to highlight champions of the environment. We need to bombard Canadians with tips they can implement now. Remember, you become what you think about. Derek Andrews from Fredericton, New Brunswick. The simplest thing for the general public to understand about climate change is that it doesn't happen equally and it won't be happening fairly and it's hitting the equatorial countries first i'd argue it's hitting the arctic first but nevertheless i hear you um going back to my point above in my youth of the 80s and 90s, above a story like what is happening in support... Wait a minute.

Going back to the point about my youth in the 80s and 90s, a story like what is happening in Somalia right now would run the gauntlet of coverage. Politicians voicing concerns, activists generating help, and picked up the torch. Sadly, it feels the West has taken the approach, if we can't do anything about it, it's best not to have to even think about it. 43,000 people died last year, as many as 34,000 more people in the first six months of this year. Over half of these deaths are expected to be children under five. This is climate change, and it's happening now, not next decade when we hit our one and a half degree target. It's now, and it's underway.

Countries are being destroyed. Somehow, someway, the coverage of climate change needs to focus on who is getting hit first. Similar to the work you do with Janice Stein. Where are the climate stories we're missing? What are the people's crops failing for the fourth, fifth, sixth season? Where are droughts into their fourth season? Where are people getting displaced because of unlivable conditions and are on the move? The short answer is it's all along the equator first. Then figure out how to engage the world in those stories, because I fear that's what our international coverage has moved on from. We just don't have the capacity, it seems. Lee Coccoliccio from Red Deer, Alberta.

In response to your comments on the climate crisis, I think a major issue contributing to climate change is the global population and the rate of growth. The need for more food, living spaces, land, and consumption of resources is out of balance. Perhaps we need to address the difficult subject of population control. I'd be interested to hear a random rant on that subject. G.K. Evans. He's also from Alberta. He's from central Alberta. Your comments about your many flights got me thinking about the guilt trip

our current national leadership keeps dumping on average Canadians. We constantly hear about how we're not doing enough to save the planet, as the PM is constantly racking up thousands of kilometers a month on flights, quite often solo, in pollution-spewing business jets. I can't feel too guilty. I mean, he's not solo, he has a staff, but your point is about the use of the jets and the constant traveling. I can't feel too guilty

about anything he's prompting or promoting climate-wise because he comes off as a hypocrite. He's a proponent of hybrid remote parliament. Can't he and his cabinet use that to cut down on his own rather large carbon footprint? Maybe take more staycations? If he's so big on climate change, why doesn't he make an effort to walk the talk? Perhaps try winning some of us more progressive voters with the strategy of leading by example. Or is that a thing of the past? Brian Dale from Sherbrooke, Quebec. To me, the only way to effectively do climate change and combat it will be to focus on solutions that are already being implemented around Canada and beyond.

How are some city planners prioritizing public transit and active transportation so that people can take advantage of alternatives to gasoline-powered vehicles? How are businesses and governments shifting production and consumption patterns toward more circular economies? How are Indigenous and other communities implementing locally controlled renewable energy projects? And a question near and dear to my heart, based on my research interests, how are farmers and food activists already helping out cutting greenhouse gases related to agriculture and eating. See what I mean? We've got lots of these, and there's still quite a few more to go here. John Moreland from Port Wade, Nova Scotia, he's been writing to me consistently for the last, I don't know,

few months saying, climate change, Mansbridge, climate change, do it. And I've been resisting, right? That's what he said this week. Climate change is political, just like almost everything these days. Climate change evidence is strictly science, but our reactions to it are all political. Why did the PM buy a pipeline for more than $25 billion that commits us to at least 300 years of fossil fuels use instead of building a new national electrical

grid, which could have revolutionized our total approach to renewable energy? Political will is required to stop subsidizing the oil industry and to organize a realistic but urgent transition to renewables. Ian Grant from Halifax. I'm resigned to the fact that our future is bleak and seasonal experiences for my young boys will be very different than the ones I enjoyed. I was just asked the other day by my eldest boy if I think we'll get to

skate on the lakes again. Before I could speak, he answered his own question saying, I expect not. To keep this short, I have no idea how we tackle this global crisis, but I do look for advice on how we can adapt, especially for my kids. I believe the odds that global powers will come together to mitigate future suffering and conflict due to climate change is essentially zero. I just want to hear frank and honest conversations on the reality to come without sugarcoating, like many of the information channels do. Finishing most reports with something like, but on the bright side, or there's still time to. We've had all the time in the world, and that time has run out. Donna Lockhart from Ennismore, Ontario. You need to occasionally post a focus question for listeners to respond to for the Thursday podcast of Letters.

Perhaps you might consider this a start. What actions are you and your family taking to help mitigate climate change? A few we are doing include using shampoo soap bars, which eliminate plastic bottles. Use laundry strips that eliminate the use of plastic bottles. Individuals, families, and communities are doing a lot that then translates into communities taking action. Okay, Don, I'll think about that one. Here's the last one in the climate change block here. And this comes from Eric Landry in Victoria.

Perhaps a way to integrate this into the podcast in a more constructive way is to educate your readers on practical ways they can contribute to the fight against climate change. More of an NBIT type of segment on occasion. Or could you do an interest piece on why in the world we don't change our ways even though many of us, ourselves included, know the impending warnings. Why don't we make change, even though the doomsday scenarios are laid out for us? That's the question, Eric. You got it. Like, what have we been doing all this time? We've been hearing the warnings, and the we is the collective we. Like, it's all of us, right?

It's not just individuals. It's governments, businesses. And I know, before you say it, I know a lot of people have done a lot of things. But what's the bottom line? The bottom line, according to that UN report this week, we're cooked. You know, it's not doing any good so far. This is your last chance. Thank you for writing about this.

I agree with most of you. This is an urgent and pressing problem. It's probably the greatest problem the world faces and has been for 20 years, at least 20 years. Stephen Harper, in his first international speech in 2006, I think it was in Berlin, said the greatest problem facing the world is climate change. That's what he said then.

He kind of changed his mind over a few years because different things happened, he says, and other issues became more pressing. But he said it. That's what he said. Okay. Moving on. And this one comes from Monica Carlson in Edmonton.

We got quite a few comments on a couple of the past random ranter comments. So before we hear this week's, let's see what you thought of the last few. My name's Monica, and I'm from Edmonton. I was quite appalled by the ranter's opinion on Catholic schools. As a former student of Catholic schools, a parent of three children who have attended Catholic schools, and as an educational assistant working in a Catholic school, I can assure you that our schools do not in any way reflect the ranter's opinion. Our school division respects and teaches inclusivity and acceptance of all races,

genders, sexual orientation, and special needs. We have many Indigenous students and staff members in our school community and have an Indigenous liaison in our school division to educate staff and students on Indigenous culture. In Edmonton and nearby cities, property taxes are allocated to support either the public system or the Catholic school. Homeowners choose which system they want their tax dollars to support. I would hope the ranter would next time do a little research. He actually did a lot of research, as you're about to see, before giving an opinion so full of misinformation, or maybe spend some time in a Catholic school to see for himself the kind and

loving atmosphere that our children are learning in. And how do you know he hasn't done that? Moving on to other letters. Ted Van High. He's from Exeter, Ontario. He's 27. I attended a Catholic elementary school, kindergarten to 8, and then a public high school, I believe, that I have some unique insights into the ranter's talk on Catholic education. I agree with the ranter about the unfairness of Catholics having the privilege of access to public funds while other faith-based schools do not. I think the solution is not to defund the

Catholic system, but to allow money to follow the student regardless of what school they attend if the school meets the provincial curriculum and standards, similar to the Finnish and Swedish school systems. Competition between the school systems can add costs, which we should reduce. However, competition increases the quality of education across both school boards. Parents send their kids to schools with higher test scores, or at least that was a common practice in my era. John McCann, Jr. He's in Calgary.

He writes, To somehow draw the conclusion that sending kids to Catholic school is homophobic on the part of the parents is just ignorant. I think it's generally thought that the Catholic schools offer a better quality education. I'm not saying it's true, just that I've heard this mentioned over the years. Then our ranter peppers in that public school is left for first nations kids wow what a generalization i think you should listen to that rant a little more carefully because it doesn't necessarily come off the way you're suggesting lisa etienne i wonder how many and lisa is in saint catherine's ontario i wonder how many, and Lisa is in St. Catharines, Ontario. I wonder how many of the people who say they want a public inquiry into the possible.

Wait a minute, this one slipped into the wrong pile. No, no, it didn't. I wonder how many of the people who say they want a public inquiry into the possibility of Chinese interference in our elections are the same people who don't bother to vote, or do vote, but without taking the time to look at the party platforms or talk to their local candidates. Those who do take voting seriously won't be influenced by a random tweet in their feed. Strangely, this ties in with the random ranter's outstanding rant on taxpayer-funded Catholic education.

Poll after poll shows the majority of people don't think the Catholic schools should be funded. However, it never becomes an election issue because it has been determined that the minority that support Catholic schools would be better at getting out the vote and would control the election outcome. I'm not sure about that. I haven't seen those studies, but, you know, clearly, Lisa, you have seen something. Okay, here's another one. Julie Smith-Allen from Lethbridge, Alberta. Last week, the random renter spoke straight to the heart. This is not the school one. It's a different one.

My son was assigned female at birth, and today he is making his way and living his truth. He is, and always has been, a kind, intelligent thinker. He taught himself to read at age four, taught his little sister to read when she was about the same age. He is respectful to all and just. Trans people are real people like the rest of us, contributing to society and doing their best to find their place in the world. They're not some bizarre species to be afraid of. Yes, as the ranter said, we must entrench LGBTQ2S plus rights. Yes, we must speak against this horrific prejudice.

Jill Keenly sighed from Wakefield, Quebec. It's just a very simple line, a one-line letter. I'm assuming you know the identity of the ranter. Well, of course I do, yes. I assume you know the identity of the ranter. Can I vote for him? The ranter is not interested in being involved in politics, never has been in any fashion.

Sandra Thomas writes from Peterborough, Ontario. She's a retired public school teacher. I couldn't agree more with the ranter read the public funding of Catholic schools. He gave most of the reasons, equity for other religions, costly duplication of services, two-tier education, anti-choice and discrimination, curriculum division, separation of people. And he's right. Just because something was right for the authors of the Constitution at the time

doesn't mean we should be bound by it over 150 years later. Circumstances and people change. A couple more still. Excuse me. Caroline Auckland Thompson. I was very pleased to hear the random ranter talking about schools. I do hope the ranter does a rant on why private schools are so harmful to Canadian society. The most important reason is that it feeds the great gap between the rich and the poor.

Educating a child is expensive. Look at the fees for sending a child to private school, where they will be in classes with fewer students and have better resources than is available in public school. Every child in Canada deserves the same quality of education. A great education should not just be for the rich. You know, we have universal health care. Should we have universal education care?

Last letter. And this is a suggestion for the ranter. This person is another fan of the ranter. Here's what he would like to see the ranter tackle. This is David Elgy.

He's in Dorchester, Ontario. The high cost of phone and internet bills in Canada, coupled with increasingly poor service that accompanies them, is an aggravation felt by most every listener I imagine. I'm not in the industry, have no connection to it other than as a payer of high bills, but was just on hold with Rogers for three hours. I've had it. I don't believe I have called Rogers in the past five years and not received the, we are experiencing higher call volumes than usual message.

So there you go, ranter. There's an idea for you. Speaking of the ranter, he's on deck. He's next at bat right here on the bridge. So let's bring him into the batter's box. And you know the new rules, you only got a couple seconds to warm up. All right, Rantor, you ready to go, buddy? I think you are. Go for it.

When it comes to artificial intelligence, most people seem concerned with all the ethical implications around copyright and deepfakes. But my concern, it's the impact on employment. Because outside of a plumber, it's hard to think of a well-paying job that won't be negatively affected in some way by AI. Architects, lawyers, engineers, writers, programmers, there's an endless list of well-paying jobs, and AI has the potential to decimate them the same way offshoring manufacturing decimated factory jobs in the 80s and 90s. Maybe it's already happening. I mean, there have been a whole lot of layoffs in the tech sector recently. And that's my fear of leaving AI in the hands of corporations, because I think they're hardwired to race to the bottom.

They'll be so happy to lower their costs and slash their workforce that it will never occur to them that those same employees represent their customer base. Now, I'm sure people said, who will buy the goods when the factories left? But manufacturing, it's just one segment of the economy. AI, it's going to impact every sector. And this time, the question won't just be, who will buy the goods? It'll be, who's going to pay the taxes? Because I can't see how unchecked AI won't turn everything on its head. I'm talking less workers across the board.

And for that matter, lower wages too. Especially for the taxpaying middle class. And make no mistake, this is just the beginning. This is only the dawn of AI. Right now, there are multiple different AI engines out there machine learning pretty much everything we do. But just wait, because it's only going to be a matter of time before some kind of Sauron Incorporated comes out with an AI to rule them all. That's right, I think there will be an AI engine that will learn how to use all the other AI engines, if there isn't already one out there, that is.

Look, you can never rule any of this out, because humans, we sure seem dead set on destroying ourselves. We'll poison the environment for a dollar, and we have weapons that can incinerate the world. So why is it beyond the realm that we'd use a tool like AI to obsolete ourselves? But hey, I get it. Change is inevitable. And the AI genie, it's not going back in the bottle. We're going to need to live with it. But by living with it, we're going to need to make it work for us. And to do that, I think we're going to need to take control of it away from the corporate masters. We're going to need responsible government that truly manages it instead of just going with the corporate American flow. We're going to need some rules.

Hell, we might even need a new system where profit isn't the overarching goal. Because if AI ends up driven by profit, then the last thing I ever see it learning is empathy or concern for humanity. This week's random rant from the random ranter. Think about that one. I'm sure some of you will have a few things to say

about it. Gonna take our break right now and when we come back, more letters from you on your turn right after this. And welcome back. Yeah, I know I played the wrong music. That's the music from Smoke Mirrors and the Truth,

as you well know. It's not the music for the regular editions of the bridge that music is this music all right you know uh anyway that's just me that's just me having a little mental block, hitting the wrong button. Okay, let's get on with things. First of all, you're listening to The Bridge, the Thursday edition of Your Turn on Sirius XM, Channel 167, Canada Talks, or on your favorite podcast platform. More letters for this week's Your Turn.

This one comes from Terry Hinch in Woodstock, Ontario. Jeez, Peter, how long are we going to waste time in the House discussing how China might have influenced the election when it's been established that it didn't? Maybe Pierre Trump or Polyev could spend less time criticizing the opposition, excuse me, and more time helping with solutions. Would you have any idea what the cost would be on an inquiry? And would that be better spent on the homeless?

Love listening to your show. I've got the hiccups. This is a bad time to have the hiccups. This is a bad time to have the hiccups when you're doing a live, unedited, straight-to-tape podcast like this one. John Hargilla from North Vancouver, BC. CSIS has told Roger Canada that Chinese interference is the greatest threat to national security and the sovereignty of Canada.

Can we talk more about what we can do about it and less about the politics? I want to know why we don't have a foreign registry. Why don't we expel some diplomats? What can we do about those so-called Chinese police stations? And how can we help the Chinese diaspora? This has been a rough day, who are being threatened and intimidated. What are the spies in our universities?

If Australia can stand up to China, surely we can. Sure, Polyev's grandstanding is deplorable, but save that for another day. Rick Howard from Salmon Arm, BC. In your discussion with Bruce yesterday, you questioned why the mandate of the inquiry into Chinese electoral interference in our elections did not include the 2015 election. I agree with your assertion that this election should also be studied because we know that Chinese interference was going on long before 2019 and 2021. One reason that the 2015 election is not included in the mandate could be that David Johnson was still our Governor General at the time. Therefore, Mr. Johnson would have a clear conflict of interest as Special Rapporteur.

I'm a David Johnson supporter, by the way. I don't know. I'm not sure just because he was GG at that time that would have an impact, but maybe you're right. I'm not sure. Huguette Messier. I just listened to your... Well, we don't know because she didn't tell us where she's from. I just listened to your podcast of today with Bruce and was very surprised to hear you say that the Prime Minister

should attend the Parliamentary Committee to answer questions on the alleged interference situation. You referred to the emergency inquiry where the PM had a good performance, but it was a forum where there was respect and where people listened to the answers. Don't tell that to the convoy lawyer. You must have forgotten the interview by Pierre Palliev with the Prime Minister for the WE Charity, where Mr. Palliev kept cutting him off, yelling his questions, and treating the Prime Minister like he was a crook.

Remember the how much, how much, to know how much the PM's mother has received? Not even relevant. The PM had accepted to go to answer the questions in good faith, but nobody believed him. It was just a show with the intent to damage him. Why would he go for a repeat? Well, he'd go for a repeat because we're a democratic institution, the Parliament of Canada, and what plays

out on that floor is what plays out on it. People make their judgments on it. There are committees going on every day in Parliament that aren't all circuses. Some of them are extremely worthwhile. But, I hear you, as we say. Ian Hepplethwaite from Moncton, New Brunswick. I grew up in Scotland, but I may not have mentioned that my father owned a sailboat. All right.

This is not in the right place, is it? I'm going to save Ian's letter for the end of the program, or near the end of the program, and move on to kind of a potpourri selection, and that's what I thought those were at the end of. You see how well organized I am today? Are you not impressed? Yikes. Okay. Let's get going man spiritually we're never going to get all these in ron greening from east selkirk manitoba

he's referring to something i talked about the other day that newspaper in texas called the canadian record i also regret the loss of newspapers like the Canadian record in Texas. However, much of that community functionality has been replaced by Facebook pages, not big-time, mega-following Facebook, but locally joined pages like Meanwhile in East Selkirk in my community. Many First Nations communities in Manitoba, which have never had a local newspaper interested in them, now have a Facebook-based news feed and a community dialogue that is hyper-local and which works in near real-time.

No standards of journalism apply. Few editorial decisions are made. No sponsoring, advertising, or owners have influence. Well, something's lost, but something's gained in living every day. Joni Mitchell, right? Ron Greening from East Selkirk. Thanks, Ron.

Yosef Robinson of Montreal wrote a long letter, but I love the last little bit. Isaac Bogoch is most probably right in that we as a society and as individuals will simply move on from the pandemic without learning any real lessons in pandemic preparedness. Dr. Bogoch was our guest earlier this week as we kind of brought back the Monday what's up with pandemic COVID these days. I hope that realistically we will learn and are learning at least some small lessons in such preparedness. Obviously the ideal is to learn lots of such lessons and to be thoroughly prepared for the we will learn and are learning, at least some small lessons in such preparedness. Obviously, the ideal is to learn lots of such lessons and to be thoroughly prepared for the next pandemic

or war or natural disaster or other crisis. To take from Dr. Bogoch's prognostication that there will be pandemics in the future, there will be devastating and massive volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, tsunamis, solar storms, wars, etc. in the future for which we will have to be prepared one way or the other. You're right about that. And if you believe the UN report this week, lots of them. Marilyn Sewell from Paris, Ontario. I so enjoyed hearing Dr. Bogoch again.

He was a familiar and honest voice when COVID was more in our minds than it is now. I recall taking a walk or working in the garden with your conversations with him in my earbuds and always feeling we were getting as much as he could tell us, just like tonight. Thanks for these periodic COVID commentaries. It's hard to believe we used to do them every day, or excuse me, every Monday from different parts of the country, right? Dr. Bogoch was one of those. Karen Bosche from Edmonton, she's a retired teacher.

How did a 16-year-old boy come to such a troubled and desperate state, have possession of a firearm, and know how to use it to ambush and kill two police officers, shoot his mother, and then turn the gun on himself, committing suicide? This story did not start in the early cold, dark hours of an Edmonton morning this past week. Obviously, facing family violence, mental health issues, and access to guns have all contributed and led to this tragic event.

As mental health problems and illnesses increase within Canada, we must provide more access to support, resources, and interventions for those in need of all stages and ages of life. If we don't, we risk the well-being and safety of more and more people within our communities. Nancy Drew writes from the Maritimes. This generation saw in real time the internet evolve into a place where you could be anyone you wanted to be and say anything you wanted to say, true or not, with no consequences. The internet is a place that allows high school tactics as an adult, but unlike in high school, there is little to no consequence for this behavior online. The internet is just an extension of what it was like in high school, but the student population is anyone that can log on to the World Wide Web. Now the bullies, know-it-alls, and any other group of individuals

you remember having to deal with in high school had a new way to wreak havoc and reach even more people. I was the last generation that had to worry about getting caught on a three-way call because the Internet and the shadiness of what takes place on the Internet was the new three-way call. Politics has also evolved, like the internet, and with each passing year, the shenanigans that we call politics

has changed from grown-ups telling the truth, doing the right thing, no matter what party suggests the solution, and showing compassion and respect to each other, especially when mistakes are made. It's a long letter from Nancy, but I really like those couple of sentences. Alvin Enns.

I need to comment on Bruce's words, weakens our collective understanding. That relates to why I appreciate your podcast so much. You and the bridge appear to strive for conveying information to promote understanding, which is in contrast to other communications firms. I've been living in the U.S. since 1984, transferred here with Nortel, and my assessment is that we have a 40% chance of becoming another Hungary. Our current situation does present an opportunity to examine our root

causes for our political risks, but few communication sources are willing to jeopardize their journalistic capital to explore those issues. I think more than you might think are willing to do that, but I hear you. Which is a common refrain from me on this day, right? Long, long letter from Douglas Moore in the Noose Bay, B.C., but I'm just going to read the beginning. I recall you asking a week or so ago if Canadians were losing interest, or worse, if we even cared about the war going on in Ukraine. It certainly seems to me that coverage of the war on our national news networks has lessened

as the months drag on, and that indeed may cause some Canadians to lose interest in the war on our national news networks has lessened as the months drag on, and that indeed may cause some Canadians to lose interest in the war. Speaking for myself, I have not lost any interest at all. I care very much about what is happening in the Ukraine and follow as closely as I can the events as they unfold day by day. As a show of my support, I've flown the Ukrainian flag in my front yard continuously since shortly after Russia invaded. I never miss Tuesdays with Brian Stewart. And you're not alone in that refrain. And you're not alone flying a flag.

Wherever I drive in Canada, in in the country in the cities i see ukrainian flags in a lot of different places tom tessier i would have said this we did an a couple of weeks ago on the safest seat in a plane where's the safest seat in the plane to sit actually i think it was in a conversation with bruce tom tessier from winnipeg i would have said being in the toilet at the back of the plane is safest when i was in 402 squadron as a reservist in winnipeg we flew dc3s there was always this repeated legend of a guy being the only one surviving a crash because he was in the crapper. That's Tom's review. Okay, now we know where to sit.

Derek Bowen of Denaimo. He's talking about AI. I think it's an example of why we should put a pause on AI development. While we try to understand the implications, although we may never fully understand, we do need to try and have some control. We did nothing when social media started speeding down the information highway, and look where that got us. Quick word from Rob Hardy. He, like me, worries about the Arctic, right?

So his suggestion is Canada's military spending, Arctic infrastructure, why doesn't Canada meet its 2% NATO in military spend requirement by reinvesting in Canada's Arctic, by building military bases, ports, plane runways, and the road, power, and other infrastructure that would be needed? It seems to me that Canada would enhance its Arctic sovereignty and security and improve infrastructure for people living in the North, provide jobs to Canadians, and meet the 2% GDP requirement.

Interesting idea. Okay. Last couple of letters. How are we doing on time? We're doing okay. Okay. Okay. Here we go.

Start with that Ian Hepplethwaite letter from New Brunswick. I grew up in Scotland, but I may not have mentioned that my father owned a sailboat, a Starletta. It was moored in Cames Bay on the Isle of Bute, one of the prettiest spots on earth. There's so many pretty spots on the islands around Scotland. And when we were sailing or going to go sailing, we listened to the shipping forecast.

Remember we talked about this the other day. I agree it is soothing and rhythmic. I've not listened to it other than in context, but perhaps I will. Of course, I know, wink, wink, that you brought it up as a counter to the feedback you got about people falling asleep on the bridge. I never listen to the show in bed for that reason. It's one I'm not prepared to miss part of.

That's good. My old friend and pen pal, David Oliver from Oak Bay, Ontario. Oak Bay, Ontario. He's going to be horrified that I said that. Oak Bay, British Columbia. It's been a while, but I could not resist responding to your end bit on the BBC shipping forecast. It reminded me of several days spent in the mid-1990s

in the Thames estuary aboard a converted Dutch barge. My friend, who I'd shared many sailing adventures with, had asked me to help sail his barge across the Channel. This kind of vessel is meant for navigating rivers and canals and doesn't take kindly to rough seas. The Channel can be a nasty place, so we had to wait for a weather window in which the wind and sea skate were just right.

Sea state were just right. Despite access to weather forecasts, it was the early morning BBC shipping forecast we used as the authoritative voice to make our decision whether to go that day or not. After waiting a few days, we had a good crossing on a fine sunny day. But we're glad to pull into Calais. Oh man, doesn't that sound great? Thanks, David. Here's the last letter for today.

It comes from Angela, Hastings County, Ontario. I'm relatively new to your podcast, or podcasts in general, but I've watched The National for years. I also have vague memories of my parents watching the journal, too. Love your work, love your content. I've grown quite interested in politics and current events. I find the current state of affairs of Canadian politics troubling. Recently, the decision of

the Prime Minister to name David Johnson has been called into question, partly because they are old family friends. My questions to this are the following. Was there ever a time when politicians could disagree and still be friends? Is it a prerequisite to consider opposing parties enemies now? Why is there so much hostility between opposing sides of Parliament instead of respectful dialogue between Canadians voted to serve the public? Is it naive of me to imagine the current state of affairs could improve? It's not naive, Angela. And there was, yes, a time like that.

And it wasn't that long ago. You know, through the 70s and 80s, and even parts of the early 90s, but mainly through the, up until the 70s and early 80s, there was a camaraderie on the hill. And the bickering happened in question period, absolutely. But they were friends. They'd go out for dinner at night together. They'd party together. They'd communicate with each other when the house wasn't sitting and they were in different parts of the country. That happened a lot. Not universally, but it did happen a lot.

Not so much now. it's pretty tense atmosphere and it can be ugly at times um some people think it's actually should be that way that that's how you get stuff done by you know tense arguments i don't know i kind of like the old way better. But times have changed, right? And as Angela says, all she sees is the new way and wonders if there ever was an old way. Well, there was. All right, we're going to leave it at that for this day. Tomorrow, good talk.

Chantelle Hebert, Bruce Anderson. We'll talk about Joe Biden's visit to Canada and who knows what else. There are lots of things going on. There's always something to talk about. And there's always some good talk in those conversations. So we'll talk again tomorrow. I'm Peter Mansbridge. Thanks so much for listening.

We'll see you in 24 hours.