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

The Current Transcript for April 26, 2021

Host: Matt Galloway

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

FEMALE VOICE: He doesn't know that he's right now being raised in a prison. Everything was normal to him, he had his crib, he had his mom, he had his toys. It was amazing for everyone, even the guards, they just everybody just loved him. He was just such a joy to have.

MATT GALLOWAY: Life jolt is prison slang for a life sentence. It's also the title of a new CBC podcast that explores life behind bars from the perspective of female prisoners. And the host knows of what she speaks, having herself spent five years in prison for drug smuggling. In 30 minutes, she takes us inside a place most of us have never been and explains why people shouldn't be defined by their worst moments. Also this morning, it was a moment of relief for many refugees from Syria, finding safe harbour in a country far from the civil war. And now all that could come crashing down.

HIBA AL-KHALIL: I would like actually to stay here in Denmark and continue to build my life. Life here in Denmark it's everything for me if I will miss my life here in Denmark. So I will miss everything actually.

MG: Denmark has ruled that Syrian refugees there can be sent back to Damascus because it is determined that city is now safe. In an hour, why those refugees say it's anything but. We begin, though, with a national push for paid time off work if you're sick and the debate over who should pay. Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway and this is The Current.

[Music: Theme]

Workers and experts weigh in on calls for paid sick leave to fight COVID-19 third wave

Guests: Rechev Browne, Kendra Strauss, Dennis Darby

MG: Paid sick leave more than a year into this pandemic and with a third wave grinding on, that is what many people are calling for across this country. Right now, only PEI and Quebec have it offering a day or two, not exactly enough to cover a two week isolation. In Ontario, there's a pledge to get something in place. But at this point, the details are scarce. In B.C., paid time off to get vaccinated is allowed, but still no paid sick leave. Most provinces are using the federal sickness and recovery benefit to explain why they are not introducing their own programmes. All the while, workplaces continue to be hotspots for transmission. Michael Guy got covid-19 from his wife and she got it at work.

MICHAEL GUY: She works in the costume department of a film shoot. I understand that the room was relatively small and not well ventilated. And while she was working in the room, somebody who was infectious came through and presumably she breathed in aerosols or whatever and came home the first day, not feeling well at the end of the day, went to work the next day, came home at lunchtime, feeling positively unwell.

MG: Even before she got a positive test, Michael took action to try to protect the rest of the family.

MICHAEL GUY: I have a young grandson who is in grade three, and we had decided with his family that last September it would be prudent to keep him out of school due to the risk of infection there. So he was living with me. So what happened when she came home at lunchtime on the second day, I scrambled, packed up my grandson and the two of us left. She subsequently tested positive, the next day or so, a couple of days later, I tested positive. Grandson did not. We were tested again and he was positive at that point. So he picked it up from me. I picked it up from her. She got it at work.

MG: And in the end, Michael's wife had to stay home from work without pay,

MICHAEL GUY: No paid sick leave. There was an attempt to allow her to work from home after her immediate infectious period ended. That wasn't terribly successful. And she ended up not being employed further with that particular shoot.

MG: For people in precarious and low income jobs, Michael's story is nothing new. The fear of losing your job and income can outweigh the benefits of staying home when you're feeling sick Rechev Browne works in a grocery store in Toronto.

MG: Rechev, good morning.

RECHEV BROWNE: Good morning. Good morning.

MG: It's great to have you on the program. What is the situation for you in your job with paid sick leave? Do you have paid sick days off?

RB: I do not have paid days off, and it's terrible because, I mean, we're in the midst of a pandemic, a pandemic which requires you to isolate for two weeks when you do contract the virus. So it's pretty scary. And the fact that our workplace has remained open throughout this pandemic, it's terrible.

MG: What is it like? I mean, you say it's terrible. What's it like going to work knowing that if you were to get sick, you would have to stay home and not get paid?

RB: It puts you in a very precarious situation because, you're thinking to yourself, OK, if I do go to work and I do get sick, am I going to tell anybody, am I going to continue to go to work being sick? Because I can't afford to not work, because for a lot of people, for me, it's rent, it's food, it's missing two weeks pay. And that can really go a long way for a lot of workers in Ontario.

MG: Tell me more about that. I mean, can you afford to stay home and not be paid for those couple of weeks that you would have to stay home and isolate if you were to get sick?

RB: I really can't. I really can't. I'm sure a lot of workers would agree with me, like the job that we do, like we're already so low on the wage scale that we can't even afford that. Like especially now in today's economic situation, for me personally, it's rent and food. I take care of myself. So it's scary. Like the scenarios that played in my head, like I'm hoping I don't catch this virus, like even though I'm going to work. I've been going to work since, like, last year. Throughout this whole pandemic, like so I'm thinking, oh my God. Like, I hope I don't get this because then there's no paid sick days. I have to go in and tell my employer of the two weeks, he's going to tell me to stay home for two weeks and that's two weeks without income.

MG: Is that what they're telling you at work? I mean, do they say explicitly if you're feeling unwell and perhaps even you need to go get tested, you have to go, but we can't pay you?

RB: Yeah, well, they pay you, I think, for the day that you miss. But then after that, you're on your own.

MG: You said that, and I hope you don't, I mean, I hope that you stay healthy, but you said that if you were to get sick, one of the things you'd run through your mind is, am I going to tell anybody?

RB: Yeah, it's tough. And that's probably why the virus has been spread so much right now, because statistics show that the workplaces that are left open in Ontario are the main places now where people are contracting covid. So it's almost like you're in a situation where, like you, you have symptoms and you're trying to hide the symptoms. Right. And you probably do. You're probably positive. But at the same time, you can't risk losing, you can't risk losing income. So you're still going in to work and you're interacting with people. You're interacting with co-workers. For me, I take the bus. I'm interacting with people on the bus. And maybe that's how the spread is... Maybe that's why, you know, there's so much right now because a lot of workers probably do have symptoms, but they continue to go to work because there's no system in place that that supports them, that lets them know, hey, it's OK, we've got your back, we're going to cover you. That's why we've been advocating so much for paid sick days, the decent health [inaudible] network. There's doctors that are saying, hey, we need paid sick days, when doctors are saying this, then. Yeah.

MG: Just before I let you go, I mean, who do you think should have your back, should it be the government, should it be your company that you work for?

RB: I think it's both. If we could remember last year, you know, the government was like, oh, my God, like, you guys are heroes. Our employer was like, oh, my God, you guys are heroes. So I think it's both. I think we need legislated, paid sick days, paid by the employer.

MG: That, that would be the way that would give you the protection that you need so that if you were to fall ill, you could stay home and not have to worry about having to keep the lights on.

RB: Yes. Yes. So legislated is paid by the employer. It would work x2. in flattening the curve. It would work in letting workers know that they're actually heroes. It would work in terms of just letting us know that there is a safety net in place where we could actually stay home for two weeks, get better because we, us going to work sick. It's only making things worse and it's really putting us in a tight, tight situation to risk our lives and other people's lives over the fact that we can't afford to stay home when sick.

MG: I'm glad to have had the chance to talk to you. And I really, I mean, take care of yourself and I hope that you stay healthy and well. Rechev, thank you very much.

RB: No problem. Thank you so much for having me. Have a great day.

MG: And you, Rechev Browne is a grocery store worker in Toronto. Kendra Strauss is an associate professor and director of the Labour Studies Program at Simon Fraser University.

MG: Kendra, good morning to you.

KENDRA STRAUSS: Good morning, Matt. Thanks for having me.

MG: Thanks for being here. What do we know about how many Canadians have access to paid sick leave?

KS: Well, we know that in most provinces it's fewer than half and overall fewer than half. So in B.C., for example, as in other parts of the countries, it's also very dependent on income. So if you make less than $40,000 dollars a year, for example, well over 60 percent of workers in that category have no access to paid sick days or paid sick leave. So, you know, not only is it fewer than half of Canadians, but it disproportionately affects lower paid workers.

MG: You know that across this country, not just in British Columbia, but Ontario and other provinces, the premiers will point to the federal government's program, the Canada Recovery Sickness Benefit as the solution and say this is what exists right now and this is why we aren't bringing in paid sick leave. Is that program the solution to the situation that Rechev was describing?

KS: No, it's not. And I think Rechev was very eloquent, you know, about the reasons why we need an employer paid sick days and sick leave. So the first thing to say is that Canada is a real laggard in this area. You know, most countries in the world have some form of sick leave policy and the majority of countries actually have employer paid sick leave. And the second thing to say is that it needs to be available from the first day that the worker is sick and it needs to be seamless. It's not something that can be applied for retro or should be applied for retroactively. For low paid workers who are working paycheque to paycheque, that will not be enough to keep them home when they're sick.

MG: And that's the situation with the CRSB, is that you apply after your home.

KS: Exactly. And, you know, as anyone who has applied for EI knows, it's not a straightforward process, you know. So if you don't have great access to the Internet or great online skills, if you don't know how to navigate the system, if English isn't your first language. There are really significant barriers and workers who may not know about it. So we really need something that is based in the workplace that starts on the first day that someone is feeling unwell, that gives them the confidence to stay home when they are sick and know that they're not going to, you know, fail to make rent or be able to, you know, not be able to afford food that month.

MG: There was no announcement of paid sick leave in the recent BC budget, nor was there an announcement of paid sick leave in the recent Ontario budget, though the Ontario premier has said that his government is now working on some sort of paid sick leave program. We just don't know what the details of that are going to be. We're more than a year into this pandemic. Why are we still struggling with this, do you think?

KS: I think one of the big problems is we still think about this as an employment benefit. This is actually a public health measure. And, you know, it's also understandable that the government, you know, provincial and federal governments have been unwilling to impose more costs on employers. But I think we need to realise that, you know, many employers, including in the sectors hardest hit, like warehousing and grocery, have actually done very well in the pandemic. And yet these are you know, these are the workers who are still going to work sick because they can't stay home. So, you know, we already have seen that programmes can be put in place to assist employers who have lost income during the pandemic. You know, that could be done during this time, but it's really still necessary for employers to share the cost in this, because when a pandemic or other forms of illness are spread through the workplace, we all pay or, you know, we all pay through the public health system. When workers can stay home, we all benefit. And employers benefit, they don't lose productivity, they don't have illness spread in the workplace.

MG: Let me bring in another voice to this conversation. Dennis Darby is the president and CEO of Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters.

MG: Dennis, good morning to you.

DENNIS DARBY: Good morning, Matt.

MG: What does your organisation think about the increasing calls for paid sick days? This is not something that's recent people have been talking about this long before the pandemic. But certainly the public health crisis that we're in right now has heightened that awareness of this issue. So where does your organisation stand on this?

DD: So as you know, Matt, manufacturers have been working throughout the pandemic and especially in Ontario, in Alberta right now, it is critical. And I'd go one step further than the professor Strauss. I think we need to make sure that workers have access to, basically from the moment they test positive in a screening test, which we don't do enough of at the workplace, because that's one way to keep people who have been getting into the workplace through the rapid screening or after a PCR test. So I... no manufacturer I've talked to wants sick people or sick workers in their plants. Given that most manufacturers are family owned, you know, 30,000 in Ontario are family owned businesses that are small, they certainly are affected by this. So I agree. I think we need to have something in place that makes sure workers don't make that wrong decision to come when they're feeling sick. But also, we need to take advantage of manufacturers to do things like vaccinations on site and to do screening. So it's an important discussion.

MG: So who should pay for them then?

DD: Well, that's... So in the manufacturing sector. And I know that I listen to the statistics of [inaudible]. You know, manufacturing tends to be a relatively higher paying, much more competitive sector, of the industrial sector. So well over half have paid sick leave, and that's still not enough. And then in many small companies we've spoken to through the pandemic, when they have had an outbreak or even a threat of an outbreak to continue to pay their employees because they certainly can't afford to lose them. I think there needs to be... We've spent a lot of money as governments across the country on this pandemic to try to get ourselves... protect ourselves so we can continue to put food on the table and the products people need. I think maybe it should be a shared you know, you talked about the federal program and the federal program really came up short for everyone, including, you know, anyone I've spoken to who run a business. Maybe there's... you know, we heard from Ontario that they're willing to do something. I think it needs to be a shared responsibility between the levels of government and industry. I don't know the mechanism, some employers to pay for it because they're larger. Probably haven't got the wherewithal, as the professor said, some of them are suffering as well. But it's certainly... It's you know, until we can get people vaccinated, until we can get those millions of rapid tests out of warehouses and at the plant gate, know we're going to have to do this and we have to do it quickly.

MG: Why do you think just briefly, why do you think this should be a shared responsibility? Why shouldn't those employers be the ones to ensure that their employees are taken care of and that their employees are protected?

DD: Yeah, what is suggested, as many employers already have paid sick leave, and if the sick leave provisions, whether it's a union contract or in a current policy, doesn't cover it, you know, is there a way to have... And mainly because many manufacturers, many businesses have suffered as well. Remember, most of them are not big multinationals. Most manufacturers are small, [inaudible] shops or small, you know, packaging, manufacturing or packaging, you know, a production shop. These are not huge businesses by and large. And so maybe there's a way maybe.... And also, I don't want to be in a situation where there's any, what did the professor say? Any discontinuous payment. So if you test positive, maybe there's a way where the employer continues to pay and there's some kind of, you know, tax credit apriori, depending on your situation, there's got to be a way to make it work.

MG: Kendra Strauss, is that the way forward to try to figure out some sort of hybrid model? Or should governments be the ones or industry be the ones solely responsible for paying sick pay to employees?

KS: Well, you know, that's a debate we're going to have to have. I mean, I think that Dennis is right, that we're probably going to need some sort of cost sharing mechanism during the pandemic for, you know, companies who can show that they've lost income. You know, we have to remember that countries like Germany, which is an extremely competitive manufacturing economy, have employer provided sick leave and that there are models where, you know, you have a system of social insurance through which the costs are shared. So, you know, models do exist out there that we can look at. And there, you know, there may be good reasons for sharing some of the burden during the pandemic, but in the longer run, this is a policy that can't go away. You know, we've learnt from this that this isn't going to be the only time that this happens. We need to be better prepared next time and. Comprehensive paid sick leave is part of that. You know, the federal budget and here in B.C., the recent provincial budget didn't have a lot of measures for increasing revenue. We're already concerned about the cost of the pandemic and adding, you know, another large program that is the responsibility solely of governments, you know, to solve an issue that is a workplace issue. That's also not really fair. So, you know, employers need to at least be part of this picture.

MG: Dennis Darby, people will... and you've hinted that you mean not all manufacturing companies are large ones, but there are enormous companies, Amazon, grocery chains like Loblaws that are making money hand over fist during this pandemic. Should they be responsible for the well-being of their staff? Should they be responsible for ensuring that their staff members can stay home if they're feeling unwell?

DD: Well, since neither of them are manufacturers, I've got to be careful here. But frankly, you know, I think that that's a very good, very good question, because at the end of the day, how companies are able to attract and retain employees. I know it may sound funny during the pandemic, but pre pandemic, we had a labour shortage in Canada, huge labour shortages, you know, and, of course, we went through a year with reduced immigration and we need more people working. I think things like paid sick leave are going to be a competitive edge going forward, as a professor said. And I think it's something we have to be having a conversation about now. Pandemic is, of course, we have to help people not come to work sick, we have to help people put food on the table. This is unprecedented, but I think the conversation is nowhere near over. We have to have this discussion as Canadians.

MG: And again, the big companies could afford to pay, presumably.

DD: You know, and again, I'm sure... I don't want to speak for them all, but I think, you know, yes, if they can afford to pay, if this is a way that you're going to be competitive and able to stay in business and be able to attract the best people to work for you, most certainly this is a... And many of them, as I said, for many of them, many of the large companies that, you know, large manufacturers especially do have that because it is such a competitive sector.

MG: Kendra, just... Go ahead. Sorry.

KS: Sorry. I was just going to say quickly, I think, Dennis you know, raises a really important point, which is that right now, you know, those employers who don't pay paid sick leave are you know, they are in a sense free riders on those employers who do so. This would also level the playing field, you know, for the many employers who do actually provide paid sick leave right now.

MG: Let's see whether this is the moment and whether given I mean, as you say, this is an issue that goes well beyond the pandemic before and after. But whether this is the moment in the midst of this pandemic where this is seized upon, it's great to speak with you both. Thank you very much.

DD: Thank you, Matt.

KS: Thanks for having me, Matt.

MG: Kendra Strauss, associate professor and director of the Labour Studies Program at Simon Fraser University. Dennis Darby, president and CEO of the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters. What do you make of this? Thoughts on paid sick leave. Is now the time? And if it is the time, how can it be ensured that this happens not just in this moment, but to Kendra's point continues well beyond the pandemic? You can let us know. Email us thecurrent@CBC.ca. The CBC News is next. And then inside a place that many of us have never been behind bars. We're going to talk to the host of a new CBC podcast called Life Jolt explores the deep and long lasting impact of the prison system on women and their loved ones. Rosemary Green joins me coming up in six minutes. I'm Matt Galloway you're listening to The Current on CBC Radio One.

New CBC podcast Life Jolt explores the stories of women in prison

Guest: Rosemary Green, John Chipman

MG: Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway and you're listening to The Current.

[Music: Theme]

MG: Still to come, Denmark's controversial move to start sending Syrian refugees back to Syria. But first, life in and outside Canada's women's prison system.

[Music: Theme]

MG: Rosemary Green has been many things in her life, a teenage mother at 14, an illiterate high school dropout, a drug dealer and smuggler and a convicted felon. But like so many people who end up in the criminal justice system, Rosemary is also much more than her crimes and punishment since getting out of prison 12 years ago. She's become a high school graduate, a college graduate, a university student, a prison reform advocate, and now a CBC host. Rosemary Green is the voice of Life Jolt, a new CBC podcast that spent more than a year pre- Pandemic inside the Grande Valley Institution for Women, a federal prison in Kitchener, Ontario.

MG: Rosemary Green, good morning.

ROSEMARY GREEN: Good morning, Matt. Well, that was a beautiful introduction.

MG: And it's all true.

RG: I love it.

MG: Congratulations on this.

RG: Thank you.

MG: We'll talk about the details in a moment. But I mean, just really broadly, what is this? What is Life Jolt?

RG: So the definition of it, life jolt, is actually prison slang for a life sentence. So this series basically explores women's experience in the prison system. It also, it's been really fortunate because our team was able to go into Grand Valley to interview these women and get to know their stories. And myself, I, too, was a convicted felon. So I got to walk alongside these women, sharing their stories and my own.

MG: I want to talk about their stories in a moment. But tell me yours. I mean, I mentioned in the introduction you were convicted of drug smuggling. Tell me a little bit about that and what happened?

RG: Yeah, so I think at a young age, I lost control of my life and I felt like I had to find something that can gain back that control. And I found that through the feelings of a form of dominance through the drug game, you know. So I started off small selling crack cocaine in the streets. And as you can tell, I have a really bubbly personality. Now it's bubbly, before it was rough. And I was very... I got what I wanted at any cost. And I just met the wrong people. I met people and I walked in and I was like, I can do anything. The sky's the limit. And I basically got affiliated with the Colombian cartel. And it's crazy because when you look at my face, you'd be like, she knew the cartel. But yeah. And then I got caught for drug trafficking from Panama. I was coming from Panama and got caught in Miami and my life changed from there.

MG: What happened in that moment when you got caught?

RG: I knew getting off that plane that I was caught. I knew leaving Panama, I was in trouble. I, I had this gut instinct that I was like... like I'm in trouble.

MG: I mean, you were smuggling drugs. I mean, how were you smuggling these drugs?

RG: Oh, so it was liquid cocaine and shampoo bottles. So they put it in those you know, those like cellophane wraps that they used to have, what they would put the cell phones in so nobody could steal the cell phone. So they wrapped it like that. And it was like just a variety of shampoo bottles and lotions and stuff. And I had a co-defendant and she had a bunch. And me being an extremist, I decided to try to take the most bottles and just had it in. But I really thought I was good because they had dogs at the airport in Panama and they were sniffing the suitcase and nothing. I thought I was good. I really did. But I knew internally, instinctively, I knew I was in trouble.

MG: How do they catch you? What happened? I mean, you said the dogs were there then what happened?

RG: Yeah. So when I got to Miami, I landed and my co-defendant went one way and I went another way. And I went up to the immigration officer and just the way he was acting, like he kept looking up and he kept looking down. And I travelled enough in my life to know that something was going down. And then they're like, OK, well, can you go this way for a second? And they escorted me through these doors. And it was apart from everybody else, like I could see the luggage section and I didn't see my co-defendant she had already gone through. So they brought me into a room and all of a sudden they were like, Oh, so what are you here for? Why are you travelling? What are your means? And I was like I felt I was on point. I was like, you know, I'm self-employed. And I thought I was getting away with it. But one thing about me is if I get really nervous, I turn like a big red tomato. And I was a tomato, I guess. And one of the things in the discovery they said is I was like my neck was like pulsating. And they basically took me into a room. And when they brought me into the room, that's when they were like, are you going to tell us what you did? Because we know and I was a hard nut to crack like I was hard core. And that's when they pulled out a picture of my children. Well, actually, first they asked me, I had a cross around my neck. It was like a protection for me. And they told me to take off the cross necklace. So that was like my first layer of defence coming down. And then the second layer defences, they pulled out a picture of my four children and they showed it to me and the immigration officer said, if you ever want to see these children again, you were going to tell us what you're doing and what you did. And that was the breaking point for me.

MG: So you were caught, convicted, sentenced. How much time did you end up doing in prison?

RG: I was sentenced to 60 months. I did five years in a federal prison in a foreign land. Yeah.

MG: When you think about that time now and I mentioned that, you know, you've been out of prison for 12 years, I mean, what goes through your mind when you think about that time in the prison?

RG: I see it as a past tense. That doesn't... That's no longer me. Right? Like, I'm so much more than my crime. I can't, I can't say it enough, you know, like, if anything, prison never. It did not rehabilitate me. Let me make that very clear. It didn't. Prison broke me. What rehabilitated me was humanity when I came out and strangers came alongside of me and spoke life into me, a social worker like people literally just came and empowered me and was like, you are so much more. Teachers at the college I attended too. It was crazy. It was just like slowly, like strangers were just coming. And that is what changes me and that's what defines me now. So now I've taken this pain, this mess, and I've made it into a message of hope.

MG: Well, when you say like it broke you, I mean, what do you mean by that?

RG: Well, when I was in prison, a lot happened and this series gets into a lot of things. I think one of the most damaging parts for it is when I did... spent time in isolation. Something horrific happened to me in prison. I was victimised in prison. So I came out re-victimised because I was already a victim going into prison. I lost my identity and who I was, so the only thing I ever knew was my identity as a mother, so that was stripped away from me. So I became a stranger to my family. I became a stranger to my children. So I no longer had that to lean into. My appearance was taken. I had lost half my teeth while I was in prison from decay and lack of care. So I came out half. Half the woman I felt. And it stripped me, it stripped me and made me feel like I was a monster who deserved punishment. So I came out vulnerable. And you know, just so broken and so lost and so afraid because I didn't know... I didn't know how to live again.

MG: I mean, having been broken, you have to kind of put yourself back together. You learned how to read and write in prison. Is that correct?

RG: Yeah.

MG: How do you do that? I mean, when you're going through everything that you just described.

RG: Well, when you're drowning, what is the first thing you do, is it not you trying to reach for some sort of life preserver, something to grab onto? So I was in the midst of drowning. And so my lifeline became reading. And it was crazy because it was so funny, so there was this poster that was put up in one of the girls rooms and it had a picture of like... it was a Twilight poster, OK? And there was....

MG: From the movie?

RG: Yeah. So Edward was there. So you're going to laugh at me when I tell you this. So there's Edward and I was like, oh he's a babe. Like I've been locked up for a minute. OK, I saw this poster and I was like, oh, he's a babe. And I was like, who is that? What's that? What is that? She was like, Oh, it's a book that's out. You know, they're going to make a movie of it. But right now it's just a book. And I was like, what? And I was like, I want to read the book. And I'm not even saying like, God forbid if I tell anyone that I can't read. And she showed me the book and I grabbed it and I was like, looking at it like my life is over because it's thick it's like a four inch book. Right. And I went to my room feeling so defeated, but I was so determined. So I was... And she told me she was like, you literally have to hurry up because somebody else is waiting to read it. So I was like, oh, I got this, no problem. So I brought the book to my room, but I was like, there you should have seen me like, look at it like. I'm just like looking through the page. Maybe something miraculous will happen as I'm flipping through. And I started to learn to read it. But at the same moment it was so funny. And John and I made a joke about this one time, the producer of Life Jolt, I had said to him that at the same time I started learning to read Twilight. I started to read the Bible again and not again, but for the first time. Right. And I always say our little inside joke was I was like having lustful thoughts. So I had to redeem myself by learning the word of God. So I started reading both books. It was crazy because I was at such a low point. So I had just realised the other day I never acknowledged that I could read until I came home from prison. I was actually reading court papers to my sister and my sister was like, Rosemary, stop, stop, stop. And I'm like, What? And she was like, Are you reading to me? And I was like, oh, yeah, I can read, but looking back now, the reason I didn't say anything about reading then is because at that moment I was in a fight with my family talking about losing custody of my children. So I'd been blocked with the pain that I didn't even realise this miracle had happened. Like, people can't just pick up a book and start reading. And I did.

MG: It's amazing. You mentioned John, John Chipman is your producer on Life Jolt. He is a longtime producer on The Current and he is with us listening to this conversation.

MG: John, hello.

JOHN CHIPMAN: Hello, Matt. Hello Rosemary.

RG: Hi, John.

MG: This is and I know only this because you and I have been talking about this for a little while, like from way back when, when you were starting to work on this. Tell me a little bit about Rosemary and how you found her.

JC: Yeah, well, I mean, you've been talking to her. She's a pretty remarkable person.

MG: Ah, yes.

JC: Yeah. I mean, you know, I have been working on this project actually, this month it’s three years since I made my first trip into GVI. And I decided, you know, early on that it was really important that I wanted the voice of this project about women's experiences in the system, in the prison system to be someone who, you know, walked the walk, who had been in, who had been through the system themselves. And it was a real challenge finding Rosemary. I mean, I think I spent probably seven months and went through six or seven other people because, you know, I needed someone reliable. I needed someone who could communicate, someone who had a big personality. And, you know, Rosemary has all that. But what was really interesting is, you know, besides finding a host with lived experience, one of the other big considerations that I had in putting this together was I needed to find some semblance of hope. Right. I mean, you know, these stories, Rosemary's story, they're difficult sometimes to listen to. And there's a lot of darkness, obviously, you know, in their lives before and in their lives during prison, in their lives afterwards. And it was really important that we found hope. And so I was always kind of trying to figure out how do we inject that hope into it? And it's interesting, because Rosemary is the hope and not only is she the hope for the listeners, but she became the hope for the women that we met themselves. Right. I mean, Rosemary doesn't present as an ex-con. Right. Like Rosemary has rebuilt her life completely. And so along the way, you know, we met a number of women. Rosemary participated in all the interviews and stuff or a lot of them. And it was kind of... we had a moment, I remember, you know, with one woman in particular, when we travelled with her after she was released. And it was probably like hours into the day. And she didn't know that Rosemary was an ex-con. Right. And it's so overwhelming in that moment. Right. It's like you've been through this traumatic experience and you've been released on parole and you're supposed to put your life together and you don't know how you're going to do it. Right. That becomes very clear when you talk to people who are in the moment and then, like her eyes just went big as saucers when Rosemary said, like, I've done this like ten years ago, I was exactly where you are. And it's just like, look where I am. And Rosemary would never say that. But that was the message, right? It's like, if I can do this, you can do this. And it was really it was a powerful moment. And it speaks to the distance that Rosemary has walked in her life.

MG: Tell me about some of the stories that you tell over the course of this series, John. And we'll bring Rosemary in, in a minute. But I mean, in the episodes that are part of this series, where do you go?

JC: Well, it's interesting because I really, I wanted to try to find someone before they were going into prison. Right. And so, you know, Diana is one of our central characters. And I managed to find her while she was being held on remand. So there's this period before you're convicted. Right. And you're either, you know, between your arrest and before your conviction in the series we call the before times. Right. Where you don't really know what's coming. Diane, is a first time offender, she'd never been involved with the criminal justice system before. She's actually a crossing guard in her city back home. And her life unravelled and she got involved in a really bad situation. Drugs, alcohol, made her make some really bad decisions. And she ended up being arrested. Right. And so I remember, you know, we met her over two years ago now and she was awaiting her sentencing and she was terrified. And we followed her from that beginning all the way through her time at Grand Valley and then back out into the community. She's been back out for over a year now and all of the challenges. So it's a really interesting snapshot of what the whole process is like.

MG: Rosemary, tell me a bit about that and some of the women that we'll meet over the course of this.

RG: Oh, my goodness. So it was really important for me in the beginning that I had as much relationship with these women as possible, I don't take someone's story lightly, having my own story, I feel like it almost has like a form of sacredness to it in the sense like, you know, that's yours. Your story to tell. I wouldn't want anyone trying to tell my story. I'm really protective of my story. So it was really important for me from the beginning to get to know the women as much as possible. So right away I was like, John, I need to know these women and I need to know that they're OK. So every woman that I did meet, I did ask them, are you OK with me sharing your story? And then this is my story. And all of them gave me the OK. So to watch these women be able to share their stories and talk about what they've been through and their experiences in the system and family and fight and resilience was so empowering for me. And I, I feel like I was able to go alongside them, like hold their hand in this sense and say to them, share your truth. So it was really empowering for me.

MG: John mentioned the before time and the remand when you're held before you're actually in prison. When they're trying to figure out whether you're going to go into prison or not. What are some of the other stages that you explore in the series?

RG: We also have where we'll go inside the prison system. So we'll talk about some of the issues inside prison, mental health, trauma, stigmatism. We talk about parenting. We talk about segregation. We talk about reintegration. And gratefully, by the grace of God, I could be that hope. But at the same time, like this is raw. These are human beings. Right. And there's no... You'll hear me laugh a lot in the series, but that's my coping mechanism. So when I'm like about to lose my gasket, I'll laugh. And there actually is even an episode about the legacy, which is our last episode, where I sit down and I have an interview with my twin daughters.

MG: Let me ask you about parenting. You mentioned parenting earlier on and you mentioned your kids as well. You were a young mom when you went in.

RG: Yeah. Yeah. So I have four children. I'm a grandma, too now.

MG: Amazing. Where were your kids at that time when all of this was happening?

RG: Yeah. So the twins were the... all four of my children I had before I went to prison. When I went to prison, my children were scattered. So my youngest daughter went with her father. My son went to, happened to... my son was actually in Barbados visiting his father when I got incarcerated. So he was with him for some time and then transitioned back to Canada and was with my... went with my sister and then my oldest twins were with my mother. So they were all separated. But yet my family did a really good job of keeping them together at the same time.

MG: What was it like to be a mom behind bars? When your kids are out there in the world?

RG: Horrible.

MG: Yeah.

RG: How do you.... I had to shut my kids out. To survive. And but, it's crazy because though I shut them out, they were also my hope to keep pushing forward when things got really bad inside, they were the means that kept me pushing to want to be better and do better.

MG: What are the conversations like now that you have with them about this?

RG: The first time we ever talked about my prison sentence was on air with Life Jolt.

MG: Really?

RG: I wasn't ready to face that. I think it's easy to... It's easy to have.... It's so natural now for me to hear the judgement of other people and their opinions and whatever may come with the ripple effect of being a convicted felon but your own children. But it's crazy because honestly, it's nothing short of a miracle. My oldest daughters and I are like best friends. Their fight, I truly believe, comes from seeing me fight, which was actually something that they shared in the interview. And then the two younger ones, you know, there's still a lot of healing. There's that underlining pain? Prison sentences don't only affect you, especially when you have children, you know, or family like everybody is affected,

JC: Matt, one of the things that we found is like just how common this experience that Rosemary went through, which, you know, 15 years later, like she's still living with the consequences of this separation that she went through. And I think over 70 percent of women in Canadian prisons have children that are 18 years old, like it is so common. And so we spend some time, you know, in real time with them, with a young mother who's trying to stay connected with her four year old son on the outside. And then, you know, we followed her after she got out and then she's trying to reintroduce herself into his life and then trying to co-parent with her parents, like her son was with her parents. And it's very, very complicated and tricky terrain to move through. And then, you know, on the flip side of that, there's this incredible program that Correction Services has and that, you know, Grand Valley, the prison that we were in, it's called the Mother Child Initiative, which, you know, very small, tiny fraction of women are allowed to bring their children into the prison permanently with them and raise them inside the prison. It's really, it's quite remarkable. So we spent some time with a mother and her son who had gone through this program and what it meant to be able to do away with that disconnection and still stay connected with him through that whole, you know, traumatic time. And how much better it was for mother and for child to be able to be together.

MG: I mean, this isn't easy for you to talk about. And I mean, that is you said that the residual trauma is still there and there are undercurrents. Why did you want to tell these stories and why did you want to be part of this?

RG: Oh, wow. When you experience pain, you automatically want to look for something that is going to help with that pain. Right. You look for some sort of coping mechanism. And I had to believe that my pain wasn't in vain. I had to believe that my pain was something that could make a difference, that there was a reason I went through it. Right. And I think it all goes back to my faith. It's just believing that through my pain and my suffering, if it gives the ability to shine a light and make people like myself seen in a different perspective and just not seen as someone who's done something wrong. We're not just bad people. We're just people that have been through some bad circumstances and got caught up in some bad situations. And I think more importantly, I just wanted to be able to be a light of hope that people could see that, yes, this is where I started. But look at me now, you know what I mean? Like, what are you going to tell me now? I'm here. And I think that was the biggest thing for me. It made it all worthwhile for me.

MG: John, what do you want people to get from this?

JC: Rosemary said it so eloquently. Right. I mean, really, my starting point for this several years ago was the same as everyone else, right? I mean, I had an opportunity to go into prison. I met some interesting people and I thought, wow, this is not really what I was expecting. And I've learned so much over the past couple of years about humanity and about resilience and about hope. You know, it's funny, like I've spent the past couple of years basically obsessed with ex cons, and I am so thankful for these incredible women that I've been able to meet. We all are so much more than our worst moments, right. For these people, their worst moments land them in prison. We all have things that we've done that we regret. And so just an opportunity to tell a more full picture of who these women are is really what I hope people take away from it.

MG: I'm really glad that you have been willing to tell your story through this series. I mean, I've heard the first episode and I am hooked. That will be the rest of my time over the next little while. Will be listening to the rest of it. In the meantime, well done and thank you very much.

RG: Thank you so much for having me.

MG: John, thanks so much.

JC: Yeah. Thanks, Matt.

MG: Rosemary Green is the host of the new CBC podcast Life Jolt. John Chipman is a producer on Life Jolt and a producer here on The Current. You can find the first two episodes of Life Jolt on the CBC Listen app or wherever you get your podcasts. Coming up after your regional update. Denmark is sending Syrian refugees back to Syria. In 90 seconds, how this controversial decision is uprooting lives all over again. I'm Matt Galloway you're listening to The Current on CBC Radio One.

[Music: Theme]

Syrian refugees in Denmark are told it's time to go home

Guest: Hiba al-Khalil, Charlotte Slente, Kristina Simonsen

MG: Hi, I'm Matt Galloway, you're listening to The Current.

NOOR: All the day. No electricity, no benzene, no gasoline, no no food.

MG: That's Noor for her safety, we've agreed not to use her real name. She's describing what life is like in Syria today. And for Noor, it's not just the lack of basic necessities that makes Syria unsafe.

NOOR: The life in Damascus is not safe to anybody, to any person inside Syria or want to come to Syria. There is no democracy, or freedom [to] express your opinion.

MG: Noor sent her daughter to Paris and is now trying to find a way out of Syria for her son.

NOOR: My girl will go to Paris and now I try hard to travel my son to any country outside Syria.

MG: While Noor is looking for a way out, the government of Denmark is busy trying to send people back. It has deemed Syria safe to return to and is revoking residency permits of some Syrian refugees. Hiba al-Khalil is a Syrian refugee who has been in Denmark for just over five years, and she recently had her second interview with immigration officials to see if her stay in that country will be renewed.

MG: Hiba joins me now. Hiba, hello.

HIBA AL-KHALIL: Hello.

MG: What are you thinking as you listen to Noor describe life in Damascus? No food, no electricity and no safety of opinion?

HIBA AL-KHALIL: Yeah, it's completely true, actually. The life is very, very bad. It's not about bombing or sarin gas. It's also about the economic problems. There's very much high prices and the regime it's controlling these areas. So absolutely. She said that it's no freedom. That's true.

MG: Why did you decide to leave Syria? You were 20 years old when you left the country, right?

HIBA AL-KHALIL: Yes, actually, I actually decided that time because I, I have a lot of experience with bombing because it was many of explosion very close to my home and the university at that time. It was not safe everywhere, was not safe and life there, actually. And the regime was at everyone who doesn't support him. So it was so, so dangerous for many people. That doesn't support the regime, soldiers everywhere. And you are just... a feeling says that you are not safe to say anything, to say anything against al-Assad.

MG: So you went to Greece. What was the passage like to Greece? How did you get to Greece?

HIBA AL-KHALIL: I actually travelled to Turkey at that time. And after that I get to Greece illegal way with rubber boat. Many people has done this. So I was one of them.

MG: In a rubber boat?

HIBA AL-KHALIL: Yeah. Yeah.

MG: Were you scared?

HIBA AL-KHALIL: Yeah, I was so scared. I was like, oh my God, I don't know if I would die or I would be alive after three hours. I don't know. I just say, OK, I have to say, I have to do this thing because I have to go. I have to begin my life again. So I didn't have any choice to stay in Turkey or in Lebanon or in anywhere. So I just have this choice to go.

MG: What were you hoping life would be like when you got out of Syria?

HIBA AL-KHALIL: I would like actually to study journalist. I would like to be a journalist who can say whatever she wants and who can help people to get their freedom and their rights. So I was hoping like a normal life, like in any country in the world.

MG: And you've been in Denmark now for five years. So what is life like for you now?

HIBA AL-KHALIL: I actually built many things here. I learnt the language and I worked. I studied. I just start from the zero. So I would like actually to stay here in Denmark and continue to build my life. Life here in Denmark it's everything for me if I will miss my life here in Denmark. So I will miss everything, actually.

MG: What was your reaction when you learnt that the government in Denmark was going to be revoking your temporary residence permit and sending you back to Syria?

HIBA AL-KHALIL: I actually was so surprised about it. I thought that they would not send me a message or a post about it because I'm alone here and they know my situation and they will believe that is a lot of raping in Syria for women and from regime. And they will understand my situation. But it was not. So I was so surprised. And so afraid about they will rejected me or something else.

MG: You talked about speaking out against the regime, being a journalist, but also somebody who doesn't agree with the regime, are you afraid of persecution by the government if you were to return?

HIBA AL-KHALIL: So I'm so afraid actually to be arrested, to be raped from the regime soldier or something.

MG: I mentioned that you had done a couple of interviews with immigration officials in Denmark. Do you think that the people who were interviewing you, do they understand what you would be facing when you returned to Syria, the danger that you'd be facing?

HIBA AL-KHALIL: I don't know, actually, because you can't even know how they are thinking, because they don't show how they are thinking. They don't show what they are coming to do. You don't know you don't. You feel like you are, um, you don't know anything.

MG: If they tell you that you have to leave, what will you do?

HIBA AL-KHALIL: I don't know actually. I absolutely don't know because I'm not thinking about that. I'm not thinking to start from zero in other land in other country. I have learnt Danish and I just believe that I will stay in Denmark. So I don't have this energy. Actually, again, I'm so tired of this. I'm trying every day to fight and fight and have work, have a study, study everything, what they have asked me about. So I don't actually have this energy.

MG: And Denmark does it feel like home now?

HIBA AL-KHALIL: No, actually, I don't feel it. No, I don't. I feel like every time that I'm going outside, I feel like it's a very strange place. I don't... When you feel that you are not safe. So everything will be strange for you.

MG: I wish you the best of luck and I hope things work out for you. Hiba, thank you very much.

HIBA AL-KHALIL: Take care. Thank you.

MG: Hiba al-Khalil is a Syrian refugee living in Denmark. Charlotte Slente is the Secretary General of the Danish Refugee Council. She's in Copenhagen.

MG: Charlotte, hello to you.

CHARLOTTE SLENTE: Hello.

MG: What do you make of what you've just heard from Hiba , talking about the life that she's made for herself in Denmark and the possibility that life will come to an end and she will be sent home to Syria?

CS: Well, the story that Hiba tells us is, unfortunately, the story of a number of Syrian refugees with residence permits in Denmark coming from Damascus or the greater Damascus area that are having their residence permits revoked. Unfortunately, this is a very complicated situation. And the Danish Refugee Council disagrees with the decision of the Danish government to deem the Damascus area or in fact, any area in Syria as a safe area to return to for refugees. In that sort of position we sort of share the line here with the recommendations of the UN and the UN's Agency for Refugees UNHCR, because as we understand it and also given various reports on the situation in Syria, the absence of fighting in some areas of Syria does not mean that people can go back safely. Numerous reports that actually talk about arbitrary detention, the severe human rights abuses of the civilian population. And we believe it's a strange position for the Danish authorities to take.

MG: Well, given that I mean, help me understand this. Why is the Danish government now revoking the residency permits of some Syrians?

CS: There was an amendment of the law in Denmark back in 2015 that actually lowered the threshold for what would be required to revoke residence permits for refugees. And that was sort of based on the general assumption. I mean, the general residence permits for people that do not flee because they are individually persecuted but flee due to war and conflict in their own countries. So for the general situation. So the Danish authorities have actually started over the last few years to look into all these residence permits for refugees stemming from the Damascus area and has been reassessing their residence permits in this country and have started revoking.

MG: How are they going about determining who should stay and who needs to be returned? I was reading something about how if men were to go back, that perhaps they would be drafted into military service or what have you and that women may not face that. And so they are finding themselves disproportionately being affected by this policy by the Danish government.

CS: Yes, we understand that if men risked to be drafted into the army, when back, they will not have their residence permits revoked. That is how we understand it at this moment in time. So in that sense, yes, women are more affected by this new sort of approach by the Danish authorities than other.

MG: We contacted the Minister of Immigration and Integration in Denmark, Mattias Tesfaye, and the ministry sent us a statement and it reads in part, "We have made it clear to the Syrian refugees that their residence permit is temporary and that the permit can be revoked if the need for protection ceases to exist. The approach of the Danish government is to provide protection to those in need of it. But when the conditions in their home country have improved, former refugees should return to their home country. The conclusion of the board is that the general security situation in the area, in and around Damascus has improved to such an extent that the need for protection for persons who are not individually persecuted but have a temporary residence permit granted on the grounds of general circumstances has ceased to exist". So there's a couple of things in there that I want to ask about. One is, was it clear to people like Hiba that the residency permit that she and others were offered was a temporary permit?

CS: Yes, that is clear to people who obtain a residence permit in Denmark. The problem here is that there is no sort of alignment between the needs relating to temporary permits. If you look at conflicts around the world, refugees in general need protection for around 15 to 20 years because that is the time it takes until people can generally return after war or after conflict in any where they are staying as refugees. So basically, the temporary status is an acceptable one. But basically what we are saying is that the temporary status here is much too temporary. So few years, it does not allow for people to go back based on the concrete situation in Syria. And that's why where we say that there are a lot of risks involved, the Syrian Network for Human Rights have actually determined that or documented that many refugees going back to Syria have been arrested. When they go to Syria, a number of them don't get out again. They remain detained for a long periods of time. Some are forcibly disappeared.

MG: So how did Denmark come to the conclusion then that Damascus and the areas around that city are safe to go back to?

CS: Basically, I think they rely on the indication that there is no sort of fighting, physical fighting taking place in Damascus and the greater Damascus area at this time.

MG: What is the urgency? I'm still having difficulty understanding the urgency. I mean, why is this happening now?

CS: You know, I basically think you would have to ask the Danish government this question because, I mean, we are in many ways also concerned because we see that a number of the people who have been rejected, their permits are not extended, their permits... will not leave voluntarily due to the risks that are involved. And then they will be placed in Denmark in return centres and potentially for a long time, because as it is, Denmark does not have diplomatic relations with the Syrian authorities and can therefore not return refugees to Syria because that requires contact and negotiations with Syrian authorities. So it means that people, if they don't leave voluntarily, will be left indefinitely in return centres where they basically cannot pursue their normal lives that they have been building here in Denmark over recent years. So there they cannot continue working. They cannot continue their education, their children cannot continue to go to school, etc. So basically they will be placed there in a limbo for a long period of time. And that's also what makes it very difficult to understand sort of the hurry of the Danish government in carrying forward this policy.

MG: What role does politics play in this? There's a far right group in Denmark that's running a poster campaign with pictures of the sun and the sand and the Syrian flag there flapping away. And the caption is "Good news. You can now return home to sunny Syria". So is this decision being influenced by and shaped in some ways by anti-immigration groups in Denmark?

CS: Obviously, it's very political, but, I mean, you would, I think, have to ask the political parties and government about that.

MG: Charlotte, it's good to speak with you. Thank you very much.

CS: You're welcome.

MG: Bye bye.

CS: Bye.

MG: Charlotte Slente is the secretary general of the Danish Refugee Council. Kristina Simonsen has been listening in. She's an associate professor in political science at Aarhus university in Denmark.

MG: Kristina, hello to you.

KRISTINA SIMONSEN: Hello.

MG: Let's talk about the politics here. This policy was put into place by the ruling Social Democratic Party. Tell me a little bit about who the party is and what their views on immigration and refugees are.

KRISTINA SIMONSEN: Hmm. So the Danish Social Democrats are quite a different social Democratic Party in comparison to other social Democratic parties in Europe when it comes to immigration and integration issues. What we saw in the election campaign of 2019 where they secured government power, is that they moved to the right on immigration issues. And it's been a hallmark of their strategy to sort of signal toughness or being restrictive on immigration. And that's been in an effort to attract previous voters that left the party, attract them again. So some of the social Democratic voters, voted previously or recently for the Danish People's Party, a right wing nationalist party. And the Social Democratic Parties analysis has been to move into their territory in order to attract those voters back. And now they're sort of locked in needing to prove that they actually are tough or restrictive on immigration.

MG: Broadly and I mentioned that poster campaign by far, right anti-immigration groups, saying it's safe to go back to Syria, you know, lucky you Syrian refugees. I mean, broadly, how do Danes view refugees and immigrants? I mean, again, you can't paint people within a broad brush, perhaps entirely. But is there a strong anti-immigrant sentiment in the country right now?

KRISTINA SIMONSEN: So I think that is the impression that one could get sort of from the outside that the Danes must be particularly anti-immigrant in comparison with populations in other countries since these policies can come into place. But when we look at international survey data, so both in comparison with other countries and over time, the Danish population is no more or no less anti-immigrant or restrictive or tough than most other populations. In fact, the population is often on most of these questions, sort of divided half/half with one half being more restrictive or concerned and another half being more liberal and more pro immigration. But the story of how politics has devolved is one of a multi-party system where a few, like small segments of the population, can end up also having a lot of influence because they're represented by parties that can decide sort of government destinies. And here the Danish People's Party has played an important role over the past decades because they were central to securing first the liberal conservative government's power, which was they took the first steps in the direction of a right move on immigration. And now for the Social Democratic Party to secure government power. Their analysis was that they needed to move in this direction, too.

MG: And so the move now to revoke the refugee permits, that is about political urgency, political expediency, you believe?

KRISTINA SIMONSEN: So, it's important to distinguish between sort of political decisions being carried out. It's a political decision to determine on what basis people get refugee status in Denmark. And that political decision is less protective than in most other countries because it's... the judgement is whether conditions have improved. And here the authorities now judge the conditions to have improved enough for people to return. But it's not the minister who decides on that. That's authorities, yeah.

MG: I mean, there are many countries, including Canada, that have offered citizenship to refugees that arrived from Syria. Canada offered citizenship to something like 50,000 of those refugees, and many of them are now part of the Canadian fabric. Is integration, something that the government views as a viable option here for those who have arrived, people that have been there like Hiba for five years now.

KRISTINA SIMONSEN: So that question gets to the core of the political messaging around these decisions. Since a couple of years ago, the goal of receiving refugees in Denmark is not integration that's explicitly stated. It's repatriation, not integration. And so the idea is that being a refugee should be a temporary status and the utmost goal of housing refugees is actually to return them to their homes. So that's also why Slente said or mentioned that refugees who have their residence permits revoked, they are then sent to repatriation centres. So centres that limit their possibilities for living a life in Denmark and therefore sort of sends a signal that it's not attractive to stay in Denmark and that they should return.

MG: Is anyone politically standing with these refugees and pushing back against a policy that would send them back to a city that many people believe is nowhere near safe?

KRISTINA SIMONSEN: Yeah, so actually, all of the parties to the left of the Social Democratic Party, who are the support parties of this government, they are standing with the Syrian refugees and arguing that it can't be that Denmark is the only country that deems this area safe and therefore the government should rethink this policy or the the decision to revoke residence permits for this group of refugees.

MG: As you mentioned, Denmark is the first country in the European Union to make this decision to revoke residency permits and send refugees back to Syria. It's being watched very carefully by other countries and being criticised very strongly by many other countries as well. What sort of message do you think this sends internationally?

KRISTINA SIMONSEN: Yes, so there is this interesting paradox, I would say, because I think the image of Denmark is usually of a progressive liberal country that is historically known also for sort of being liberal in the refugee area. But over the past 10 to 20 years, this has moved further to the right. And therefore, it also comes to some internationals as a surprise to see this happening in Denmark. But I would say that then, looking at the international reaction from a Danish perspective, it's not new to be the most restrictive country any longer in terms of immigration. Denmark has also tightened its citizenship policies so that they're amongst the most restrictive in Europe, if not the most restrictive. And you have other policies where Denmark is also a country that is now one of the most restrictive.

MG: Changes the image in some ways of how people see the country.

KRISTINA SIMONSEN: Yes, definitely. And sort of, yeah, turns everything upside down in a way,.

MG: Kristina, I appreciate you walking us through this. It's getting a lot of attention and it'll be obviously watched very closely to see whether the decision is followed through on. In the meantime, thank you very much.

KRISTINA SIMONSEN: Thank you.

MG: Kristina Simonsen is an associate professor in political science at Aarhus university in Denmark.

MG: Well, that is The Current for this Monday. Coming up next on CBC Radio One, it's Q and there will be a lively discussion of last night's Academy Awards. Looked kind of unusual, not the Academy Awards that perhaps in these times, unusual times, that you might expect, but some great moments as well. Everything from the double win for Chloe Zhao for her film Nomad Land, to the expression on the face of Daniel Kaluuya when he made his speech. You'll hear all about that coming up in just a few moments on CBC Radio One. Before we go, it has been great hearing about people getting their vaccines lately. The covid shot selfie is a thing, people celebrating, getting their shot. And yours truly got the shot last week and just posted a photo of said shot going into my arm in every pic just off to the side of the person who's getting the vaccination are the real stars of this whole operation, the healthcare workers who are giving the dose. Many of them are pharmacists. And across the country, they have been working very hard to keep pharmacies running smoothly and patients well served. So we'll leave you today with some of their stories. I'm Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening to The Current and we'll talk to you tomorrow.

[Sound Clip: Pharmacists share their stories, transcribed below]

Hello, my name is Azmina.

Hi, my name is Jennifer.

Hi. My name is Manelle Kelada.

Hi. My name is Cameron.

I'm a pharmacist.

And I'm a community pharmacist

I am the pharmacist.

And owner of a pharmacy

In Burnaby B.C.

In Coal Harbour, Nova Scotia.

In Toronto.

In Edmonton.

Giving covid-19 vaccinations has been a positive and yet a busy experience.

For me this past year has been like no other in my twelve year career in retail pharmacy.

It's hard work for pharmacists to juggle prescriptions, injections and other services.

The hardest part of the vaccine rollout of a pharmacy has been the limit of each group and not sure how many vials we are getting and when.

From the beginning of the pandemic, pharmacists are working harder than ever before.

The pandemic has brought with it new challenges, some of which included dividing our staff into teams and staying up to date on the ever changing research surrounding the coronavirus. The most challenging part of the rollout thus far has been adapting to the steady stream of changing information and the quick turnarounds on vaccine supply and clinic setup updates. We are immunising about 100 patients a day, and we averaged 300 to 500 patients a week, depending on supply.

Frequent updates and changes during the pandemic have been challenging.

The pharmacists are playing an essential role in safely providing vaccination to everyone and following the protocol, although our supplies are doing very good with us. But still, we're not sure. Everything is in a grey area. So there's a lot of confusion with the patients and the pharmacies as well.

Overall, it has been a satisfying experience as we've been able to contribute to the safety of our community.

Seeing the happiness and the appreciation in people's faces makes it worthwhile.

Monday April 26, 2021 Full Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode