Wednesday Dec 10th

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is VOCM Open Line Call seven oh nine two
seven three fifty two eleven or one triple eight five
ninety eight six two six of uwsing. Opinions of this
programmer not necessarily those of this station. The biggest conversation
in Newfoundland and Labrador starts now Here's VOCM Open Line

(00:22):
Host Paddy Daily.

Speaker 2 (00:23):
Well, all right and good.

Speaker 3 (00:25):
Morning to you. Thank you very much for tuning into
the program. It's Wednesday, December the tenth. This is Open Line.
I'm your host, Patty Daily. Matt Barron sitting in the
producer's chair. This morning. You'll be speaking with Matt when
you pick up the phone to give us a call.
Get in the Queen on the air if you're in
the sat John's metroridge and the number of dial A is
seven zero nine two seven three five two one one
elsewhere a total free long distance one eight eight eight

(00:47):
five ninety VOCM, which is eighty six twenty six. So
I do enjoy giving a shout out to local athletes
doing well on the provincial scene, on the national scene,
on the international scene. So this morning, Totta Roberts, who
play for Dalhousie University at Tigers as a football player.

Speaker 2 (01:03):
Now, it's not that.

Speaker 3 (01:04):
Long ago there was no such thing as organized football
or a football field or football players here in the province.
But now apparently we're punching above her weight again. Todtter's
the first ever New Fromlander to play for Dalhousie on
the Tiger's football team, starting freshman on the offensive line
as the right guard. Also played special teams and named
the league All Star team as well First Team All
Star with Dall. So congratulations Tyler Roberts playing some ball

(01:27):
at doll And. I see this story back in the
news today about Penne Alexiak, the most decorated female Olympian
in Canadian history. So you know the story. She's been
suspended or banned for two years from competition. She's not
allowed to train with the coach or with the Olympic team,
so she's training in a public pool. She says she's
going to focus on competing in the next Olympics, but

(01:47):
I mean the future two years out. I mean she's
only twenty five years old now, living in Los Angeles.
So she failed three whereabouts tests, so she had a
certain amount of time to get a drug test. She
missed three in a row. Consequently suspended. It's not like
the doping conversation is new. We've been talking about this
for decades and she's denying any doping accusations. But boy,

(02:11):
it's hard to justify missing three tests if you're not doping.
And I have no idea what the actual circumstances are,
but it brings in all of the thoughts about performance
enhancing drugs in the sports period and the integrity sports,
which I think is going to be compromising in the future,
not just about drugs but mostly about betting. And you've
heard we talked about it before. But poor Oldpenny alexiak

(02:32):
back in the news, all right. And for the folks
who like to get out for a little twirl around
the Bannermer Park ice skating loop, it's not open. It's
a brilliant opportunity to get out. The Christmas lights are there,
there's generally a lot of good vibes. They recommend to helmet,
which is probably a very very good idea. You can't
bring your hockey stick, you can't bring a buck, or
those types of issues. But the Bannomer Park Loop open

(02:53):
ten to ten when weather it is cooperating, all right, thankfully,
I know it took so long, but the old American
inventory alcohol at the NLC is back up for sale.
So yesterday there was an announcement of some five hundred
thousand dollars donation to the Community Food Sharing Association. Another
million may indeed be pending as a result of the sale.

(03:15):
So net profits from the sale of three point two
million dollars worth of American inventory.

Speaker 2 (03:19):
It's the right thing to do.

Speaker 3 (03:21):
We probably could have kind a step further, but bravo
to finally get this done. And you just think about it.
You know, in Edmonton in nineteen eighty one was the
first ever Canadian food bank, and we were told at
the time it was a temporary solution for an economic
upheaval in the province of Alberta, specifically the city of Bedminton.
And now all these years later and all of a sudden,

(03:42):
a couple of million plus Canadians with a full alliance
on food banks. It's amazing, it really truly is. When
you think about it, the opportunities in this country, and
people talk about natural resource well through what have you,
and fair enough, but go from a temporary band aid
in nineteen eighty one to.

Speaker 2 (03:58):
What is ongoing today.

Speaker 3 (04:00):
You just look at the Community Food Sharing Association just
how many food banks they support and how many individuals
rely on their support. And it's not just folks who
are down on their luck. There's people who work full
time jobs have to go to the food bank. So anyway,
good do on the government for finally getting this stunbushment.
There you go. And on the concept of the groceries
and access to I think it's an interesting conversation being

(04:22):
led by farmers trying to propose a cap on profits
at the big grocery retailers. They mentioned the three big
ones in particular, but there's five companies dominated eighty percent
of the opportunity to buy groceries in this country. So
we're always up to that type of conversation. And on
that front, it brought forth some of these insolvency numbers
and this is also quite sad stuff. Insolvency numbers in

(04:44):
this province are out of control. The province saw five
point nine percent increase in bankruptcies and proposals for the
twelve month period ending in October thirty the first That
is down from eight point nine percent the month before,
but the national average zero point seven percent.

Speaker 2 (04:59):
That's the most recent update.

Speaker 3 (05:01):
So obviously a lot of people, you know, we wonder
aloud how people are able to make ends meet, especially
if you're on the lower income scale. But man, the
insolvency numbers in this problems when compared to the national
average is unbelievable. All right. I'm not so sure how
to approach this one. But today the ten to December,
for youth in Australia under the age of sixteen, you'll

(05:24):
be banned from social media, all right. So they've talked
about the ban from Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Twitch, Facebook,
Reddit threads and Kick. I don't even sure what kick is,
all right, So for Staratyers it's probably not going to work.
I mean, youth in Australia and others have been asked
about any potential workarounds, and there's plenty available. So they

(05:47):
still will indeed be on some of these social media platforms,
whether it be by the use of a VPN or otherwise.
Social media I think, for being honest as a failed experiment.
You know, it's gone from fun and information sharing to
something vastly different. I was on the receiving into some
interesting stuff yesterday. But anyway, that's beside the point. I
heard jerry Lyn Mackie speaking to youth in the community

(06:07):
yesterday for a bit of Streeter tape on the VOC
Morning Show today, and she posed the best question. It
was who should be responsible for control of social media?
The government, the parents or the tech companies. Government is
an interesting question. I understand the motivation here because for
youth it can be extremely problematic, whether it be for

(06:30):
the relentless and endless cyber bullying, whether it be for
things like sex stortion and child sex lorg. All of
these things are very real. We understand it.

Speaker 2 (06:38):
To be true.

Speaker 3 (06:39):
But government intervention here is just not going to work.
And then you talk about the tech companies, well, we
know they don't care right clicks, her money, subscribers to
their money, so they have done very very little to
protect the general public, specifically youth, from all of the
digital ills and evils that lurk around every corner. So
the tech companies aren't the answer. Look for young people, obviously,

(07:02):
they enjoy social media, as do many adults, even though
plenty of people abuse it, and boys or boys, when
I grow up, someone who loves me please take my
phone away if I become a social media troll. And
here's some of the quotes coming from teenagers in Australia.
Here's one in particular from a fifteen year old. I
don't think the impact will be very positive for us.

(07:23):
We don't have a lot out there to get in
contact with each other. Doesn't that say at all? You know,
don't have an avenue or opportunity to connect with each
other with any other avenue versus social media. Boy oh boy.
So things are getting lost in the shuffle there. But
I think it's an interesting conversation about social media use.

Speaker 2 (07:43):
You know what it does boil back to the parents
and to.

Speaker 3 (07:47):
Encourage appropriate use, whatever the level that might be for
you and your family will leave it up to you.
But the way people currently use social media and how
dark and toxic has become in so many corners. You know,
you can scroll through and have some person talk about
a recipe to a happy dance, to sharing information and
posting cute pictures all the way down to things that

(08:08):
are vastly different than that. Anyway you want to take
it on, we can do it. And I think there's
also a conversation we had with our families about artificial intelligence.
Number one government has to put forward legislation about how
government uses artificial intelligence, not to impose any necessary restrictions
on individuals as taxpayers and voters. But I mean, some

(08:29):
of the work that's been done, it seems to be
just in one ear out to the other for so many.
I mean, we've already had an issue the inside of
education about critical thinking and academic outcomes. Even if you
just look to some I think well rereputable organizations like
MIT and MIT's Media Lab. They conducted a pretty broad
study fifty four subjects eighteen to thirty nine years of volt,

(08:52):
all in the Boston area, and they asked them to
write SAT essays using open ais chat Gypt. So one
group used Chatchy, another one to use Google, and another
group use nothing at all other their own brains through
autocritical thinking and their own skills.

Speaker 2 (09:07):
So the outcome was also crystal clear.

Speaker 3 (09:10):
The people who were in the chat GPT group, they've
produced the least brain activity across thirty four regions of
all three groups that had the lawst brain engagement and
consistently underperformed at neutral, linguistic and behavioral levels. So these
things which don't feel like a big deal, but just
think about how discourse, conversation, and dialogue has taken a

(09:34):
turn for the worst. For the most part, there's still
plenty of pleasant people out there having productive and constructive conversations.
But when we talk about the youth of today and
social media and artificial intelligence, what do we think the
outcome is going to be. It's not going to be great.
Artificial intelligence has proven to be pretty helpful in fields
like engineering and statistical compilation and inside of healthcare, but

(09:57):
otherwise maybe not so much. You're thought, let's.

Speaker 2 (10:01):
Move criminal justice.

Speaker 3 (10:04):
You know, we know the federal government has proposed tough
on crime legislation yet to be tested in the courts,
just like when Stephen Harper did it and went through
the Supreme Court and was deemed to be against the Charter, unconstitutional.
And these are consecutive sentences and variety of things. But
one catchphrase that gets a lot of traction in this
country is jail not bail. I get it. So a

(10:26):
new story I read this morning about these numbers coming
from Ontario in particular, they talk about the numbers of
people that are behind bars in that province is over
eighty percent around remand they haven't been found guilty of anything,
So Donald HMP were told repeatedly that it's in and
around sixty plus percent are on remand they didn't work

(10:46):
granted bail or they couldn't produce bail. So I get
the concept. But what is really bizarre is that we
don't formally track crime is being committed, especially violent crimes
being committed while on bail. We don't know exactly number
is about folks accused of a violent crime that get
bail and consequently offend while on bail.

Speaker 2 (11:05):
It'd be probably.

Speaker 3 (11:07):
Very helpful to get some actual data associated with that,
because now it's an opinion being offered versus being backed
up by any sort of data. So it's a strange
thing to not track because it's important. Public safety is
a real concern when asked by the Department of Justice
here in this province polland nationally, people talk about public
safety and they feel less safe than they once did.

(11:29):
So the whole jail not bail. I understand the sentiment
behind it, of course we do. If you're accused of
a violent crime, people talk about the revolving door. Right
you get charged with something, you either get a slap
on the wrist, you get bail, you break all, you
breach all your conditions, you're back in front of a judge.
And the cycle continues and continues and continues, and bring
some repeat. But the numbers, like in Ontario, over eighty

(11:51):
percent of people in the prison population are on remand so.

Speaker 2 (11:56):
Here's some of the numbers.

Speaker 3 (11:57):
The jail population averaged prisoners while the Prophece's jails had
a maximum capacity for proximately eighty five hundred beds. So
there's a reason we're building a new penitentiary, not because
it's antiquated and it's a dungeon, but people are thinking
and talking more about public safety, and everybody understands why
because for the most part, the SA's kind of the
numbers regarding crime are problematic for a variety reasons. And

(12:20):
if you want to take it on, we can do it.
All right, let's get back into industry. So this week
is one year since the Upper Churchill Memoranda of Understanding
was brought forward in a pretty glossy, glitzy press conference
at the Rooms.

Speaker 2 (12:35):
Okay, so I know.

Speaker 3 (12:37):
Some people don't want to hear much from the official
opposition at this moment of time, given the Liberals were
in position of power for a decade plus, but their
role is clear and the questions they're being asked, I
think are shared by many, regardless of the political party
you support. So here's the questions being paused by the
Liberals on this.

Speaker 2 (12:53):
Front, and I think they're fair.

Speaker 3 (12:55):
It's Premier wake from choosing members of the independent review himself,
because it once was some sort of global organization was
going to conduct this independent review, but now apparently we're
just going right back down the path of a three
person independent panel appointed by the government. Our negotiations with
Quebec paust it's a good question. Has the Premier had
discussions with other potential partners, which is an excellent question.

(13:18):
We talk about industrial strategy, whether it be for minds
or mining expansion, critical minerals, supply chain stuff, artificial intelligence,
data centers and all the way through. So are any
of those conversations happening? And there's another one when the
proposed referendum will be held and who will draft the
question and what is the plan to develop goal out
and if the dealer does not proceed, I don't think

(13:38):
anybody suggesting signing a deal for a deal's sake because
of some timeline put forward by the problems Quebec, which
is April of next year. But the referendum question is
pretty interesting, So will it be about the current MoU,
whether it's going to require further clarity and has I
heard John Hogan say, and he's right. When Quebec had

(14:00):
their last referendum, it resulted in the establishment of a
Clarity Act so that there was actual, clearly defined questions
to be broached, whether we're talking about separation or a
referendum on an MoU or whatever the case may be.
But the conversation is just too big, too important, with
decades long as implication to not have a real good
understanding of exactly what's going on. To that end, let's

(14:23):
put the pressure on the reopen the house. I mean,
why not if so many people are wondering or worried
about this proposed deal with the province Quebec, let's just
get some questions post and answers offered. I don't think
there's a downside to it, and it doesn't matter who
you vote for, because remember, over the course of the
next fifty years, governments will change hands many, many, many times,

(14:46):
but the deal will remain in place. So I get
the concept of doing it right. Why wouldn't everybody who's
listening to this program or not listening to this program,
want to make sure we do this right, get the
best deal possible with all the risks identified and understood,
and go from there. And whether or not the deal
goes by the wayside, whether you think that's a good
thing or a bad thing, the possibility is real. I mean,

(15:09):
we all see the polling numbers in Quebec. Lego and
the coalition davin Air. They're done, they're cooked. They might
not even win a seat. The separatest party of the
party Quebec WAH, who looks like they're poised to win,
they've already said they're walking away from it. They think
it's a great deal for us, a terrible deal for Quebec,
which is the politics of it all, as opposed to
the commercial arrangement that we should be thinking about. Our
talking about a little bit more of your thoughts, all right. Oh, so,

(15:33):
apparently we're getting a provincial fiscal update next week from
Finance Minister Craig Party. I'm looking forward to it on
a couple of fronts. Number one, we're told that the
actual fiscal reality in the problems is worse than we
already understand. So whether that be the deficit at six
hundred and twenty six million dollars which includes all the
big tobacco money, and the level of borrowing. So it'd

(15:54):
be nice to have a peek under the cover or
behind the curtains to see exactly what the Tories have
discover since they've been in government, which is not a
long time. We understand they need to get their footing
solid before we proceed. Anyway, let's keep going MOUs. Okay,
So yesterday in Parliament, of course, it's just for the
most part of its theater, and that doesn't matter who's

(16:15):
been in government or who's been in opposition over the
last number of decades. There is a lot of theater
that happens, and some of it is just an absurd
waste of time yesterday. So look to pretend that every
single member of the Liberal government is in favor of
the MoU regarding a pipeline from Alberta the PC's north coast.
Obviously that's not true. You'll have members from Quebec who'll

(16:37):
have a problem with it, you have members from British
Columbia who will have a problem with it, and others
who may be more focused on things beyond pipelines and
may be more focused on things like climate change policy.
So there was a motion put forward yesterday by the
CPC which is absolutely there right, but it was about
the MoU, but only parts of the MoU, and so
some liberals voted against it because fair enough on an

(16:59):
interest exercise for me would be if a motion from
the Conservatives said, here is the MoU in full investment
in pathways, alliance, the industrial carbon tax to increase by
a factor of six, and all the pipeline related matters
regarding consultations with indigenous communities and the province of British Columbia,
if you put it all in front of the country,

(17:19):
if you put it all in front of the governing liberals,
it would probably be a bit more eye opening than
what the result was yesterday. But anyway, that's a lot
all right. Last one, So while we were told that
if necessary, based on some sort of emotional whim, there
might be severe tariffs on Canadian fertilizer potation in particular.

(17:40):
So that's one thing, but even the Americans, and we
have to deal with the American policy because it impacts
us directly. Whether people like it or not, and this
is about their national strategy regarding defense. And so yesterday
the Secretary of Defense Pete Hexit saying things like this,
allies that step up, South Korea, Poland will receive our

(18:02):
special favor. Allies that do not will face consequences. Those allies,
notably will be the UK and Canada. So talk about
stepping up, and lots of conversations about NATO Article five
is only been triggered once by who the Americans on
the heels of nine to eleven and people and allies
stood up, including Canada and the UK. So I don't

(18:25):
know what this is, you know, step up like Israel,
South Korean, Poland, the allies that suffered the highest number
of casualties in Afghanistan after America, the United Kingdom and Canada.
So as the families of the one hundred and fifty
eight members of the Canadian military who died in Afghanistan
over that prolonged war that we got dragged into. And

(18:46):
we're not allies, excuse me? And we're a national security
threat what anyway? Oh and last one, So we had
a conversation with the caller yesterday and obviously he and
I disagreed on his thoughts on a couple of issues,
which is fine, right, nothing personal. I don't know the man,
so it's certainly not personal to me, But Boyle Boy,

(19:09):
since that the amount of stuff that I've seen about
how much disdain people have for me and how much
they hate me, and I shouldn't be allowed on the air,
and I should be removed, and the propaganda and the bias,
and one email that.

Speaker 2 (19:24):
Was particularly bad.

Speaker 3 (19:27):
Now, if it wasn't so sad, it'd be funny. This person,
I don't know if it's a matter of woman said
based on the fact that I didn't agree with someone's opinion,
is that they said, too bad the COVID jab didn't
kill you? What?

Speaker 4 (19:41):
What?

Speaker 3 (19:42):
Really? That's kind of where we heard though, right, differing
opinions has now brought that reaction.

Speaker 2 (19:49):
I mean, not.

Speaker 3 (19:50):
Everyone's like that. For Boyle Boy, if you'd like to
call about that issue, which was apparently controversial, or anything
else under the sun, if we disagree, that's okay, that's okay.
I don't have the brain power to want to hate
you or wish you dead because you don't agree with me,
because that's nature of the beast. Right, we all don't

(20:12):
agree on everything. It's just kind of a bit of
human nature. We're on Twitter where VSM open line can
bodves there, email addresses, open line a few SM dot com.
When we come back, let's have a great show. That
means you're in the queue the topic up to you.
Don't go ahead, welcome back to the program. Let's go
Line number two. Bill, you're on the air.

Speaker 5 (20:28):
Hello, Hello, Yeah, this is a bill.

Speaker 2 (20:31):
Hi Bill, Yeah, call up.

Speaker 4 (20:34):
I hate to say this, but call up to disagree
with you.

Speaker 2 (20:36):
Fair enough?

Speaker 3 (20:37):
Let it fly?

Speaker 4 (20:38):
Can we do it? Yeah?

Speaker 6 (20:39):
Absolutely, couldn't bring it on.

Speaker 4 (20:42):
Yeah, okay.

Speaker 7 (20:42):
No.

Speaker 4 (20:43):
So you had a caller yesterday about snow tars and
I think he said at the end of his called
he said that you're completely correct. You can't in the
left lane is a passing lane. And he says, you're
not allowed to pass in the right lane.

Speaker 2 (21:04):
Hello, Yeah, I'm just listening, okay.

Speaker 4 (21:06):
And then so he was saying, passing on the left
lane at one hundred is usually a recipe for people
to get and pass out in the right lane. And
then you said you said you're not allowed to pass
on the right lane.

Speaker 6 (21:21):
Correct, But that's not true.

Speaker 3 (21:23):
I believe it is.

Speaker 4 (21:25):
Okay, well, okay, this right disagreed because the Highway Traffic
Act in the section ninety seven sub section one B,
and he said, it goes on to I mean, this
is what we're talking about, right, the rules of the road. Right,
So it says the driver of a vehicle shall not

(21:45):
overtake and pass on the right of another vehicle except
b when on a lane roadway there are one or
more unobstructed lanes available to traffic moving in the direction
of traffic of the vehicle. So you're acording to that,
you're allowed to pass on.

Speaker 3 (22:01):
The right as an exemption. Yeah, okay, I can buy
I can buy that.

Speaker 4 (22:06):
Okay, Well that's the rule, right, you know, that's the rule.
It says, so on a on a two lane road
or lane lane road or lane roadways, how they you
can pass on the right. So what you said was
was was wrong. Right, you can pass on the right

(22:26):
on a lane highway. Okay, okay, So I just want
so that's that sets up the whole thing. See, people
said that you can only pass on the left is
not correct. So if someone's in the left lane, let's
say the outer ring road, and they're traveling at I

(22:48):
don't know. Maybe they don't feel traveling at one hundred,
but they're traveling at ninety and somebody behind them says, well,
I feel safe. I could drive a lot to one hundred.
He has the option to move around him, He can
pass on the right and go ahead of them or her,
whoever's driving the car. So so you know, the two
lanes are driving lanes.

Speaker 6 (23:08):
It's not one that is.

Speaker 4 (23:11):
And I think two lanes are driving lanes. And you
can pass on the right if someone's obstructing because they
don't feel safe traveling at the post of speed, so
they're entitled to be there.

Speaker 3 (23:24):
And I think it bolsters the point that if you
pull out to the left lane to get past somebody
for whatever reason, at that point when it's safe to
return to the right lane, it's probably a good idea
to do that so that we don't have people passing
on the right when people have that thought in their
mind that Okay, I've been in the left lane, I

(23:44):
passed the vehicle that I wanted to do. That's slow
moving truck going up the here or what have you.
Now it's safe to get back to the right lane.
Do it so that we can use the lot.

Speaker 4 (23:52):
Before you just said, for whatever reason, if you feel safe,
if you feel more comfortable in the right lane, take it.
But I mean, you know, the person is in the
left lane on the divided highway like the Ottering Road
is entitled to be in the left lane and there's
no restrictions to passing on the right or on the
left on those types of highways.

Speaker 3 (24:11):
Yeah, I'm more inclined to I'm more inclined to.

Speaker 4 (24:13):
Think about hyway traffic act.

Speaker 3 (24:14):
I'm more inclined to think about what's the safest way
to get home versus what is allowed based on exemptions
to be passing on the right lane. That's just me though.
I'm you know, not so worried about what you just read.
I'm more worried about just safe passage. People being not similar,
if not the same page with using the left lane
to get by someone who you think is going to

(24:34):
slow or who are tapping the brakes or whatever they're
doing that caused you to want to get past them,
and then when safe to return to the right lane,
then do it, and probably probably a c back.

Speaker 4 (24:45):
Into the right lane. But if you're going further around,
then you have you're entitled to use the left lane.
It's not a you can the right lane is also
a passing lane and the left lane is a passing lane.
So there is no one passing lane on a multiplane
divided highway. There is no there is no designated passing lane.
That's what this is. What this this rule in the

(25:08):
Highway Traffic Access I mean, I mean this is what
this is. Why it implies is that you can pass
on the left, you can pass on.

Speaker 6 (25:14):
The rice right. Yeah, you don't believe me.

Speaker 4 (25:20):
I mean it's written.

Speaker 3 (25:21):
I'm not you can read the Highway Traffic Act to me.
Oh you like, Bill, And I don't know how much
passion you have for this particular topic, but I'm talking
about for how people get taught to drive and what
the safest way is to proceed on a multi lane road,
whether it be the Outer Ring Road or the four
oh one or whatever.

Speaker 2 (25:37):
The case may be.

Speaker 3 (25:37):
When it expands beyond two lanes, then it's a bit
of a free for all, which is why it's so
difficult to travel safely on some of these multi lane highways.
Versus what is a pretty fundamental approach to a two
lane in both directions thing highway?

Speaker 2 (25:51):
Like we have outtering road.

Speaker 4 (25:53):
Or no, that's what you're talking about is an orthodox approach.
And that's see I'm a heretic, right, And there's a
lot of people out there that are the same way.
Because because we because we're a biden by the rules
of the road, and I'm allowed to pass on the
right and the traffic directional to control things. The signs
that are there are telling me which lane to pick,

(26:15):
and they're not they're not saying, you know, uh, is
not just a simple uh suggestion. There's actual arrows pointing
into the lanes and telling me that I could use
that lane if i'm if I'm driving so, I mean so,
but this whole keep right except the pass. That's a
sign that's posted on the highway in certain places.

Speaker 3 (26:38):
Yes, we've had this conversation a lot.

Speaker 8 (26:39):
No.

Speaker 4 (26:39):
No, no, it's not it's not in it's not in
the Highway Traffic Act. It's a sign, okay. But people
have like believed now they got this orthodox view that
that you know, that that sign rules everything, and and
and and that's where the confusion has caused. And that's
what you were, like you were saying yesterday, Uh, people

(27:01):
are we need to be operating from a from a
standard playbook. I agree with you, you know, and I
think it's up to someone that highways and you know,
the Department of Highways or or administer or transportation or
something like that, because it affects so many people.

Speaker 6 (27:17):
It's up to some.

Speaker 4 (27:17):
It's not up to me. I'm just doing what I can.
No charge, you know, but uh, I want to.

Speaker 6 (27:23):
I want to.

Speaker 4 (27:24):
I want to be able to go on that highway safely.
And and according to trivia how we unless they see
in their legislature and change that rule then you know,
but that's what it says that I'm allowed to do that,
and you know, so anyway, I hate to disagree with you, Patty, but.

Speaker 2 (27:42):
You know, oh I don't care. That doesn't bother me.

Speaker 3 (27:44):
I don't know. Yes, I'm not taking a personal I'm
just planning on when I leave here today, driving as
safely as I can, commensurate with weather conditions and daylight,
and hopefully that means I get home safely to take
the dog out for a pee. That's why everybody.

Speaker 4 (28:00):
Deserves to get home safely at the end of the day.

Speaker 3 (28:03):
Yes, I appreciate the time, though I appreciate the call
take good care bye bye. All right, it's gonna break you.
Welcome back to there's another caller wants to talk about
the outer Ring Road, has an idea.

Speaker 2 (28:11):
Why is it?

Speaker 3 (28:12):
We'll find out. Don't go away, welcome back, Let's go
line number one.

Speaker 2 (28:17):
Collar.

Speaker 3 (28:18):
You're on the air.

Speaker 5 (28:20):
Oh Patty, good morning. I've called before. Just looking at
a number of your issues that you're dealing with right now,
I got like six, but they're going to be very quick.
Out a ring road could just just be you know,
solved by slowing the right laying down to say eighty

(28:42):
killers meters an hour. That's that's my solution to that. Yeah,
I mean and and uh and and and the what
do you call it? The Highways Traffic Act will change
to do that. If you if you go over five
kilometers an hour over speed limit, you get a warning,

(29:08):
and if you go with tain killers an hour you
get a fine.

Speaker 2 (29:14):
You can make the speed limit whatever you want.

Speaker 3 (29:15):
The unfortunate reality is for anyone who travels on the highway,
specifically this stretch of the Otering Road, say between here
and the seal Coat turn off, is a lot of
people don't care what the post the speed limit is.
You know, you'll have people doing seventy five, you'll have
people doing one hundred and fifty.

Speaker 5 (29:30):
Yeah. Yeah, but you gotta find them.

Speaker 2 (29:35):
Yeah, you got to catch them to define them.

Speaker 3 (29:38):
And that's where I'm pretty sure I'm in the minority
on this one. But I'm all in on the speed cameras.
I just am because you know, you can't have.

Speaker 9 (29:46):
A cock car.

Speaker 3 (29:46):
I'm not Paddy oh and fair enough, a lot of
people aren't.

Speaker 5 (29:50):
Ontario just eliminatum.

Speaker 3 (29:53):
Yeah, based on some pretty bizarre rational though too, both
Premium Smith and Premium Ford. I've talked about speaking just
being a cash grab. No speed cameras are intended to
slow people down, you know, if it comes with it's
not a cash grab unless you're feeding.

Speaker 5 (30:08):
There's another way to do that. Support are on certain
police that are guess what to do. They give you
a fine, and I think in Nukelan Babador we should
eliminate all the speed traps and let the police do
their job and get caught back in action.

Speaker 3 (30:26):
The problem with that is that, look, I think most
people will agree nothing slows you down quite like a
cop car. But the unfortunate reality is there's a lot
of highway and byways to patrol and not enough cops,
especially in the traffic enforcement division to actually do what
you suggest.

Speaker 5 (30:41):
I did look to enter your government at tool and
mixed speed traps. They're not a choice and we're in
the same position. But that's my opinion. Say what, that's
my opinion.

Speaker 2 (30:55):
I can accept that.

Speaker 3 (30:56):
But my thought on it was to just call them
a cash grab is a bit of a strange thing
to say, given the fact that if you're not speeding,
you won't be fine, and consequently you won't be separated
from your cash. So it's just sort of a strange approach.

Speaker 5 (31:08):
To Right now, you've got the court system shut down,
which is like totally unreasonable, not lived because of what's
gonna with speed trips. And it happened because of speed trips.
We had to shut the court system down. No, just

(31:29):
saddened a material.

Speaker 3 (31:31):
Yeah, the provincial court closures here is not because of
the number or the volume of speeding tickets.

Speaker 5 (31:38):
They can handle it and people are well. It's also
involved with what do you call it, really bad crime?

Speaker 3 (31:46):
No, if the criminal courts haven't been impacted, it's things
like Contravention Act and some civil violations, and.

Speaker 5 (31:53):
It's all speeding tickets right.

Speaker 3 (31:56):
No, And it's not about how many tickets there are,
it's about how many staff there are.

Speaker 5 (32:02):
Let's let's see what they call it, the VLG, and
listeners comment on sure, yeah, I'm going through divorce on
type for money, I can't access the cash that I
got a couple of hundred thousand dollars till the first
of January, and I was wondering about when I say
CCP and all we're saying I'm going through divorce. My

(32:28):
salary has dropped from say since since I went to
work in when I was sixteen, pumping gas, and then
I went and done the engineering. I slowly got myself
up to over under thousand. You no way. I went
through through really bad divorce and I'm down to twenty

(32:50):
seven thousand.

Speaker 3 (32:51):
Patty, I'm sorry to hear you're going through a bad divorce.
And I can accept your opinion on whether it be
traveling or speed limits, or policing or speed cameras, whatever
the case may be. And I wish you well into
the future. I hope you have a great holiday season.

Speaker 5 (33:05):
Well give me a chance. Note, Gatty, can you find
a say revenue Canada. I'm supposed to get say my CCP,
which I really need, does that only come before Christmas?

Speaker 2 (33:18):
CPP?

Speaker 5 (33:19):
Yeah, that's the other things where I'm going to a
really low salary, say twenty seven thousand dollars from over
undertows and two under.

Speaker 3 (33:28):
Thosand yeah, a couple of things. I can't get you
any information about anything personal for you, but I can
give some generic information.

Speaker 5 (33:41):
Yeah, okay, that's that's another topic I'd like to talk
to you about, Daddy.

Speaker 3 (33:45):
What I mean the there's what they call a special
date before Christmas for CPP. I believe this year is
the twenty second of December.

Speaker 5 (33:53):
Okay, that's that answer. My question concern social media. It needs,
Like I believe night, I've eliminated social media for my
own Saturday.

Speaker 3 (34:05):
Probably a smart thing to do.

Speaker 5 (34:07):
Yeah, And I think everybody who needs to do it,
especially kids Like when I when I went to school,
we had a slow class. Anybody that was in trouble
was in this class. They are turned at right eventually rate.
And we changed that. The teaching system change it, and

(34:28):
now the teachers are torture.

Speaker 3 (34:31):
Yeah, I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that.
There's still such thing as special needs classes, aren't there?

Speaker 7 (34:37):
Oh?

Speaker 5 (34:38):
Yes, there is. At one time. Let's say, let's say
someone took them three years to get through grade eight. Yeah,
they still passed on. Did you still got the best
king of businesses? But they were separated from everyone else.
I never had to deal with them.

Speaker 6 (34:56):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (34:57):
I'm not sure what you're getting at there, But.

Speaker 5 (35:00):
Just as I'd ask the teachers to call it.

Speaker 3 (35:04):
Yeah, teachers for the most part are hesitant or loath
to call about education matters because of fear of reprisal.
And there's long been the way, and it shouldn't be.
People on the front lines are the most valuable voices,
whether we're talking about education or healthcare, or justice or
anything else. I do have to get go and call her.
I appreciate your time this morning. Have a great holidays.
Oh very quickly, very very quickly.

Speaker 6 (35:27):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (35:28):
My ex wife was a teacher and she's retired and
she don't have to word or not fair.

Speaker 3 (35:37):
Thanks, take good care, bye bye. All right. Uh, let's
see here. So there's Colin. I want to talk about
the postal subsidy. Exactly what about that we'll find out.
Then Sean wants to talk about safety on the roads.
Then whatever you want to talk about don't go away.
Welcome back to the show. Let's go Line number three.
David he around the air.

Speaker 8 (35:54):
Hello, Patty, how are you very well?

Speaker 3 (35:56):
Thank you?

Speaker 8 (35:58):
I love the I love the show. You did a
thing about postal subsidies makes makes me sound really dull,
But I think when you guys care what's going on,
you'll find it it's much more interesting and worrying.

Speaker 3 (36:14):
Then you might think I'm interested in most server than
go right ahead.

Speaker 4 (36:19):
Uh.

Speaker 8 (36:19):
It turns out something in Ottawa that just kind of
slipped through in a big bill bill see fifteen. We
remove the special rate that libraries get from the post
Office to move books back and forth. And that is
a that is a big deal because I didn't realize this.

(36:43):
But try to guess how many books are sent back
and forth by the by the Newfouland Library system each.

Speaker 3 (36:51):
Year using that I have no idea.

Speaker 8 (36:53):
It's two hundred thousands, okay to our thirteen thousand. So
that's nearly a order of all the stuff that people
sign out of their public libraries relies on this system,
and it's being caught if we don't stop it at
the federal level. So nobody it was just a single

(37:18):
line in the very large bill. It flips through it.
Until very recently no one was aware of it. You
won't care about it in the news yet they'll hope
you're going to hear it soon. You got to write
your NP like right away if you want to see this.
So this is the kind of thing where some bureaucrat thought, oh,

(37:40):
you know, it's a couple of million dollars. We can
say like, no one will know this, but particularly for
the rural libraries in youth lines, but any your libraries.
Really this could be a real harm. Right, You're a
small library around the bay at stock all the stuff

(38:02):
that people would need, they have to rewile on this
and they don't have resources to pick up slack if
that subtly was removed.

Speaker 3 (38:16):
Yeah, and I saw your email, and you know, you
think back to twenty sixteen where we talked about huge
costs to funding for libraries and the threat for many
libraries to close, and then we hear from public libraries
talk about the fact that they are unable to you know,
rotate and bring in new materials, whether it be periodicals
or books or CDs or other equipments and things that

(38:37):
they loan from the libraries because funding has been stagnant.
Input costs are up. Funding has been stagnant for about
a decade. So there's a bunch of problems facing libraries.
Now add this to the mix.

Speaker 8 (38:48):
Yeah, I'm glad you brought that up, and I hope
that provincial MHAs will be listening into this as well,
because with the new government, I think it is long
past time to take a look at at the provincial
funding of the libraries, because many people listening will remember
when there was a threat to close half the libraries

(39:09):
and everyone you know suddenly woke up to the problem.
But they did not solve the problem, Like the funding
didn't change after everyone got alarmed. They'd be that. They
just the government told the libraries, don't shot half the libraries,
find the other ways to stay afloat, and that's what
they did. But we're still looking at a library system

(39:32):
where we spend forty two percent less per head on
our libraries than the Canadian average when God knows the
costs for libraries, the fact that we need to have
libraries spread out across a very large problems if anything
or higher. So there's clearly not a lot of slack
in the system to pick up for problems that the

(39:55):
dead are now about to have us. But more fundamentally,
the librar. They'll do a wonderful job with the resources
that we're given, but they desperately need a boose. So
I would say, you know, through for one, write your
write your MP and also write your MHA and say, listen,
can we have a property resource library system. I would

(40:20):
add by the by that it's not just going to
affect public libraries. It'll also affect libraries like mun's libraries,
which you know, if you're going to research, or if
you're assuming and you need to get a library book
from elsewhere in the country some other materials, it's going

(40:42):
to affect them too. They rely on the same system.

Speaker 3 (40:45):
You know, people will continually tell me that libraries are dead,
are the thing of the past, because of the fact
that I've got all the information in the world right
the palm of my hand. But I don't think the
numbers reflect that. I think people still do use and
utilize libraries, and it's not just some periodicals. So they
have all the e books available, DVDs, board games, video games,

(41:06):
their musical instruments. I think you can get at the
public libraries. What else is sort of strange, en off
the beat track, birdwatching kids. I mean, there's a lot
that goes on in the library and it's part of
the community. So to see it go by the wayside
because of funding and the stagnant funding that we've experienced
in this problems for a decade plus is I don't
think helpful. Even though yes, I have a library in

(41:28):
my hand right now, I'm holding out to my smartphone,
but it's not the same as you know, the same
thing I think can be said for the newspaper business.
I can read the newspaper on my phone, but there's
nothing quite like a broad street in your hand, a
broad sheet.

Speaker 8 (41:42):
Yeah, and there's a person there in your libry, in
your local library whose whole job is to help you
to find stuff out right that or if you just
need somewhere warm, or if you don't have a you
don't have a computer, or your computer doesn't work so well,
you can go into the library and needs to lick
this one hundred reasons why we need libraries aside from books.

(42:03):
But clearly like the fewer the books you can get
hold of, the lower the resources, the less the libraries
get used. And the next thing you know, people say, oh,
well there's not so many people coming into the library,
we can close this one down now. We need to
have properly supported, decent libraries. There one of the very

(42:24):
expensive relative to all the other things we spend money on.

Speaker 3 (42:27):
Like, yeah, it's super important.

Speaker 2 (42:28):
Let me add this to it.

Speaker 3 (42:29):
It's just an email that I saw at the corner
of my eye, and this is from someone at the CNIB.
It says, in addition to Canada Post cutting services to libraries,
literature for the blind was normally shipped through for free
through Canada Posts. This is a service that will be cut.
Libraries or other organizations won't be able to send braille
documents anymore, or audio books or CDs to people that

(42:49):
are blind or partially cited. This will be a major
blow to the blind community, which I hadn't considered. But
this is from the CNIB, so they know.

Speaker 8 (42:56):
Yeah, I heard that that they they did leap on
that one, and rumor has it that the Post Office
will not be doing that again that that doesn't necessarily
mean that's a choice that the Post Office is making
right now. The whole purpose of the seven C fifteen

(43:17):
is basically to say the Post Office now have free
reign to charge what it needs to make its money back,
which is okay, but it but that's the problem is
that the post office does a bunch of stuff that
isn't profitable that we need it to do anyway, right,
like shipping books back and forth. So while I'm delighted

(43:38):
that the Canada Posts may be deciding to do that,
but it worries me a little because of course, once
it has the freedom to elect to, you know, provide
shipbooks back and forth to the blind for free or not,
then a future kind of the post to decide to
change that same with a library book rate. I think
that's that's why it was in religious in the first place,

(44:00):
and that's why it needs to stay there.

Speaker 3 (44:02):
I appreciate the topic and the time anything else this morning, David,
I hope.

Speaker 8 (44:07):
Think thought, but I kind of sad. It's a sad thing.
But I'm glad that this new threat to libraries helps
give it a reason to remind people that the library
system needs our support and needs more support it than
it has already. So I hope people will We'll leave
interaction and show people that we care about our local library.

Speaker 2 (44:32):
The vital I appreciate the time, David, thanks for doing it.

Speaker 3 (44:36):
Thank you, You're welcome.

Speaker 9 (44:37):
Thank you, Bye.

Speaker 3 (44:38):
Bye, I said another one for the news. Let's go
to line number two. Sean, you're on the air.

Speaker 6 (44:43):
Good morning, Patty.

Speaker 3 (44:44):
How are you break today?

Speaker 2 (44:45):
You good?

Speaker 10 (44:48):
I was listening to when you started out here in
your plant about people disagreeing and emails not it. In
my opinion, I think you're a very intelligent man and carry
on a conversation about most anything. You may not be
right all the time, but you're certainly not wrong a
lot of time. So we'll lead that there.

Speaker 2 (45:10):
Yeah, let me add to it.

Speaker 3 (45:11):
Though I am absolutely one percent not right all the time.
I've come to learn that they're hard to way many
many times when I'm wrong, I can admit I'm wrong,
and now we go because it's not personal. We just
try to be informative and entertaining and that the far
they may.

Speaker 6 (45:28):
That's right.

Speaker 10 (45:28):
And if anybody thinks if someone thinks they're right all
the time.

Speaker 6 (45:32):
They're definitely round.

Speaker 2 (45:35):
Well said.

Speaker 10 (45:38):
No, I'm calling about eyeways safety and it's about.

Speaker 6 (45:42):
Tractor trailers drivers. I've got the greatest respect in the
world for track to trailer drivers, for.

Speaker 10 (45:50):
The amount of kilometers they drive, and they drive in
all kinds of weather and conditions, and the amount of
accidents of time the eyeway, either they cars or they're
involved with is very little for the amount of driving
they do. And you know, some of the areas they
got to go in.

Speaker 6 (46:10):
It's sort of crazy.

Speaker 10 (46:13):
But I'm just going to give you food for thought there.
It's just something I was thinking about, and correct me
if I'm wrong. As far as I know, they most
of them, probably not the private ones, but the ones.
Most of them are being paid by the kilometer or

(46:34):
they're being subsidized by the amount of kilometers they're driving,
which means they may be getting an hourly wage or whatever.
But the more kilometers they drive, as far as I know,
the more money they make.

Speaker 6 (46:48):
Would that be.

Speaker 2 (46:49):
Quick, I guess. So I don't really know.

Speaker 10 (46:54):
No, and I really don't know, but maybe some drivers
or someone you know, can give us a dumb on
it and just let us know how that happens.

Speaker 3 (47:03):
Well, I know there's a couple of truckers that listen
to the show all the time and they send me
notes all the time, So I guarantee you they're going
to answer that question for me. Here sooner than later.

Speaker 10 (47:11):
Yes, And the best of my knowledge, I may be wrong,
but I think they do get subsidized by the amount
of Klameter's day drive per day or trip or whatever
I sink. So yes, But anyhow, if we're right hand that,
I honestly think, you know, I see some of those

(47:31):
drivers driving the roads and they're driving in crazy conditions,
especially over around it Wreckaus area, And I've seen since
the winner have started now we've been getting dead whether
a few of jack Knights on the road, and there's
a few doing possibly things they shouldn't be doing, you know,

(47:54):
because the driver around here is slow, the weather's dead.
They're pulling out pass and I respect them that much
that if I'm on the highway, I normally follow them,
drive behind them because to me it's probably the safest
place to be. They get the big lights who used
to driving in bed weather and the move someone in there.

(48:17):
But my point is, if you're a driver and you're
getting paid by the kilometer, the more kilometers that you
drive in a twelve hour period, whatever their log book
is good for, the more colometers they drive, actually, the
more money they would make. Would I be quick on
that if they'd be paid by the kilometer.

Speaker 3 (48:37):
Yeah, I guess so, But of course there are rules
regarding how long they can drive per day, and as
many climbers that they're allowed by law to drive and
have to record it in their log books and those
types of things. I know that much about it, But
exactly how people get paid, I'm not entirely sure. But
I'm hoping that a truck or listening that will chime
in and give me some details so we can add
it to the conversation before I get to the new

(48:58):
Is there anything else you'd like to say this, mon Sean, No, it's.

Speaker 10 (49:01):
Just for me. The rest of the world, you know,
are paid by contract or we're paid by hour. Possibly
if they were paid by the hour, not by the
amount of kilometers they drive, then they probably wouldn't be
taking so many chances they take because they're going to
be hourly based anyhow, So it doesn't matter if you
drive five thousand kilometers in a day or if you

(49:23):
drive trade, they probably wouldn't be taking as many chances
as they do. Yeah, because they don't, you know, it's
it's just a footure thought.

Speaker 6 (49:32):
Maybe a truckers can tune in and straighten us out
on them.

Speaker 3 (49:36):
Yeah, and I guess they travel as much they have
to based on deadlines for delivery. Sean, I appreciate your time.
Thanks for doing it for me. You enjoy yourself, you too,
all the best, Bye bye, all right, it's gonna break
for the news. Let me come back ton of time
for you. Don't go ahead, welcome back to the show.
Let's go light number one. Cyril here on the air. Here,

(49:56):
you great, you good.

Speaker 9 (50:01):
I'm I'm calling about every time you hear new Flanders talk, Oh, Quebec,
this Ontario is Tooba is Why don't they worry about
their own selves in Newfland and do their own thing?

Speaker 2 (50:15):
I think we do.

Speaker 9 (50:18):
Sometimes.

Speaker 3 (50:18):
Yes, Yeah, it's an interesting thought. So I guess worries
about what goes on in other parts of Canada also
does have an impact on us, whether it be about
political sentiment, whether it be about real things like transfer
dollars in healthcare, transfer dollars in equalization. So there are
concerns here that are routed elsewhere. But I get your point.

Speaker 9 (50:39):
Well, I'm rigily from Buckle's Junction, okay, right up in
the woods, central Newfland, and I'm working in Manitoba in
the minds, and I see a lot of guys come
and go, A lot of guys left. When the Vois's Bay,
you get the Voises Bay. It's not so nice. They
want to come back to Thompson, but they're just You're

(51:00):
already replaced, like that's already talking about it. Newland quebecus Quebec,
that Ontario, Manitoba no good for.

Speaker 6 (51:11):
Nothing, blah blah blah.

Speaker 9 (51:13):
So either make up your mind either your new Flander
or Laboratorian or who you want to be where you
want to be.

Speaker 3 (51:22):
I think I get your point, you know, I'd also
add to it, it's the disproportional representation in the House
of Commons that also, you know, leads to decisions made
about benefiting Quebec or benefiting Ontario or benefiting BC because
in this province, with seven seats, we don't bring a
whole lot of cloud to the argument. So I think
that's another reason why people look at other provinces and

(51:44):
what they get or what they don't get, or policies
they create and the benefits that flow their way versus
maybe not the same attention given to smaller provinces like
US and Pei and Nova Scotian who Runswick. So I
guess that's maybe part of it as well. I suppose, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 9 (52:01):
Because like up there, I'm just visiting Sue Saint Mary
and there's about three feet of snow here. Everybody's told everybody,
everybody's stuck back in New plan. Apparently the rain is
coming going to get rid of some snow, hopefully, but

(52:23):
they're all bitching about Newfland. Newfland is Newfland at and
Mainland is Mayland at. I don't know, like, fie fly
take me two days to plight for Newfland to get
to Thompson, Manitoba to go to work when Boises Bay
takes two hours from Dear Lake to Voises Bay, and

(52:45):
the bitch and plain about that. But I don't know.

Speaker 3 (52:48):
It's interesting that you bring up Voises Bay and Thompson
in the same sentence, because I'll just put this out.
There's not really what we're talking about. But while Long
Harbors was being built, we were told that every spoonful
of nickel that went to either Subury or Thompson for
processing would be replaced. And I wonder has that happened?
Because Long Harbor was under construction for.

Speaker 9 (53:09):
Years that was Danny Williams. And did it get replaced
or no?

Speaker 3 (53:15):
I don't know, that's the question I'm asking, And it
would be nice to know because that's work and there
had to be plenty of nickels sipped out here to
both Subury and Thompson during construction at Long Harbor.

Speaker 9 (53:26):
So so where did it go? Nobody heard Tacolate from
day one since.

Speaker 3 (53:31):
Forever I did ask then Minister response from Landrew Paris
is a number of years ago about it, and I believe,
if I can recall correctly, is that the response was
we'll get you an update, We'll get you some numbers,
and apparently was happening.

Speaker 2 (53:46):
But whether or not every.

Speaker 3 (53:47):
Spoonful was returned, I don't know, but I'll find out
now that it got me thinking about it.

Speaker 9 (53:52):
Yeah, because I don't my opinion, I don't think it was.
But politics, I guess I don't know, that's part of it.

Speaker 3 (54:01):
So you know, there's always going to be the need
for conversations and concerns or questions about the.

Speaker 2 (54:07):
Federation to be asked.

Speaker 3 (54:09):
But like I'm most worried about what's happening in my backyard,
and I think that's probably the most popular sentiment out there,
people worried about their own lives. But then with the
way we watch the news and the way we use
the internet, the way we use social media, all of
a sudden, concerns can be as far afield as Ukraine
and Gaza and Africa and the United States, which we

(54:32):
hear a lot about.

Speaker 9 (54:34):
And Thompson is up for sale, so I don't know
if that has any effect with Lges Bay or Sudbury.
I don't know any word on that one.

Speaker 3 (54:48):
Nothing that I know of. But I do know, even
when you're talking about Manitoba, one of the big major
projects moving forward here federally is for the northern port
up in Churchill. I think it's called Churchill Yea.

Speaker 9 (54:59):
And they also got one going on in Lane Lake
which is just order Thompson. That's right, Yeah, big mind
opening up. But this one with Thompson where they're up
for sale, and I don't know if that's going to
affect Floyds's Bay and Sudbury or what.

Speaker 2 (55:17):
I really don't know. I don't know what the impact
might be.

Speaker 3 (55:21):
Nor do I know if Long Harbor's operating at maximum capacity.
To be honest, I assume it is, but assumptions are
tricky pieces of to assess and to digest information.

Speaker 6 (55:33):
Well, with this.

Speaker 9 (55:35):
Floyd's Bay, Nicol Valet, Sudbury Valet, and Thompson Vallet already
all connected. Is when Valet Valet's up for sale right now?
As I know, if that goes up for sale, doesn't
affect a Burry Andie's Bay.

Speaker 3 (55:54):
Yeah, I don't know, And I think you said Valets
up for sale, but I know you meant Thompson's up
for sale right.

Speaker 2 (56:00):
Exactly, Okay, got it.

Speaker 9 (56:02):
So if that's up for sale, is Subbury up to
sale and Bay up to sale as well?

Speaker 3 (56:08):
No voices. Bay is not for sale at this moment
in time, all right, as far as I know, Sarah,
I appreciate the time right now. All the best, all right,
good bye.

Speaker 2 (56:18):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (56:18):
It's an interesting question because we were told, in knowing
certain terms, that every nickel of every spoonful of nickel
that went from this province to either Sudbury and or
Thompson would be returned. It would be nice to get
an update on that front. And then you know, we
just mentioned some of the major projects that have been
on the fast track list. There's been two lists that
have been publicly disclosed. I think the first was five projects.

(56:40):
Then the second list had six projects, none of which
include this province. And what projects in this province could
be on the fast track list inside the major Project's office.
I'll leave it up to you in your opinion on it.
Right after this break, don't go away. Welcome back to
the program. Let's go to line number two. Ken, you're
on the air.

Speaker 7 (56:58):
Good morning. I want to I got a comment about
your rude caller yesterday. But first that I got this, okay,
I went looking for the video that he was advising
you to watch, okay, and the actual title is The
Invisible Machine Electro Magnet Warfare hert HAA RP. Michael Waye's Weaponry. Now,

(57:22):
I'm going to save you the time. I watched the
whole forty five minutes, okay, because I wanted to see
for myself, and I found it not a little bit conspiratorial,
but a nice bit conspiratorial. There was one thing that
they mentioned, something happened on Bell Island. I believe memory
serves in nineteen seventy eight house started got blown up,

(57:48):
and then this was part of that. I mean they
had graphics, U they had like lightning balls coming through
people's windows and stuff like that. Obviously this was all
made up for dramatic effects. You know, I'm sure that
nobody had cell phones in nineteen seventy eight where they

(58:09):
got them where they can you understand what I'm saying.
So this video, okay, was published in nineteens, sorry you
fifty twenty fifteenth, so ten years ago, and you you'd
swear that, okay, fast forward to twenty twenty five. You

(58:33):
think the way they were getting on that we'd be
all did now right from microwave weaponry and stuff like that.
So I saved you the time. Don't bother watching it now.
You can probably find the facts about what happened on
Bill Island in nineteen seventy eight, and they talked about

(58:53):
it in the video and they used that as part
of their conspiratorial thoughts. Ever, now about this guy that
falls okay, I thought he was rather rude. I mean
to say that your audience is your listening audience is
dying off that to me, he was okay, there was

(59:16):
no real argument. You were just offering your opinion. But
because you would not go along with what he was
trying to put out, he got insulting as far as
I'm concerned, which is usually what happens when a lot
of people are like that. It happens on both sides
of the political spectrum. A lot of people when when
they're losing an argument or debate, they get insulting. And

(59:39):
you know where did this guy come up with the
idea that you're losing your audience. The only way you're
going to lose your audience is when all of us
older people die off, and by that time you did too.
But right now, like I'm sixty six years old, I'm basically.

Speaker 6 (59:56):
A new caller.

Speaker 2 (59:58):
Yeah, I appreciate the time.

Speaker 7 (01:00:00):
I know, I'm basically a new listener. It's only in
the last year or so that I started listening to you, right, And.

Speaker 3 (01:00:06):
I appreciate you tuning in and calling this morning. I mean, however,
many people are listening. I mean, I can't just I
can't think about that. I can't dwell on that, because
if there's one person or one hundred thousand people, I
have to do the job the same way. So I
don't get too worried about those things. There are ratings
that are just not stop rating season here in the
radio business and the numbers are strong, and I really

(01:00:28):
appreciate it. So whether or not, people and here's something
that I think, and I'll be happy to say. Look
for people who like me or like the show, they
listen when they can. But people who hate me and
hate the show, they listen all the time. So I
think it's great.

Speaker 7 (01:00:43):
Yeah, so like and I mean this actually can come
under my radar. Somebody that nowhere now clan. That person
put out a video and see didn't very new things
to say about you know. I know you don't always
get it right, and there advent times and when I

(01:01:04):
disagree with you, but I find yourself very entertaining and
very insightful most times, right, And so you know, to say,
like this particular person said basically my interpretation. She said
that BOCM was an extended arm of the Liberal Party.

(01:01:27):
I absolutely disagree with that. I'm sure BOCM don't get
things right all the time. Then I'm sure they make
a rich re action of when they find out they're wrong.
Nobody can get it right all.

Speaker 2 (01:01:39):
The time, Patty, Yeah, no, I get that.

Speaker 3 (01:01:41):
And if anybody's sitting in a chair like this is
thinking that they're infallible, well they're wrong, because not everybody
has all the answers, not everybody knows everything, not everybody
gets everything right. Not anybody gets everything right all the time.
It's just not a thing. So I'm mindful of it.
And this little bit about propaganda, I've been in the
armor of the Liberal party. Well, I'm a terrible liberal then,

(01:02:02):
because I've just been the last decade criticizing the liberals
right because.

Speaker 7 (01:02:06):
There were government I mean, I can I called you
a few times about the industrial wind industry possibly coming
to New Poundland, and I gained you you were on
offside as far as I was concerned, but you were
only pointing out what could happen should these wind turbine

(01:02:27):
that they put up in Nuclein. So I don't see you.

Speaker 6 (01:02:30):
Like that at all.

Speaker 7 (01:02:31):
And so and in regards to comments, I actually recorded
your session yesterday where you started talking to I can
forget the name now, and so I recorded the whole
thing and I put a little commentary up there and
I didn't say anything. Okay, this is how.

Speaker 6 (01:02:52):
I wrote it.

Speaker 7 (01:02:52):
I put to put this on my Facebook page, and
I guess said NATO and Gander on a Newfoundland question mark,
and I said things got a Little lie V on
The Patty Daily Show today, when a caller mentioned a
particular topic, Daddy was quick to jump in and share
his thoughts, and then I provide the link and check

(01:03:13):
it out here. Now, I saw some comments on there
that I didn't like, but I believe people are entitled
their opinion of you or me or anybody, you know
what I mean.

Speaker 3 (01:03:24):
Absolutely. I mean it's just part of the job, right,
And you know it coming in, and you know early
on that some of the more harsher things they kind
of stung. Now they just don't anymore because I'm kind
of used to it. I can take things with the
grain of salt, and look, if people are mad about
something I said or something they heard, I get it,

(01:03:46):
and fair enough.

Speaker 6 (01:03:47):
You know.

Speaker 3 (01:03:47):
Sometimes it gets a little bit much, though, Like to
tell me that you hate me. Okay, that's fine, because
not everyone's going to like get anybody doing whatever job
in this world. But when someone sent me an email
saying it's too bad to COVID JAD didn't kill me,
I thought, Man, that's a bit much, isn't it. You
wish to be dead because I didn't agree with something.
It's a wild time to be alive.

Speaker 7 (01:04:09):
Well, that's what I'm talking about. I mean, that's an
awful thing to say. I mean, I wouldn't wish something
like that. I don't know if I got any real enemies.
I got a lot of people that disagree with me
and stuff like that. I've been involved in the political
world for a long time, but I've never said I
wish you would have died from the COVID show. Now
it myself. I didn't take a COVID show, but that

(01:04:31):
was my choice. If you took it, you took a
COVID shot, that was your choice. I have no right
to get involved with your medical opators. And if you
if you choose to tell people that you took a
vaccine or whatever, that's up to you.

Speaker 3 (01:04:46):
Yeah, And I mean, I don't think I was ever
more sick of anything as a topic than maybe muskratch
there for a couple of years, and then the entirety
of the pandemic was it was tough. It was tough
on everybody. It was tough on me, it was tough
on the show, it was tough on the working man,
and it's tough on kids. And the fallout has been
pretty clear to see and look again for people who

(01:05:08):
don't like me, I understand, And I'll say this one
that my buddy's gonna kick out of. They'll be perfectly honest.
There's nobody more sick of me than me.

Speaker 7 (01:05:18):
Yeah, to be honest, I got a little bit, I
mean nice to be a pair of bit of time
on social media and I'm mid of a right wingler
and stuff like that. But you know, like I always
allow on my Twitter account and Facebook page or whatever,
I let people have their own own opinions unless they
get really unfounded with their words they come up with

(01:05:41):
something that's totally stupid and not true. And I band
people like that. Yeah, you're allowed to have conversation with me.

Speaker 2 (01:05:49):
Yeah, me too.

Speaker 3 (01:05:50):
And you know, I think we've gotten really caught up
and right left kind of stuff and everyone's in a
distinct camp when when we peel back onion, most everybody
has the same wants and needs in this world. You know,
a meaningful, gainful job, be able to pay the bills,
be able to feed the family, be able to you know,
nurture your friendships, want to be healthy. I mean, we

(01:06:13):
all are pretty we're more alike than we are different.
But the social media aspect has really carved us up
into different teams or different factions or whatever.

Speaker 2 (01:06:22):
The actual proper world.

Speaker 3 (01:06:23):
Is here when, no matter if your right wing or
left wing, when you go home today, you pretty much
want to have a couple of things, something healthy to eat,
the house to be warm, and the ability to pay
your bills, and maybe you can get to say hello
to your buddies. That's about it. I mean, I've pretty
got a pretty simple life going here other than from
nine to twelve weekdays.

Speaker 7 (01:06:43):
Yeah, so, you know, I mean, like I rarely most
of the stuff I put out on social media is
one other content creators they're putting out. Can I do
put at all? Okay? Sometimes I get it wrong? Yeah,
Sometimes sometimes I get caught up in the title, you
know what I mean. A lot of people put what

(01:07:03):
I call click me out there and throw it in
and then I don't read the article or watch the
whole video. Okay, So then I get caught out, And
when I get corrected, I let people know okay, I
stand corrected, okay, And then once people that were following
that particular post understand that I I'm admitting that I

(01:07:24):
made a mistake, then I delete the posts okay, and
get rid of it. Yeah, Now one more thing before
I go, Patty. Now, I don't know if this is
under your radio radar right now, but this broke yesterday
on Twitter and BBC put out an article in the
step and in Saskatchewan and here's a title and you
can look it up yourself. Okay, so us conserved A

(01:07:47):
commentator Glennbeck offers out as Saskatchewan woman struggles to get
surgery gains attention. Now, apparently see this lady. According the
stories I've read, she needs surgery asap, but she can't
get a surgeon in Saskatchewan that can accommodate her. So

(01:08:11):
they offered, Oh not, they offered. She has chosen made. Now,
I don't know if that's something you want to look
up at, but it's a real thing. It's a real story.
And so Glen Beck, I don't know if you ever
heard of him, but he's part popular in the States.
He offered to pay for her way down and he
actually got surgeons in the States, now, you know, stepping

(01:08:35):
up to the plate saying that they held a surgery.
So I didn't. I thought i'd let you know that
this is not a political thing or anything like that. Okay,
it speaks to our healthcare system in Canada. Okay, I
won't get in exactly now, but I'm sure things are
happening in New plan as well, where people can't get
certain surgeries or they're delayed for a long long time.

(01:08:59):
So anyway, yeah, I saw that story.

Speaker 3 (01:09:02):
Glenn Back is the guy behind The Blaze, a media
company called The Blaze, and the lady's name is I
think it's like a Dutch name, Van something rather. And
you know, the motives are pretty clear here, right with
all the ongoing conversation regarding American healthcare, with the you know,
the elimination of health care subsidies under the Affordable Care Act,

(01:09:25):
people on that side of the political spectrum in the
United States are trying to paint the very clear and
rosy picture of their system and comparing it to things
like universal health care in this country and wait times
what have you, And yeah, wait times are vastly less
than they are in the United States than they are here.
But that's a political ploy as much as anything else.
Maybe there's some compassion involved, but there's a lot of

(01:09:47):
politics involved that one. Because healthcare in the States is
a big part of the conversation.

Speaker 7 (01:09:52):
Well, help in the States. I will tell you what.
You don't go for open art surgery in the States
unless you've got wicked, unless you're paying wicket insurance payments,
or you're going to pay out of pocket. Most people
in Canada, I mean, regardless of our system right now,
it's still free to my.

Speaker 2 (01:10:12):
Knowledge, well it's universal.

Speaker 3 (01:10:15):
We pay for it with our tax dollars, but you
don't come out of pocket when you go to the doctor.
And exactly zero Canadians go bankrupt because of medical procedures.
They may indeed have job interruptions or lose jobs and
stuff like that, because that's the reality of poor health.
But you know, the big shift in the United States
is to move away. It's not just necessarily the subsidies.

(01:10:35):
It's with the insurance companies and the way it looks
like they're going. If you have a pre existing condition,
you're not going to get covered. How many Americans have
a pre existing health condition millions and millions. So that's
the strange world down there. I pay attention to it
enough to know or to try to know what's going on,
but it is a clown show. I mean, politics in

(01:10:55):
this country is bad enough. The American system of politics
and the politicians. Whoa boy, oh boy? Is that the
best thing as welcome?

Speaker 7 (01:11:03):
I said that was, But I do have one more comment,
okay quick, that guy that overstate is welcome and he
was asking you questions and you know, like about the
Banner pension and whatnot.

Speaker 3 (01:11:17):
All.

Speaker 7 (01:11:18):
No, I don't know if somebody's ever advised him to
maybe set up a Cier account, everything that you got
coming in it would be all there. You're like a
personal Cierra account. I mean, if I want to find
out right now if I'm doing a GSD in their
Canada pension or whatever in January, I can pretty much

(01:11:40):
guarantee you if I log into my Cierre account, I
will see it there.

Speaker 3 (01:11:44):
There's a lot of helpful information on that front. With
everything digitized, governments really needs off the game with protecting
my information, whether it be health or financial or banking.
Because cyber warfare is as popular as warfare.

Speaker 2 (01:11:56):
On the ground these days. A popular is the wrong word. Ken.

Speaker 3 (01:11:59):
I got to get home, but I appreciate you making
time for the show.

Speaker 7 (01:12:02):
Hi, Hey, Patty, you have a great day on Uh,
don't don't get too disappointed, good buddy, Think you got
a dwindling audience.

Speaker 3 (01:12:09):
Okay, I'm not worried about any of that because I
got to take a break, and thankfully there's another caller
in the queue, so on we go.

Speaker 2 (01:12:16):
Thanks, great day, you too, all the best. All right,
bye bye, let's get that break.

Speaker 3 (01:12:20):
Rob. You stay right there. He's got a Christmas story. Excellent,
don't go away, Welcome back to the program. Let's go
line number one. Rob, you are on the air.

Speaker 11 (01:12:31):
Top of the morning.

Speaker 3 (01:12:32):
To you, Patty, same to you.

Speaker 11 (01:12:34):
I just got a little bit of a nice Christmas
story here.

Speaker 3 (01:12:38):
Okay.

Speaker 11 (01:12:39):
So the wife and I went out for a little
run there yesterday afternoon after I talked to you, and
we went to the Piper Store and Killigrew's and uh,
I was just going in, so the selly hands got
their their can there. So I dug out all the

(01:12:59):
change that I had in my pocket and I put
it in probably seven eight bucks, not a big lot,
but it helped somebody. And We're just going through the
store and stuff like that, and I've seen a gentleman
leaning on the card. He had one little bit of
a piece of beef into his cart and he was

(01:13:19):
staring into the freezer and everything like that, and you know,
just not knowing what he's thinking or anything like that.
I didn't know him, and so I reached into my
pocket and I had some bills in my pocket, and
I just gave it to him, said Merry Christmas. And
as we're going through the checkout and we're going out

(01:13:40):
the line, here's this mister here putting some of that
money that I gave him back into the kettle for
the Sally Ann And I just thought it was just
a really good feeling that, you know, everybody's giving forward
at this time of the year.

Speaker 2 (01:13:58):
Absolutely.

Speaker 3 (01:13:59):
You know, it's like the bad news gets all the headlines,
the good news not so much, bad people get all
the headlines, good people not so much. When in fact,
if we're being honest with each other, there's probably more
very good people out there than there is very bad people.
And sometimes it takes something like the Christmas season to
bring out some kindness and folks. But it costs nothing

(01:14:20):
to be kind and in this case, it actually costs
some money. But yeah, there's lots of good people out there.

Speaker 6 (01:14:25):
Yeah, And.

Speaker 5 (01:14:27):
It was just one of those good feelings.

Speaker 11 (01:14:30):
I'm not a big Christmas person. I usually like to
hunker down like the bears and and sort of hibernate.
You know, I do what I can and stuff like that.
But it was just really good to be there. And
guess what I drove there on my all season tires.

Speaker 3 (01:14:48):
Well, I'm glad you made it to and fro in
a safe fashion. I appreciate the time and the story. Rob,
thanks a lot. Okay, have a good day you too,
Bye bye. But yeah, I mean so I'll add to
the pile of names that are being thrown around. But
apparently the comment that I made that we're probably a

(01:15:10):
little more alike than we are different. And I said,
it's some pretty basic stuff, you know, having some food
to eat and hopefully to be healthy in the house,
to be warm, the kids, to be good and have
a good job, and you know, the things that I
think we all share is makes us more common than not.
And someone said that's a pretty polyanna way to look
at it. Well, why is the other way to look

(01:15:30):
at it? You know, for people who were defined by
their politics, is a strange way to live, just in
my personal opinion. I mean, I know I shure to
talk about politics for a living for the most part,
but I don't know why people just want to define
who they are simply based on their political meanings or
their favorite politician or whatever the case may be. And
that's you know, favorite and fan. That's kind of what

(01:15:53):
has become, isn't it. Policy kind of be danned. We're
in a place now where it's it's always been a
popularity contest, but now it's more fandom than it is
of you know, concern with policy and tone and temperament
and vision. It's more now about whether or not that
person's personality and their you know, cultural or opinions are

(01:16:16):
shared by you. When again, look, politics has a huge
impact on our day to day lives. Of course it does.
But some people are strictly defined by their political following
their political leanings. I should say, when you know, just
one more reminder, as much as I'm not always right,
because nobody is your favorite politician or your favorite political party.
They don't have all the answers. They don't. You might

(01:16:38):
agree with the basic tenant of their political party, or
their political leanings or the historical context. But we've we've
got to stop pretending that there's one politician or one
political party that is all right and the others are
all wrong. Because of course that's not true. But that's
kind of where we are. Right, if you're a liberal,

(01:17:00):
you're an idiot, or if you're a conservative, you're an idiot,
and there's no actual conversations, conversations are thinking the past,
you know, we are just making statements, and the ability
to navigate even polite or pleasant conversation has been replaced
with nasty and conversations over before they begin. Right, we
just assign a label. So you have a question or

(01:17:22):
concern about immigration, you're a racist. That doesn't have to
be the truth. And if you have some concerns with
public policy and public spending and international relations, all of
a sudden, talking about the war and Gaza through any
negative flight associated with the Israelis, you're a naty Samway.
You know, we're just not helping each other with that.
Talk about climate change, all of a sudden's the carbon
tax first thing out of your mind? Are you right
in your mouth as a carbon tax? When there's a

(01:17:43):
lot more to these conversations. And again I know full
well I'm not always right, because of course I'm not.
I never have been always right, I never will be
always right, which is why your input to your perspective.
Your conversation on the show is exactly what makes the
world go around, including this program that's gonna break it.
But today a good day to get on the show
if you're in and around town seven zero nine two

(01:18:03):
seven threety five two one one elsewhere total free long
distance one eight eight eight five night Evo CM, which
is eighty six twenty six.

Speaker 2 (01:18:10):
We're taking a break and then we're coming back. Welcome
back to the program.

Speaker 3 (01:18:13):
One of my favorite phrase that I hear people throw
around when we talk about government involvement in our day
to day lives is govern me hard or daddy. And
that was something that's when Justin wrote me when we
talked about as of today in Australia that country's youth
under the age of sixteen will not be allowed, supposedly
by law to access social media accounts, whether that be

(01:18:35):
let's see here. I had the list of Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Twitch, Facebook,
Reddit threads, and something called kick and the email pretty
much said that, you know, why would I think that
it's a good idea for government to be able to
involve themselves to that extent in the youth of Australia's lives. Well,
I mean, if we sat back and think about it,
government has already evolved in youth's lives. You know, there's

(01:18:58):
an age for each which you can there's an a
which you can buy cannabis or alcohol in a licensed retailer.
So there's already things out there, and something is about
protecting youth, you know, increasing their safety based on the
fact that you know, we all I think, can be
honest with each other and saying you're more prone to
some reckless decision making when you're young. You learn some

(01:19:20):
lessons sometimes the hard way in this life, and those
are some of the things that we try to keep away.
You can't get behind the wheel of a car with
a license until you're a certain age, so we already
do certain things like that. And you know, this to
me doesn't really feel like an issue of government overreach
because we can all look around. You can read the
pay reviewed research from wherever about social media. It's usage,

(01:19:42):
the amount of time young people spend on it and
people who are adults, but what it means for their
happiness and mental well being. So whether it be the
reports that came out that talked about the increased level
of depression and anxiety for children on the age of
twelve if they get a smartphone. Add to it, what
do you think it is in so far as net
negative for youth under the age of sixteen. I mean, yes,

(01:20:05):
it can be fun and yes it could be helpful,
but it's not about government. For the first time in
the history of the modern world where government has to
restricted access to certain things for young people. And add
to it, in Australia this there's thought about it, maybe
happening in the UK, some consideration for it in France,
and I do know we've got like online arms build
being navigated here in this country. But I don't really

(01:20:27):
see the huge downside now. One or the two points
that we made on it is the question that I
heard Jerry Lynaska Streeter is who should be responsible for
this type of approach to how people use or utilize
social media? Is it the government?

Speaker 2 (01:20:44):
Not really?

Speaker 3 (01:20:45):
Is it the parents?

Speaker 2 (01:20:46):
Is that the tech companies?

Speaker 3 (01:20:48):
Well, I think we can all say that the tech
companies aren't going to be the one to do it
because they obviously don't really care why because they created
algorithms which I've proven to be extremely problematic for everyone,
and particularly young people. So it boils back to too,
the individual with guidance from their parents, because that's really
where it comes from. You know. I heard one of
the responses from one of the streeters to Jerryline, and

(01:21:09):
the lady said she sees the top four Dallar's head
more than her face because her face is buried in
her phone all the time. I think that's pretty popular
as a sentiment. Now, do I spend so much time
on my phone? Probably? Right, But I'm also fifty odd
years of age, so I think that's a little bit different.
So I think there's a conversation we had about social media.

Speaker 2 (01:21:28):
And its impact.

Speaker 3 (01:21:29):
You add it to The next comment I made after
that was about how young people in particular are using
artificial intelligence. You know, again, I don't know how some
people hear what I say, but just look around at
what we see happening right in front of our very eyes.
If you had to ten years ago talk about how
do you digest or assess what you're seeing on the

(01:21:51):
Internet and or social media, whether or not it's real
or accurate, fake and misleading, it was already a problem,
and now it is unbelievable because you can generate something
using artificial intelligence in a heartbeat that can make its
way around the world that is demonstrably false. But like
we say, the lot can get around the world before
the truth gets out of bed, and that's becoming more

(01:22:12):
and more apparent and more and more evident. I mean,
just look at what credibility has been hampered on things
like the ten year Plan for healthcare human resources because
some of the citations were generated by artificial intelligence and
they were wrong, they were incorrect, they were false, they
didn't exist. Same thing in the education record, which is
a problem and not the content of those reports, but
some of the citations and footnotes attached to it.

Speaker 2 (01:22:34):
And then the.

Speaker 3 (01:22:34):
Thought about you know, being able to think your way
through the world. It's a hard place to navigate. The
world is complicated, and bit of critical thinking goes a
very very long way to discern what's real and what's fake.
But also just in your day to day operations here.
So I mentioned this one report that we mentioned on
the show and had a couple of interviews about is
how critical thinking has been compromised by the use of

(01:22:56):
these large language models like open ais chat GP. And
this wasn't worked done by a bunch of fly by nighters.
It was done at MIT in their Media lab. I
think it's fair to say a pretty reputable organization down
a at MIT. So they took fifty four subjects between
the ages of eighteen and thirty nine years old. This
was all in the Boston area and their one task

(01:23:19):
was to write several SAT essays. One group was using
chat GPT, one was simply using Google, and the other
was just using their brains. And the results came out
crystal clear. The lowest brain activity across all thirty two
regions in the brain found the group using chat GPT
to be underperforming consistently in neural, linguistic and behavioral levels.

(01:23:39):
It got a little bit better for the Google group,
but it got a lot better for the folks who
were just using their brain. They're own individual ideas, both
for the equality of the essays and both through the
ability to regurgitate what they had written, because obviously, if
you use chat GPT, you just use it, you put
the inputs in, it splits something out. So how could
you possibly be able to regurgitate something you did not

(01:24:00):
that you didn't think your way through. So those two things,
I'm pretty sure they are going to be their issues today,
but they are going to be bigger issues into the future.
And picking up what Sarah had to say earlier about
you know, why do people in the province care so
much about things that are happening ounder the parts of
the country. For me, I don't know how we can
separate out just thinking about this province and nothing but

(01:24:21):
this province, because whether it be political discourse or equalization,
or healthcare transfers or public policy, how can you ignore
some of what's happening here? And I hear people tell
me all the time I wish we had a premier
like Daniel Smith.

Speaker 2 (01:24:34):
Well I don't.

Speaker 3 (01:24:35):
I mean, just look at how they're using the notwithstanding clause.
There's a reason why they're not with standing clause is there?
But isn't it being abused? It kind of looks like
it to me, Like four times in recent months the
Province of Alberta has used and notwithstanding clause so that
their policies cannot be challenged. You know, you hear people
talk about authoritarians and dictators and communist regimes and all this,

(01:25:00):
man when governments are frequently going back to the well
to utilize them not with standing Claus, you're pretty much
picking up exactly what you God condemned. All the time.
Nobody wants to be living under a dictator or some
sort of authoritarian But boy, oh boy, when things, whether
it be transgender rights or collective bargaining, when you impose it,

(01:25:20):
not with standing claus, you're pretty much begging for someone
to be have full authority over you and public policy.
You can't challenge it in court. Consequently, it's the law
of the land be damped. Doesn't matter what you think
or what you want, that's going to be what's happening.
I don't know why we don't have a bit more
of a public nationwide conversation about the utilization of that.

(01:25:41):
I remember mister Polief talked about using it when it
came to justice reform, bail and otherwise, and we gave
out some bail numbers a little while ago.

Speaker 2 (01:25:49):
Everybody, i think, agrees that.

Speaker 3 (01:25:50):
If you're charged with a violent crime, anything we can
do to keep you behind bars until you face the
judge or the jury is a good thing. In Ontario,
the numbers are wild. Over eighty percent of those inner
an Ontario prisoner on remand haven't been convicted of anything.
In this province, we've got somewhere in the neighborhood of
around sixty percent ish at HMP who are on remand

(01:26:12):
haven't been convicted of anything. And the more complicating factor
there is we do not track how many people who
have been charged for the violent crime that are out
on bail and reoffend with another violent crime. It would
certainly give us a bit more data to sink our
teeth into. And now I guess we just have to build.
If capacity in Ontario jails is eighty five hundred, but

(01:26:33):
there's ten thousand, eight hundred people in those jails, obviously
there's something there. So when we hear the politics of
jail not bail, it sells easy. Why because public safety
is top of mind for many people in this province
and in this country, and the survey done by the
Environment of Justice of public safety here was pretty evident

(01:26:53):
that people feel less safe than they did five years ago. Now,
some of that is absolutely driven by data and statistics Canada,
someone's driven by the media, which is extremely unfortunate. It's
that whole thought. If it bleeds, it leads, And yes,
crime does get sensationalized because it gets a lot of eyeballs,
It gets a lot of ears, it gets a lot
of clicks. People are fascinated, even if they are fearful

(01:27:18):
of crime, just to look like how popular programs on
television and movies are that deal with crime. You know,
from the law and Orders all the way down. People
are intrigued by that type of happenings events in the society. Aria,
let's check in on the Twitter before we get to
the news. We're VOSM up a line. You know what
they do. You follow us there email addresses open line

(01:27:39):
at VOSM dot com. When we come back, Mike just
joined us. He's in the queue to talk about local
service district and that concept of local service district. It's
amazing to me that when regionalization was part of the conversation,
it got rebuffed pretty much in full because I think
we got off on the wrong foot. We really could
have and should have included representatives of local service districts,

(01:28:00):
not just incorporated municipalities, so that we had a clear
understanding across the board of what originalization means, how it
could work, the benefits, the pros, and the cons. But
Mike wants talking about a local service district and then
this time for you at the topic up to you
don't coect.

Speaker 1 (01:28:15):
You were listening to a rebroadcast VOCM Open line. Have
your say by calling seven oh nine, two seven, three
fifty two eleven or one triple eight five ninety eight
six two six and listen live weekday mornings at nine am.

Speaker 3 (01:28:32):
Welcome back to the show. Let's go.

Speaker 2 (01:28:34):
I nemb won Mike you're on the air.

Speaker 12 (01:28:36):
Yeah, good morning, Patty. I just want to say tanks
or taking my call, I was getting back on. I'm
getting back to your dear. I spoke to you a
couple of weeks ago on a local service committee we're
getting going from Mirrors Vale area.

Speaker 3 (01:28:47):
Yeah, you had a meeting on a Saturday night to
see who was interested in reforming that committee that had
been disbanded. Everyone quit, I think.

Speaker 12 (01:28:53):
I recall, well, yeah, I already resigned, already had an
offer whatever whatever way a goal. But all we've done
very well. We had big turnout. I was even surprised,
and we got a good committee on the go there.
Now we've got a maximum of seven member committee and
it's just taking time to get everything moving. Patty. That's
what I want the people to know. You just don't

(01:29:15):
happen overnight, and that's where we're to.

Speaker 3 (01:29:18):
So you did get seven people interested in sitting on
the committee.

Speaker 12 (01:29:22):
Yeah, they're all sworn in. Well, let's said for one person,
he was working there shift. He got to get sworn
in and she's ready, ready to roll.

Speaker 3 (01:29:29):
That's good news because the worry was whether or not
people wanted to take on what it could be a
very difficult and sometimes a thankless task.

Speaker 12 (01:29:36):
Oh, it's very tankless, but we're willing to give it
a goal and that's where we stand for. Like you said, now,
I just posted a few signs on the mailboxes and website.
We got a girl lady really doing a good job
on a website, and we got to have another general
meeting before we can really get started. So we're all

(01:29:57):
gone home after the meeting and ready to do what
we can do for the community.

Speaker 2 (01:30:01):
Good on you, Mike.

Speaker 3 (01:30:02):
So what's there or at the top of the list
for concerns and business that needs to be done in
Mary's Vale?

Speaker 13 (01:30:07):
Uh?

Speaker 12 (01:30:08):
Some general maintenance, water leaps, but the big problem, Patty. Look,
I often heard you say with government's we haven't got
a spending problem. We got money problem here in this community. Right,
and so we're hoping to move forward with with the
people we got that got elected and sworn in. I

(01:30:29):
think we'll do wood y'all. So I just want to
let the people.

Speaker 3 (01:30:31):
Know, well, I'm glad that you had seven people step up,
step up to the plate, and I wish all of them,
including yourself, good luck. Mike.

Speaker 2 (01:30:37):
I appreciate the update too.

Speaker 12 (01:30:39):
Yes, and then thanks for taking my call again Patty,
and a lot of people do listen to your show.
I don't mind what some people says there, but I
know a lot of people come along with me when
I getting a coffee and say, oh I heard John
openline or whatever. But before it goes off there, I know,
I'd just like to send out a thank you to
John Attenheimer for comment to the local hall here and

(01:31:01):
swearing our memborzine and Ryan Ryan for lowness to haul.

Speaker 3 (01:31:07):
Good on all of them. Mike, appreciate the time, Thanks
a lot.

Speaker 12 (01:31:10):
Yeah, you take care of Patty and have good Christmas.
And our habs are not doing very good.

Speaker 3 (01:31:15):
Yeah, a bit of a slide on the go here now.
Unfortunately that's it. Thanks, okay, all beastly all right, byebye,
I keep problem. Let's go to lie number two. Greg
you're on the air.

Speaker 13 (01:31:27):
Oh, thank you, Patty for taking my call. I just
want to express my opinion about artificial intelligence and use.
And I was listening to childs Dermans theon evolution last
night and I thought, well, you know, natural selection allows
us the ability to.

Speaker 3 (01:31:47):
Use these.

Speaker 13 (01:31:50):
Things like computers in that right, So why shouldn't we
use artificial intelligence to advantage it's still using pends on
paper to drive it.

Speaker 3 (01:32:00):
We can and should use artificial intelligence to our benefit.
The problem is all the negatives that come with it,
which will be plenty. I've kind of spoken to some
of them already, So yeah, there's plenty of good things
we can do. Applications of AI and healthcare, for instance,
are looking to be very promising. But there's also some
of the distinct downsides. And that's just my personal opinion.

(01:32:22):
Some people might love it and have a big reliance
on Hey, if we talk about the amount of energy required,
we talk about the amount of water required to cool
off these super hot data centers or servers. So there's
good and bad, like everything else in this world. I
just think that we're going to see more of the
bad percolate up inside of just societal conversations versus industry applications.

Speaker 2 (01:32:43):
That's just my thoughts on it.

Speaker 13 (01:32:46):
Okay, I was talking about open AI and I can
use them on the computer now to my advantage to
create papers, create images and create poems and discuss news
and all that. But I don't really know. I mean,
for me, it's just the amount of electricity that I
use for a computer to do that. But where the
computing comes from to be able to use openly, I

(01:33:09):
don't know. But I guess if it's a cloud service,
then I don't understand the problem.

Speaker 3 (01:33:15):
You know, the data servers required to boost artificial intelligence
is a big conversation.

Speaker 2 (01:33:21):
The amount of power is unbelievable.

Speaker 3 (01:33:22):
They're looking at by the end of this decade, some
ten percent of the power generated in the world will
simply be for artificial intelligence.

Speaker 2 (01:33:29):
So it's fun to be able to go.

Speaker 3 (01:33:31):
In there and create a poem or an image or
whatever very quickly inside your own home with your own
power bill. But the amount of power required to actually
give you that energy inside your home is enormous. Same
thing with the amount of water to cool the servers.
It's just astronomical. The needs for these data.

Speaker 13 (01:33:49):
Centers right, But I mean China is doing it and
Russia's doing it, and I mean they have more artificial
instation in China, events in science better than leaner.

Speaker 3 (01:34:03):
I think science, yeah, I think inside the world of science,
what the keys there would be, you know, creating and
generating science that creates intellectual property which can be monetized.

Speaker 2 (01:34:15):
We're way behind the rest of.

Speaker 3 (01:34:16):
The world on that frontier in Canada. So I mean,
I don't know about comparisons to other countries and the
use of AI. But it's also important to note, not
because I say so, but because actual academia has done
the work for me. Is chat GIPT, which is probably
one of the most popular large language models. It's wrong
as much as it's right insofar as the information it produces.

(01:34:38):
So again, you know, when you have a human being
who has had to do the research, whether it be
on Google or whatever or at a library, and have
to provide citations so that we can, you know, fact
check what has been written and produced, that seems to
me to be the most effective way to get things
right versus just rely on an algorithm to get it right.
Because chat GPT is as wrong as it is right,

(01:35:00):
as as often wrong as it is right.

Speaker 13 (01:35:03):
Well, I'm using open ai and Microsoft open ai and
it's always right, and it was not right a questions
like I'm requestioning you whether you know you are wrong
or right, and it would give me an answer, But
I mean, I have to be very specific and I
can ask it about news that's going on today and
it will tell me what it knows. So it's up

(01:35:24):
to me to be more specific and ask even when
I'm writing a poem ory like that. And it is
my intellectual.

Speaker 6 (01:35:31):
Property, you know, is it?

Speaker 3 (01:35:34):
That's a good question. I haven't really thought about it
like that. But is what's generated by you using artificial
intelligence actually your I P I don't know. I don't think.

Speaker 13 (01:35:42):
So it is my intellectual property, yes it is, but
open ai it is, yes, and open ai Microsoft open
ai is censored. Right, So I cannot like just.

Speaker 4 (01:35:55):
Go and.

Speaker 13 (01:35:57):
Ask three images of say the Pope and other people
like that because it will not do that, you know.
And it's it's very selective on how it restricts me
from asking questions about things that doesn't want an answer
to give. You know, it's answered right, where chat GPT

(01:36:20):
probably is more critical and probably would give you these answers,
and you know, but I'm just expressed in my opinion here.

Speaker 3 (01:36:26):
Yeah, I get it knowledge that I know. Yeah, and
it could be extremely fun and it's fascinating to watch.
But you know, even something that we refer to as
a human phenomenon as a hallucination, that's actually where being
applied now to things like open aies chat GPT is
the possibility for a machine to hallucinate, which is kind
of scary when you think about it in real terms.

(01:36:48):
But yeah, the few times that I fooled around with
it just to see how it works, I don't use
it every day because I just don't. I choose not to.
But yeah, it's it's fascinating what can happen in second
flat that would have taking the human being, you know,
weeks or months to produce.

Speaker 2 (01:37:03):
It's wild, really exactly.

Speaker 13 (01:37:06):
Yes, But machines don't loosening people do. Machines are not
on drugs, just people who are using them that are
on drugs that cannot don't have the neural capacity to
create the images they want. And you know, if people
are blind to whatever they think they see and cannot
read properly, then it's their problem. Their misinterpretation, not creator.

Speaker 2 (01:37:29):
Yeah, qind of person.

Speaker 13 (01:37:31):
Who advanced the images through open an eye. You understand
what I mean.

Speaker 3 (01:37:35):
I do, But I mean what you're producing for your
own interests or your own amusement or enjoyment is one thing.

Speaker 2 (01:37:42):
It's how it's.

Speaker 3 (01:37:42):
Used to produce things like legislation, how it's used to
produce things like public policy. That's why I think we've
got ourselves a bit of a problem here because basically
how it works. And I don't pretend to be an
expert in this field, but you know, it's like everything
else in this world where you were lying an algorithm,
So garbage in equals garbage out. And if chat GPT
is scouring the internet for information to answer your query

(01:38:04):
or to produce your poem, then there's lots of information
on the Internet that is verifiably inaccurate. So chat GPT
can actually just get a bogus information for you. I mean,
look at the Education Court, someone used AI to provide
some citations or footnotes, fifteen of which proved to be
made up, fictitious didn't exist, So there's possibilities to get

(01:38:26):
it wrong. And put it this way, I saw something
from a teacher and I found it to be really
quite interesting. They said they acknowledge and understand the fact
that their students are going to use chat GPT and
there's no way to stop them. So what the teacher
is now saying is they're going to allow their students
to produce the project or the essay with chat GPT,
but the question is then prove whether or not what

(01:38:47):
chatchipt produce is right or wrong, accurate or not. So
it's an interesting take from an educator is that they're
going to let their students use it, but they want
them to back up what the chat GPT produced by
further research. Interesting take, Well, it.

Speaker 13 (01:39:01):
Shouldn't it be on the teacher's own us to see
if it's uh uh similarities and comparisons, right, similarities coincidences?

Speaker 3 (01:39:11):
Right?

Speaker 13 (01:39:11):
I mean if you if you and I would write
an essay on paper, then you know, well, if we
did the same study in school, there would be similarities
and coincidences on things that words that we were interpreted
and uh, essays and so on that we would interpret
the same. Right, it's the same we using that open AI,

(01:39:33):
isn't it?

Speaker 2 (01:39:36):
Maybe in part?

Speaker 3 (01:39:37):
But of course let me talk about the onus on
teachers to verify as to whether or not a students
use it because they think acknowledge that students are going
to use it. There's actually software has been created to
identify when something has been produced in part and full
by chat GPT, And I know that's not the only
large language model out but it's the most commonly used
I think so. But we also have teachers who have

(01:39:59):
a pre any significant workload already an added burden of
having to verify every word because people have been plagiarizing
since the beginning of time. But there's a difference between
stealing a line from a research book that it is
simply saying to chat EPT, give me a thousand words
about the Summit series. So yeah, I know where you're
coming from. But I think how governments use it and

(01:40:21):
how people can use it for nefarious reasons to produce
completely bogus, misleading disinformation that influences people's thoughts. So there's
a difference between that and how you use it.

Speaker 13 (01:40:32):
Well, this this information that you don't like is it's
like beauty is in the eye to beholder, right, and
the thing with ugliness is I to beholder too. So
if you're critical, like I said, if you're a teacher
and you're critical about what a student writes, and you
have even compare it to what the other students are writing,

(01:40:54):
and maybe it's like I'm just repeating myself over the
second time, teacher is the one who has to correct
the papers. Right, Why does the teacher go through all
the problems of checking out everything on the internet, which
it must be an awful burden to the teacher instead
of accepting what's written and comparing it to other students

(01:41:16):
and giving a remark, do you understand?

Speaker 3 (01:41:20):
I get that as a snapshot in time, But the
problem into the future will be if that young person
in that classroom did not do any of the work themselves,
then what happens into the future when they're going to
have day to day issues they had to navigate as
an adult, as a father or a mother, or someone
employed in whatever feel in this world. If we've taken

(01:41:41):
away some of their ability to grow over years to
critically think and to advance their critical thinking skills, that's
in that negative because if people are fully reliant on
machines to produce what they should have been able to
think of themselves, it might not be a snapshot in time.
Problem today for the grade six student producing an essay,
But when they become a twenty six year old and
things have changed and they have to rely on their

(01:42:02):
own wits and skills in critical thinking, then we've kind
of betrayed them. We've allowed them to take the laser
way out, and the lazy way out might be efficient
in so far as work, you know, as opposed to
working hard, work smart, But the only way to work
smart is if you are smart, and being smart requires
critical thoughts, which.

Speaker 13 (01:42:20):
Fined me back to what I was reading last night
about Charles Dernwan and his observation on natural selection and
that and also on some people have the ability to
use this, some people don't have the ability to use this.
So I go with Diarwin and saying that on observation,
if people don't have the ability to use this, then

(01:42:42):
they have other abilities, right, So I would say that
if the ability to use this as an advantage to
young people, then they should use it, and it was
an on the ability to some people, then they shouldn't
use it.

Speaker 4 (01:42:54):
And that's my phone.

Speaker 3 (01:42:55):
Yeah, thank you for and I appreciate your time. Thanks
for calling.

Speaker 2 (01:43:00):
Okay by Greg, And of course natural selections.

Speaker 3 (01:43:02):
Some of the keys are adapting to your environment. But
then it's not just talking about you as an individual
and you as a snapshot in time. It's also talked
about passing along. That's the right way to put it,
passing along advantageous heritable traits to your offspring, which is
part of natural selection. So if we create a group

(01:43:23):
of people as adolescents today, they become adults, they've reduced
drastically their ability to think critically. They pass on those
traits to their offspring. Because you know, most of everything
you learn starts at home. Yeah, we could talk about
booklearning in school, but a lot of what you're going
to learn about yourself, learn about the world, learn about life.

(01:43:44):
If it doesn't come or at least start at home.
And if we start at home with a bunch of
people that can only produce any thoughts by using a
large language model, then I just think there's a snowball
there that's probably not in our best interest, just like
social media start off? Is it any longer?

Speaker 4 (01:44:01):
Not?

Speaker 3 (01:44:01):
Really? Let's take a break, I tak away. Welcome back
to the program. Let's go light nuber three conway around
the air. Yes, good morning morning.

Speaker 14 (01:44:11):
I'm holding in regarding our holl about here in four
are now, I uh, this morning there was up to
and could be over thirty percent of the quote I
still lifting the water now. We're on a what we
call a cap system on our hollibut. No, it's not

(01:44:34):
that I were we're looking for anybody else's fish, but
I mean this fish is it's basically going to be
lifting the water again this year. And I found out
that there was a significant amount left in the water
last year. And I've been talking to DNFO and the union,
and look, I told DFO, you expect to leave fish

(01:44:58):
in the water and leave us all on five hundred
dollars a week on employment when we could be making
thousands of dollars a week. And it's a cap system,
so I mean it's it runs the same way the
hearing system runs on caps or capelan or Northern two
J Turbott.

Speaker 6 (01:45:16):
It's cap system.

Speaker 14 (01:45:18):
My fish is not caught, is lifting to the overall
pot and then it's distributed. True fisherman that's willing to
go fish again.

Speaker 3 (01:45:30):
Okay, just from basic question, why would so much of
the quota or the cap be left in the water.

Speaker 14 (01:45:38):
Well, I guess it got to do with everybody's got
a cap. And I mean it starts right after our
lots for season's over at this in my area. Here,
some places it starts earlier. Probably people don't get their
whole cap, you know, the the lead two or three
hundred pound here or more and whyer. Some people just
didn't go at it. Like I know right now, there's

(01:46:01):
boats that put in for this month and they just
didn't go at it. Got too cold, the I guess the.

Speaker 6 (01:46:09):
When somewhere's else went to work something.

Speaker 14 (01:46:11):
They just did not go at it. Now I do
realize that there's probably five or six boats that's waiting
for a good day to go at it. But these
boats are not going to catch thirty percent of the quota.
They only got their own cap. And if you do
go at it, and like I told DFO, this is
a cap system. It's it's a stroke of a pen.
She can write there another two thousand pound nine on

(01:46:33):
top of what we got to kitch.

Speaker 6 (01:46:35):
That's how it works.

Speaker 14 (01:46:36):
Just prints off another set of conditions and you can
go in and catch it. And if the fellers still
got fish in the water, I'm sure they'll be happy
with another two thousand pound on top of it. You
leave it open for two weeks where it gets caught,
they come back, you re evaluate how much quota is left,
and then we started again. We got from merch to

(01:46:56):
merch to catch this quota. That's the foodbrough whom it
when the quote us come out come out in March
and you've got to tell the first to march to
kitchen and why do you foe and the union having
the Union especially haven't brought this up. I mean I'm
bringing it up now. I was just voted in and

(01:47:18):
to the member for this area, so now I'm bringing
it up. Our economy needs it. The UFO is not
allowed to leave it in the water. We got a
custodial management of this fish and we needs it to
keep our economies going, not to leave it in the water.
It's not helping anybody.

Speaker 3 (01:47:40):
Yeah, no, it doesn't make any sense. I asked because
I thought maybe there's some relationship with processing capacity or
what have you. But I asked because I had no
idea what.

Speaker 14 (01:47:48):
The answer was, Well, process and capacity. It comes in,
he takes out of it the washes, that packes and
boxes and sends it off to the market. There's no
big listening to a hallibut. People want to buy a hallibut,
They buys a whole hallibut, like the restaurants any anywhere,
the big dominions or you know, through lands or whoever.

(01:48:12):
And I mean they buy, they buy the hallibut in
the hole offer they can make their nice little steaks
to put on your on your plate when it comes
into the restaurant. So I mean, there's no reason why
they can give a thousand reasons what he don't want
to do it, but footwork, everything is all there for
every other fish ray. And I'm putting this out there

(01:48:33):
because something has to be done. Someone has to wag
up and realize there's a lot of money left in
the water. You're talking a fish right now is anywhere
from the twelve to fourteen dollars a pound. So just
imagine if you've got another two thousand pounds of go catch,
you're looking at a lot of money.

Speaker 3 (01:48:53):
Yeah, that's pretty clear, isn't it.

Speaker 4 (01:48:56):
So?

Speaker 14 (01:48:57):
And I mean thirty of the quote left in the water.
So anyway, I phone into let everybody know what's going on,
that we're not here trying to take somebody else's fish.
But the feller's desk. All got quod at the kitch.
I'm sure they could use another two thousand pounds and
their boats are stelling the water. Somebody gets a two
thousand pound, give us extra two weeks when it comes back.

(01:49:22):
Came up, see how much fishes left, and if they
can give us another five hundred if it's good enough
to go where there's sensible. We need money, not five
hundred dollars a week. This is ridiculous with the post
of everything, groceries, gas, just to cost a living. Getting
out of bad in the morning cost more than five
hundred dollars a week.

Speaker 3 (01:49:39):
Yeah, the price of everything your one hundred percent rise. Conwy,
I gotta get to the news, but we'll do our
level best to get an answer because it's it doesn't
really make any sense to me. But of course I'm
not a fish harvest so I don't know.

Speaker 14 (01:49:49):
But uh, well, this has this has to be put
out there. I mean, this is this is this is
the money for our economy that needs to be brought
up and ask why it's not being into an early tournament.

Speaker 3 (01:50:04):
So thank you, I appreciate the time comment, Thanks for
the call. All right, there you go, Yeah, why something
inside or under the cap has left in the water.
Good question.

Speaker 2 (01:50:13):
Let's get a break in for the news.

Speaker 3 (01:50:14):
Let me come back patrickson the Cure to talk about
a land dispute and then whatever you want to talk about,
don't go away.

Speaker 1 (01:50:19):
The Tim Powers Show showing the conversation weekday afternoons at
four pm on your VOCM.

Speaker 2 (01:50:26):
Welcome back to the program. Let's go line number one.

Speaker 3 (01:50:28):
Patrick, you are on the air.

Speaker 8 (01:50:32):
Hello Patty, Hi there, Paddy.

Speaker 9 (01:50:34):
I was down to Lands Indeeds there about two years
ago or three years ago now to get into me
at grandfather's quitening of the title. And they told me
that I got to get a lawyer to get into
the file and I can't get in their lawyer. I'm
after phone and thirty and there's nobody who there wonderful
will come down and help they get into my grandfather's

(01:50:55):
quitening of the title. I was wondering if you could
get a lawyer for me to help to go out
and do it.

Speaker 3 (01:51:01):
Well, I don't know if I can get you a lawyer,
but I do know that a couple of lawyers dealing
with crowd lands and lands and deeds and quiety titles
listening to this program and time in all the time,
I will send off a note to one such lawyer
on your behalf. I can't promise anything because I can
manage that person's own personal time or professional time. But
I can try.

Speaker 9 (01:51:22):
Yeah, I got to get into that file quickening up
my grandfather's because she left it to my mother who
left it to me. See Yeah, and if I get
set filed, then this will be straightened up. And these
people that's doing this to me now this land while
because when I was selling some ground in two thousand
and nine, I'll have to find out now that surveys

(01:51:44):
were done in two thousand and one. I mean mother's
cancer come back in two thousand and two, and she
was dying in the day all the two thousand and
three as she died, and January twenty twenty fifth in
two thousand and four, and we later risked in it
in yeah and Famus Sanity Harry and to two thousand

(01:52:04):
and eight. And I know who's after doing it, but
I can't get nothing known about it.

Speaker 6 (01:52:10):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:52:11):
I can't make any promises because of course, like I said,
I can't manage other people's time, but I will zip
off a couple of quick notes on your behalf. That's
no problem.

Speaker 8 (01:52:20):
Okay, thank you, Patty.

Speaker 9 (01:52:22):
I needed everybody to help. I can get because this
is family members.

Speaker 6 (01:52:25):
I'm talking about.

Speaker 3 (01:52:26):
Oh, I totally understand and been there. I'll see what
I could do. Patrick, leave it with me.

Speaker 9 (01:52:31):
Okay, thank you, Patty, You're welcome.

Speaker 3 (01:52:33):
E take care bye bye.

Speaker 2 (01:52:35):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:52:36):
Then things shouldn't be that difficult. Let's go. Ne Umber
two is taking more to the president and then chair
at the Universal Design Network. That's Sandra Cunning. Hello, Sandra,
you're on the air.

Speaker 15 (01:52:46):
Hi, Patty, thanks so much for speaking to me again.
This is a follow up of our conversation last week. Yep,
I'm so really happy to speak to you. Just wanted
to do a shout out that the City of Saint
john has released the new Universal Design Resources to support
the creation of accessible, inclusive housing and so we have

(01:53:08):
partnered with the fabulous City of Saint John's lots of
connections by Counselor w Mayor Ellsworth and now Counselor Hammond
is taking the lead and working closely with Trisha Rose,
who is the Inclusion facilitator for the city. So we
now have the Universal Design Network of Newfoundland and Labrador

(01:53:30):
home Building Checklists released and Universal Design as our Universal
Design Guide for Accessible and Inclusive Housing, and so it's
on the city's website. It was released yesterday and went
through council and we just really like everybody to check
it out.

Speaker 2 (01:53:46):
Can you give us a little cheat sheet here?

Speaker 3 (01:53:49):
What kind of things are included?

Speaker 15 (01:53:51):
So the first one is the Universal Guide for Accessible
and Inclusive Homes and it's just like what to know?
What does universal design mean? What do inclusive homes look like?
From the Rick Hanson Foundation kind of MythBusters about what
universal design means. And then the home Building Checklist really

(01:54:14):
is a checklist that takes you through kind of every
room in the house that looks at visitable, d ready
and really good star UDI design homes. And it's backed
up why with references from the CFA and MKA and
other sources.

Speaker 3 (01:54:33):
So, how in real terms is this be applied? So
is this a guideline or a rollbook for every developer
or for city developments or how is this going to
be used?

Speaker 15 (01:54:43):
Well, I think that's going to be an evolving question.
I think really this is a guide and a checklist
to help homeowners and builders and developers think about how
do we build a more inclusive community for people of
all ages and states as persons with disabilities. And so

(01:55:04):
if people can pick it up and look at it
and think ahead of time when they're going to build,
or think about how they might do a renovation. And
obviously we'd really love to see everybody kind of adopt
this but use it as a guide to start thinking
and pre planning what you're going to do. And we'd
love to see developers. I'd also love to see real

(01:55:25):
estate agents pick it up and start commenting or coming
up with an index related to UD. We have walkability
and liveability indexes. It would be really nice to see
realtors start to think about universal Design index.

Speaker 3 (01:55:40):
Yeah, because you know, as we mentioned in our last conversation,
or at least I think we did, it's sometime into
the future you may indeed be in need of these
types of designs in your own home, so you know,
and we talk about cost and what it means into
the future. So if you designed it appropriately now for
what might happen into the future, you're in money.

Speaker 15 (01:56:00):
You're up by absolutely it's more cock deficient and not
that really insignificantly in terms of many of the cost upfront,
and also the future might not be that far away
if you have a young and growing family. A lot
of these designs are you know, help young families with strollers,

(01:56:21):
they have people who might have an unexpected and catastrophic injury.
They really also help bring friends and family members who
might have challenges around accessibility to be able to visit
and reduce isolation and really form connections. So it might
be in the future, but the future might be sooner.

Speaker 7 (01:56:38):
Than you think.

Speaker 3 (01:56:38):
Yeah, fair enough, well said anything else we need to
know about it this morning.

Speaker 15 (01:56:42):
Sandra, No, just really appreciate the time and you know,
directing people to go check it out. And thanks again
from U DNNL to the city for their fantastic partnership.

Speaker 2 (01:56:54):
And I'm glad it worked out the way it did.
Have my pleasure.

Speaker 9 (01:56:57):
Happy to have you on take care bubby.

Speaker 3 (01:57:00):
But bye. Yeah, I mean, certainly when we talk about
universal design for private developers, you know, building houses on
spec I'll leave it up to you. It's your money
and your thoughts as to what's appropriate inside your own home.

Speaker 2 (01:57:12):
But this is just a very quick.

Speaker 3 (01:57:14):
Reference and a funny story insofar as academics and the
use of artificial intelligence, so I won't give away the
person's name. So they belong to someone or in a
relationship with someone who works at one of the institutions
of higher learning, and they have to determine on their
own as to whether or not their students have used
artificial intelligence, and to accuse or to prove plagiarism is

(01:57:37):
a very lengthy process and always has been.

Speaker 2 (01:57:40):
But this is a funny story.

Speaker 3 (01:57:41):
Part however, one student left on both sides of their
paper quote unquote, would you like me to make it
sound more personal? They got caught because that's one of
the problems that you get on the heels of the
initial document being producers. Would you like me to make
this sound and read more personal? And of course pretty
dead giveaway and the result they got caught. Let's take

(01:58:02):
a break here. What the penalty for plageris in these
days in school? It used to be that you were
kicked out is certainly when we talked at the university level.
But anyway, let's get a break in. When we come back,
still another segment left for you, do not go away,
look it back. Let's go line number three. Wayne, You're
on the.

Speaker 16 (01:58:16):
Air, Yes, sir, I found a set of keys this
morning when I was out for a walk by the
mailbox and Galaxy Crescent in Airport Heights. I just want
to put it out there to let somebody know if
you lost a set of keys, and.

Speaker 3 (01:58:32):
Good on you're for picking it up and letting us know.
So Galaxy Christs and Airport Heights lost keys by the
mail box. So if you lost your keys, Wayne has them.
Do you want people to call you a Wayne or
call us?

Speaker 16 (01:58:43):
They can call you and you can call me.

Speaker 2 (01:58:46):
I guess yeah that works for us.

Speaker 3 (01:58:48):
Okay, thanks a lot, Wayne, Okay, no problem on you too.
Bye bye.

Speaker 2 (01:58:53):
Yeah, I want to drag it as lose your keys.
So let's go to line number one, Gym.

Speaker 3 (01:58:57):
You're on the air.

Speaker 17 (01:58:59):
He yes, good morning, Good morning every morning. It's a
good morning that I can wake up and got the
energy is training to get out of bed when you
use the baptrum to come out and have a meal.
My glass is always pull never half empty. Anyway, everybody
got a brain opinion, and I got a question this

(01:59:23):
morning on my mind. Okay, and that's beginning our city hall.
I understand the property text is going up and then
regard I'm just looking, I understand halifaxa twice a side
of Saint Chance Halifax together the mayor and the deputy
mayor and fourteen counselors. Saint Chance to get mayor and
depinitey mayor and nine counselors. Do that makes sense? How

(01:59:46):
big this corner Brook out there?

Speaker 3 (01:59:49):
How big is the How large is the council? H Yeah,
I'm not sure.

Speaker 17 (01:59:55):
Okay, that's one question. I got a number one question.
I understand there are Saint Chance council got a thousand employees.
How they implies say head of exict and corner brook
Per household or whatever you want to compare it with.

Speaker 3 (02:00:13):
I mean, I don't know those numbers.

Speaker 17 (02:00:15):
But but then plere's my two questions out came in
my mind this morning where I heard Brown one it's
worth and saying they're very speaking our property text to up.
I had one experience, two experiences with the city. One
experience I went down to talking for her an information
hearing bringing a shade on my property. I have one
third of an acre of building that probably one of

(02:00:36):
the biggest, one of the Saint John's. There were four
women behind the council down there and asked when I said,
what is the regulation? Hearing clearance? Isn't it? And now
one of them could answer. They went inside and spoke
to somebody, and one of them did and come outside
them and said, give me a name and number that
I get somebody card you. And they told me very simply,

(02:00:58):
I'd be ab eight feet away from my house and
four feet away from Fencer boundary line. I said, how
about my u the power coming from my house? He
didn't know the answer. Why couldn't they turn around when
I went in and he said what he wants to
I said, an information shed in the garden. Why couldn't

(02:01:20):
he turn around and passed me on the package put
the information on?

Speaker 3 (02:01:25):
It?

Speaker 17 (02:01:28):
Is that difficult or complex? Before I blame the girls snow,
I blamed superviers for not training these girls in and
also blaming council for why they having got working behind
the counter and the didn't want know any To me,
it doesn't make sense and not logical, it's not common sense.

(02:01:49):
And earlier experience one time I was up I go
for a walk and I'm living down here Apologgie Bay
Road and I worked for around finger for drown and
walk and snow play walk up there, I over there.
There was a flower bend there going to a little
playground there, and there's a two council truck there. Where
four men four eight men standing there talking. Does that

(02:02:11):
make sense? We closely overstaffed at city Hall and this
is why are probably textually going up. We definitely got
more counselors than we need in relationship with everyone else.
I understand down there there, Sandy Hickman got the twenty
first year are given Sandy Hickman credit one thing every
time I looked at him and looked at them and

(02:02:32):
the count to mean his eyes were closed and now
he's wearing their classes so he can't see his eyes.

Speaker 3 (02:02:38):
Yeah, I don't know or care about that. So someone
just sent me a note quick enough. You had a question,
someone had an answer. So the City Saint John's employees
between twelve hundred and fourteen hundred people based on the season,
and apparently Halifax has abround fifty four hundred people work
for the Halifax Regional Municipal Authority.

Speaker 17 (02:02:55):
Okay, that's fair enough here, Okay, Yeah.

Speaker 2 (02:03:01):
I had no idea. Someone just sent me that number.
And I know this person.

Speaker 17 (02:03:04):
They live in Dartmouth, but I don't know number I
haven't got a computer, I haven't got a cell phone,
and that in person, neither one would fair enough.

Speaker 3 (02:03:13):
Some days I wish I wasn't either.

Speaker 17 (02:03:15):
No, I was born and were in Saint John's. I
remember leaving my house, walking up Namin Street, going into
Vanma Park, going down Bahnas a little shit down there
with a wood stove into it, and was a skating
rink down there, and they skate around us, and then
they got the loop up there. But I'm too old
the wolf skating anyway. So doesn't what they got fair enough?

Speaker 3 (02:03:37):
And as a resident of Saint John's, I'm anxious to
find out what this particular budget looks like. And you know, curiously,
Mount Pearl, they are tabled their budget yesterday. No change
the mill rate, no change the water fees. That budget
is about sixty two million dollars. Saint John's over three
hundred million dollars. So let's see here the mill.

Speaker 17 (02:03:56):
Rate over three hundred million dollars. That's the question in it.

Speaker 9 (02:03:59):
What the question.

Speaker 17 (02:04:02):
Why is our budget over three million dollars? Is because
it's absolutely necessary to have this stab, It's necessary to
have the numbrous counselors.

Speaker 3 (02:04:12):
We got.

Speaker 17 (02:04:14):
What do counselors do other than ten meetings? Just st
up and give one second. I'm in Nights of Columbus
of a cent layers. They just had a big parody
for the poor that's strictly run by bounteers. The Legion
and the Shriners and and all the minor sports here
there were all there run by volunteers. I don't know,

(02:04:37):
we're volunteer. I spent thirty years boundingteering. Well, all these
people are running by boundeers. And yet we got a
councilor down there, to council members down there, the millium
paying down there and not to pay now, for last understanding,
we're in fifty thousand or mayors getting the deputy.

Speaker 3 (02:04:55):
Mayors getting yeah, over one hundred thousand dollars for the mayor.
I'm not sure. The rest council members themselves don't get
paid very much, and I would imagine it's a very
busy job.

Speaker 17 (02:05:08):
But mister getting paid something. Look at the monkey they're
spending on advertising candy. I'll like this, Why would you
go draw that trouble, spend money on getting someth binging
up signs and go around putting up signs.

Speaker 2 (02:05:21):
But that's their own money, that's their.

Speaker 17 (02:05:24):
That's not getting paid. Last I heard fifty dollars a year.

Speaker 3 (02:05:28):
I don't know. I don't begrudge a city councilor getting paid.

Speaker 17 (02:05:32):
But book on the volunteers we got here. The volunteers
are the backbone of society.

Speaker 3 (02:05:41):
Yeah, if you backed out volunteers, government wouldn't be able
to pick up the slack. I agree with that. Uh
anything else quick, Jim, before I have to give say goodbye?

Speaker 17 (02:05:50):
Oh says my question. Why is Texas going up?

Speaker 2 (02:05:53):
Well, I don't know if they are.

Speaker 17 (02:05:56):
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (02:05:58):
I guess we'll all find out when they table the budget.

Speaker 17 (02:06:00):
If I get my bill property text, I pay within
thirty days. That's all I know.

Speaker 3 (02:06:05):
Good aning, Because there's plenty of people out there who
are in arrears with the city.

Speaker 17 (02:06:10):
Well boy, I'm not in the arrears.

Speaker 3 (02:06:12):
Good good for you. I appreciate the calls. Thanks, good again,
appreciate your time.

Speaker 17 (02:06:20):
But Darne, you guys, I think about here. I'm down
the little called a sec and the ground to be
white with sand with salved Why can't he be using
bigger percentage of send with salt? Why is it they
going to put down with salt? Of all time.

Speaker 4 (02:06:40):
I don't know.

Speaker 17 (02:06:41):
They come down here and where I'm at the end,
they take the salt with a bit of snow and
they push up on the LNA burn my lam up. Anyway,
that's my rent for the day.

Speaker 3 (02:06:50):
Appreciate your time. Thanks a lot, Jim.

Speaker 17 (02:06:52):
I feel better anyway.

Speaker 3 (02:06:54):
Good.

Speaker 17 (02:06:54):
I know you can really disagree. I don't care. I
got my opinion, and that's my opinion. And everybody got.

Speaker 3 (02:07:01):
An opinion, that's one thing for sure.

Speaker 17 (02:07:05):
Yeah, he didn't have an opinion, You wouldn't have a job,
would you up there?

Speaker 3 (02:07:08):
Exactly right? And I appreciate your call. We're out of
time for this morning, but stay in touch, okay, you
take care, okay, Thanks Jim.

Speaker 17 (02:07:16):
Okay, have a good day, you.

Speaker 3 (02:07:17):
Too, Bye bye, have a good yeah. Oh sorry, is
he still there of count here?

Speaker 2 (02:07:24):
Okay?

Speaker 3 (02:07:25):
Yeah. And the Mount Pearl's City Council table of their budget,
they held things pretty firm. Mill rate did not change
for the residential rate payers seven point seven mills, commercial
rate remains the same, twelve point four mills, Water fees
the same six to twenty five per unit. Waste collection
same at twenty bucks. But we're told to be aware

(02:07:45):
that there may indeed be hiking my property tax. My
properly assessment is up. Whether or not that means there's
also going to be an adjustment upwards on the mill rate.
I guess we'll all find out the same time. All Right,
good show today, big thanks to all hands. We will
indeed pick up this conversation again to more morning here
on VOCM and big Land FM's Open Line on behalf
of the producer David Williams. I'm your host, Patty Daily.
Have yourself a safe, fun happy day. We'll talk in

(02:08:07):
the morning. By bye.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

Betrayal: Weekly

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Wednesday Dec 10th

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

Betrayal: Weekly

All Episodes

Wednesday Dec 10th

Stuff You Should Know