We're here to talk about reinvesting revenue from BC Parks license plate sales into the park systems. It's been an incredibly successful program. The revenue from the sales of these plates goes to conservation to preserve the natural, the cultural, and the recreational values of our parks. Today we're here to celebrate the sale of the 100,000th plate. Among the programs that have been funded from Park Sales are the student ranger program. We have 48 student rangers in eight regions of British Columbia who have finished their training and they're out in the field today. Recently we were in golden years. We just did a lot of hiking, looking around at trails to see what improvements were needed and what was really wonderful about that was the amount of license plates that we saw in golden years. It was incredible. You wanted to kind of stop every car and say thank you for buying one because they've funded these incredible projects that we're working on. British Columbians love to show and demonstrate our love for our great province, our love for its natural beauty, our respect for the environment, and our desire to invest in conservation.


The 2022 annual Southeastern Kentucky Chamber Awards night is September 27th for tickets call<PHONE_NUMBER>. You can also watch live on the free Mountain Top TV app. The Battle of Middle Creek reenactment will return September 9th through the 11th for the first time since 2019. The weekend will feature three battle reenactments and a 9-11 memorial. So not only does the battlefield feature for the public the reenactments but there's also several educational stations around everything from a spinning wheel to learn how the clothing was made because that was a huge reason. One of the main reasons that the Union side was able to win is they had proper clothing during the winter. So they'll be able to see that a blacksmith music they'll be able to see bugles and how those calls are made harmonica and just really kind of step back in time for a moment. The Battle of Middle Creek and the Battle of Ivy Creek reenactments will be held at 2pm Saturday and Sunday and a special night battle will be held at 8.30pm on Saturday. The Middle Creek battle it wasn't the largest it wasn't the most prominent in the Civil War while it was really prominent in Eastern Kentucky because it was the largest. It changed course for a lot of history so one it was really important to President Lincoln at the time that they win this battle because the Union side desperately needed a victory and it was so important that they won that in his home state of Kentucky but then it also opened up a pathway into Virginia and West Virginia and then from that battle President Garfield actually led the Union troops to victory on this battlefield and later ran a lot of his presidency campaign from not only that battle but the really good deeds that he did while here. The event is free to the public and open to all ages. For more information visit Prestonsburg Tourism on Facebook. For Mountain Top News, I'm Brianna Robinson.


This is Think Tech Hawaii, Community Matters here. OK, we're live. And it's Hawaii at the State of Clean Energy. I'm Jay Fidel. We have a special show. This is a special show with one of our special guests who came down to participate in the Clean Energy Day conference took place earlier this week. So this show is Hawaii State of Clean Energy. And our title is, What Can We Learn from the University of Wisconsin on Smart Transportation? And logically, we're going to talk to somebody from the University of Wisconsin. And he's the director of the State Smart Transportation Initiative at the University of Wisconsin. And he is Eric Sunquist. Welcome to the show, Eric. Thank you. Thanks for having me. Thanks for having me. Yeah. So what an excitement. You came down here with Craig Dirksen of Portland. You guys were both material contributions to our effort on Monday. Thank you. And we heard a lot from you. We talked with you. You answered our questions. You were engaged in a really good conversation that lifted the value of the program, the importance of the program. Well, I wanted to review that with you or relive it, if you will. And I wanted to get your thoughts now, just the two of us, just along here, about how it went for you. What did you think of the proceedings? What did you think of the collective lesson of the day? So first, let's talk about what it is at the State Smart Transportation Initiative in the University of Wisconsin. Yeah, so we've been around since 2010. We grew out of a research center at the UW. We're now co-housed with Smart Growth America in DC, so we're jointly operated. But we work with state DOTs around the country, including Hawaii DOT, mainly. But we work with some other large entities and some smaller ones, too, but mainly state DOTs. We work on sustainability issues. We work on modernizing practice and policy, and those two are different things. Often we have great policy goals. We're going to reduce VMT, or I should explain what that is. I guess we can in a bit. Emissions, we're going to get people to work better and so forth, but the practice, it's hard to change the practice, the decisions that are actually made. So we work a lot on practice. Well, let's talk about the payload on this. So you're in the University of Wisconsin. Where is that in Madison? It is. And then you're actually speaking to the whole country. You're consulting with them, offering them advice, writing papers, consulting in one way or another. And it's not limited to Madison or the university or to the state of Wisconsin. No, and most of our work is outside of Wisconsin. We have not gotten much traction with the Wisconsin DOT. But you want to be, and you are, a national consulting organization. You're doing university, what do you call it, from academia to industry, from academia to government all over the country. Yeah, so UW has this thing called the Wisconsin idea that dates back to the Robert LaFollette era, where the idea was, the idea, I know pun intended, was that the ivory tower shouldn't be apart from the world. That people who learn about whether it's engineering or policy or anything should actually be engaged with people who are making decisions in the real world. So we come out of that and we do convenings. So we bring state DOTs together for meetings. We do technical assistance. So we were here for some other meetings around that in addition to Clean Energy Day.  So the payload, the takeaway then, the product of your efforts, it's in events where you speak and participate in panels, I suppose. It's where you publish and what else? Well, most of it is in technical assistance or what you were calling consulting. We call it technical assistance that we're not a for-profit consultant, but it's kind of the same thing. Yeah, okay. Well, it's pretty valuable because then you're doing outreach, you're helping people all over and you're helping us by coming down here.  Can you summarize your remarks? What were you presenting to the crowd at Hawaii Energy Clean Energy Day? Yeah, sure. So Clean Energy Day's focus was on transportation, which is why I was asked to speak. And typically when energy people come into transportation, there's a little bit of a, I wouldn't say a mismatch, but a lot of people in the energy world come from the utility side. That's what they've been working on, policy around coal plants, policy around utilities. And the transportation policy world is a lot different. When I get out of this though, I'd be interested in your thoughts about it from where you stand. Is that the whole movement started out on the energy side. Everybody's interested in better generation of renewables, moving into the new technologies and all that. And then just like Hawaii Energy Policy Forum, somebody said, wait a minute, we got to look at transportation because there's so much energy. This is the biggest generator of greenhouse gas now. Yeah, right. I mean, the grid is getting cleaner and transportation is lagging. So you got to look at that. So and it's very sophisticated to deal with energy in transportation. So you look the other side of the fence, you look for somebody you can sort of meet in the middle, somebody on the transportation policy side, and you find out those guys are not thinking about energy. Am I right? So half right, they are thinking about it. And again, I think a lot of DOTs and states have good policy goals around transportation that we're gonna reduce greenhouse gas by X percent by X year, but it doesn't translate into actions and decisions often in practice. So if you go to the average planner engineer and say, we need you to reduce greenhouse gas, they got nothing. There is not. They got stats. That's not what they're working on. They're working on should we widen this road because it's congested or should we put in another traffic light because there's a danger there? That's what they're trained to do and that's what all the books in civil engineering around transportation are about. So there's a disconnect between these policy goals and the practice and that's what we're trying to, that's what I was trying to talk about. We're working on here with some stakeholders around Hawaii. Yeah.  Your state smart transportation initiative does include reference to energy because energy is part of all of that. Energy and environmental outcomes in general. Anybody else at your level with doing an initiative like this in other colleges? Oh yeah. So there's a lot of papers written about this. There's a lot of discussion and there are some actions. I don't want to say that it's just, this is, I thought of this. That's not the case at all. In fact, back 10 years ago or 12 years ago, a lot of us in the Midwest worked on a Midwest Governors Association package of greenhouse gas reduction efforts and there was a huge emphasis on transportation. So, but it's a more diffuse policy target and a practice target than the more centralized utility world. So we've been thinking about that as such, focused on that for a long time, but this we haven't really integrated it with all the technology and all the energy aspects of it. And I was very impressed, for example, in your use of technology determine what was it? Access, accessibility. So you take a given neighborhood, given community and you look at each destination as against every other destination and you determine accessibility through transportation. And it's actually a very complex matrix. It's almost infinite to have all these places connected with all these other places and do accessibility for all of the connections. It's complex, but you know what? We got computers, they can do that. It's not that complex. It would have been, this has been written in papers for two generations now. This is not a new concept, but the computing power and the big data that we have now and make it practice ready. So I mean, what the point of that was when you look at transportation, we basically have three legs of the stool when we're talking about greenhouse gas. We have what are the vehicles? How efficient are they basically? What are the fuels? So even if the car is efficient, there are different carbon intensities in gasoline, say. Have to analyze each different mode. Yeah, so while walking is a zero GHG mode, is that one easy? Yeah, transit has some, but by and large we're talking about automobiles and you can improve the auto carbon footprint by having more than one person in the car at a time. But anyway, we're looking at vehicles and fuels, and then the third leg of the stool, which is where infrastructure and planning and all the stuff we work on come in the most is vehicle miles traveled or VMT that I referred to. So normally what we do is we look at congestion and delay and those sorts of things and those tell us what to go and put money into or to improve or to expand. But if you look at accessibility, what it does a number of things. One, it describes what people really care about most getting out of transportation. It's not that important how fast I go if I can get where I'm going quickly. So if my destinations are close together, then maybe I can slower vehicle speed or I can even get out and walk or something and be there. And I can make a plan. I can plan to go this way and not that way. I can make a plan to use this mode and not that mode and get there faster. Right, so you can look at the different modes in one paradigm, which is different than the traditional how fast we go in mode because it's different standards for walking and different standards for, I mean, there's really not a how fast can I walk mode standard at all. But for cars and transit. Well, if your traffic is completely congested right in the next block and people are spending 20 minutes moving five inches. Yeah. Walking is faster. It can be. So the point of, if we look at different modal accessibilities, which you described well, it's just like how easily can I get from where I am to the potential opportunities that I might want to go visit, where that could be a job, it could be a school, it could be a grocery store, it could be another house, it could be whatever.  If everything is inaccessible except by car, then people are just gonna drive. And then when I know that, my planners and engineers have some traction they can say, let's raise up the accessibility on the other modes. We can make some land use decisions, we can make some transportation decisions. And we can see empirically that where accessibility is higher by walking, say, BMT, vehicle miles travel go down and emissions go down. So all of a sudden we have something that practitioners can use as the point. Let's talk about technology or at least improvements. You know, take a system as exists, you want to improve accessibility, reduce vehicle miles traveled. So you may have to make changes. I mean, for example, and I'm only speaking of Honolulu now, I stop at the traffic light and I wait for three minutes or four and I notice that nobody is crossing vertically to me, nobody, there is no other traffic there. And I say, gee, couldn't they do better? Couldn't they have sensors that determine there's no other traffic coming and free me up to cross the intersection earlier than three minutes.  So arguably, if you put in some sensors and put in some technology, I'm improving my accessibility in that mode on that street, going to that destination. So that's gotta be part of the planning, doesn't it? Also, let me throw one more thing in, if you find that the street is not adequate to get there, that you need another street, an alternative street, this happens much, a lot of time in Hawaii with the valleys and the cuts through the mountains and so forth, where you have one road only. If something happens on that road, everybody gets tied up, happens all the time. So you say to yourself, well, let's use some condemnation here, let's make a second road, let's have some relief from the total dependency on one road and that's gotta be better. So I'm just throwing that in as a possible alternative improvement that you would make in order to make life better. Sure, so yeah, so we're talking about auto wheel access now, accessibility. And your first point is absolutely dead on. Often when we think about problems with accessibility, by any mode, we think about we gotta build stuff. But operating the system that already exists, the foot within the same footprint can be very efficient and so whether it's signalization improvements or transit route improvements, signalization improvements for pedestrians. I mean, I've stayed here near the beach and spent a lot of time waiting for lights to change walking around in the past three or four days. So we have a very high rate of pedestrian fatality, by the way, which could be resolved with improved signals. More signals sometimes, and there's variety of different kinds. So there's a lot of, sometimes when you have long blocks, it's really impractical for the pedestrian to walk all the way down, cross and walk all the way back and they call it jaywalking, but it's really kind of unfair because it's just the pedestrian doing what is efficient. I do it all the time, you know. And in fact, I would have the adventure to say that every time I walk, you could arguably say it's jaywalking. Yeah, so let's just talk to each other. All right, okay, all right. Took me a minute. That's Eric Sunquist. He's the director of the State Smart Transportation Initiative at the University of Wisconsin, serving the whole country and will be right back after this short break to further discuss what can be done in Hawaii will be right back. I look familiar. He calls himself the ultra fan, but that doesn't explain all this. What? He planned his party, planned the snacks, he even planned to coordinate colored shirts, but he didn't plan to have a good time. Now you wouldn't do this in your own house, so don't do it in your team's house. Know your limits and plan ahead so that everyone can have a good time. Okay, we're back alive. We're here with Eric Sunquist. He's the director of the State Smart Transportation Initiative at the University of Wisconsin. We're delighted to have him here and where our title of the show is let's see, what can we learn? What can we learn from the University of Wisconsin and smart transportation? And guess what? Sharon Moriwaki is here. She's the co-chair of the Y Energy Policy Forum. She put that program on on Monday. She's gonna tell you a little about it and Eric's role in the larger picture of that program. Well, you know, we've been grappling with transportation, clean transportation, energy and transportation for so long. And so clean energy pathways to clean transportation was the theme for Monday's Clean Energy Day. And we wanted to do something different. We wanted to not only bring experts like Eric in, but also have them listen and listen to people who are doing things in the state and putting that all together and actually themselves coming to consensus on what kinds of goals do we wanna take forward? And so we really appreciate Eric's role on measuring success and clean transportation. As part of the problem sometimes is that you have goals and you don't have measures. And so they stay on the books and stay on the shelf. That's called pie in the sky. Whatever you wanna call it, it doesn't get done. I guess they say you only do what you measure. And so we really appreciated Eric's coming over not only to speak to us, but to work with the people who really do need to make things happen and can make things happen are the transportation folks. So he was with transportation planners and with people that we don't usually see on the energy side of the house. So he's making that connection for us because he has a background in energy but also working with transportation. It's the integration of energy and transportation. That's what we're looking at, it's integration, collaboration. And as the mayor said the other day, you not only think to the choir, you expand the choir. And how can we bring people to work shoulder to shoulder which is what we did on Monday to come up with goals and actions. So we're trying to get a report out and we've been working hard on that. So you not only spoke in the keynote about what you were doing in the University of Wisconsin and all the analysis you were making, the computer models you were making, but you also actually consulted with some people while you were here. Can you talk about that? Yeah, sure. So we are working with HDOT over the next several months on this or maybe up to a year. That's the Hawaii Department of Transportation, the State Department. And the counties. And the counties too. Right, so we're working with HDOT though, specifically on some follow up to a previous workshop that looked at scoping transportation projects and some better practices for them. And it's sort of now attached that effort to what we talked about on Monday at Clean Energy Day. So we had counties in Ampo, the MPO for Oahu and HDOT in a workshop for two days talking about, again, performance measures. How do we measure decisions or apply measures to decisions that we're making so that we point in the right direction and not the wrong one. And bring energy and other considerations into these decisions that haven't been there before. So how did you feel about it? I mean, but were the agencies you're talking with, were they coming to action points here? Give us an honest appraisal. Yeah, so they, the counties are in different places in some, which you would expect. I mean, Oahu and Kauai are vastly different in scale. Yet the energy was universally really good across all of the islands and with the state. And the MPO, they requested. So this is something we, yeah. So this is something that we were coming and trying to sell. This was a request. And they've all been working on performance measures and putting them into practice for probably a varying time depending on the island. Some are a little further along than the others. So how well do you think Oahu is doing? From what you've seen. That's an open-ended question. Yeah. And it's really hard to answer because there's so many different aspects of transportation. So clearly you have this massive rail project that is really important and should, you know, will expect that it succeeds. That could be a real game changer here in Oahu. I mean, that can be a real VMT. Either way, if it succeeds or it doesn't succeed. Well, true. Yeah, but doesn't then, that'll be tough too. But generally the projections on ridership on almost every transit project in the country in the modern era, you know, dating back maybe to the 70s. They always underestimate ridership because of the models. So unless something is really different about this and I'm not really in the weeds on the projections and the modeling, it should perform really well. And that provides a big opportunity, we were talking about accessibility to have transportation-oriented development, which the city is big into. Sometimes intentional, like we're gonna, we have some state-owned land or the city's gonna bring some land together here so we can sort of be developers. Or organically, if you have this transit system that is providing new accessibility as a spine and you can provide walking access to it at many different points, the land uses can just respond sort of organically and densify in places where you'd like. So what do you favor, plan TOD or organic development? I mean, I don't think you have to choose. I think if you have an opportunity to do some, if you have state-owned land, which there is a lot in Hawaii, I understand, then why not like plan that? On the other hand, you're not gonna be able to do that at every stop or every station area. So where you're not doing intentional TOD, let's make the organic stuff really work. Let's make the zoning compatible. Let's make sure the walking and the routes in and out very easy. This isn't any news to anybody in the city of Honolulu. I think they're thinking about that. No, but there's so many components to play together. And I see your initiative as a place where you evaluate the components and you make them work together. And you have to give appropriate emphasis and stress on some over others. And that depends on the community involved and what people want and what is available. And for example, bikes. Bikes that don't do well up steep hills. But bikes do well on the roads, the main roads around Oahu that are sea level. So clearly, I've just asked a question. What is the future of bikes here? Do you think bikes are promising? Do you think bikes are a larger element, a larger element in the development of clean transportation here than they would be in some other place? I saw a bunch of people out on them last night, particularly the bike share with the flashing lights. I understand those are ahead of projection in terms of ridership. I think that there's a long way to go in terms of retrofitting the road so that people feel safe to do it. It costs money. It costs money? No, it doesn't always cost that much money. What it costs is a trade off. Like, am I willing to give up some parking spaces so that the bikes can go through here? Or a lane of traffic or something like that. So those sorts of hard choices are more of a barrier than the money usually. The money for a bike lane isn't usually very much. How do you make these choices in the perfect world? In a world where you have seen it would be most efficient, how do you make those choices politically? Community-wise, how do you make those choices? Yeah, it really depends. It's a messy process when it gets to community. People have their own set of beliefs and their own interests. Some people's interests make track right against having a bike lane because they have a store on the street and they are certain that if people can't park there, they will not come to the store anymore. Now, that may not be true. So the one linking thing is that you can, and we work in academia and consulting, is to bring as much information to the table as possible. So at least if there's gonna be this political, messy discussion that, you know, honestly doesn't always turn out for the best. But you wanna make sure they understand the implications and effects of making it this way or that way. You can at least tamp down some clearly irrational or unfounded claims. Others are just policy decisions. Experiences like in Hawaii where people love their automobiles and how do you transfer from that love of automobiles to helping to, everybody share the road to get to where we wanna go faster or better, has any other jurisdiction gone from that point to sharing the road? Yeah, they have. There's some famous cases in Washington DC and New York. When I lived in the DC area in the 80s, you could drive anywhere, park anywhere. There were no bikes. The transit system was not used a lot. And now the modal share of people traveling in Washington is mostly not by car. And there's not really that much congestion in the district per se. Now, when you get to the suburbs, it's epic congestion because that's still very car-oriented. So, and some of that was land uses being built close together so people could walk and that you didn't have to drive. Some of it was infrastructure. So they have counterflow bike lanes. They have added to the capacity of transit and so forth. So it's both sides of the coin, the land use and the transportation. And we don't, you know, we try not to like chastise people for driving. And that doesn't help anything, right? Because some people have a really good reason to have to drive. They just, you know. And a number of reasons. Yeah, and I drive some.   But if we give people the opportunity to drive less, driving is a cost. If we give people the opportunity to drive less, a lot of people will do that. And that's really the goal.   And some people will stop driving readily and some will do it with a little more incentive and so forth. Talk about infrastructure. We're remaking this, your initiative and like initiatives. And maybe what happens here in Hawaii, remaking the society, the country. Because somebody said on Monday that 50% of the land area in a given city is dedicated to transportation, 50%. Including parking. Parking is the big one. 50%. And, you know, when you think about it, the economy of the country is largely in the cities. The population is largely in the cities and how the cities work is sort of a metric on how the country works. And so we've gotta use those public spaces and I say public spaces advisably. You know, your apartment in your condo or my house, it's not a public space. But everything else is a public space. The city flows through these public spaces and I don't think we've paid enough attention in the past few years. While the community gets more active, has more to do, we all have more to do. More places to go, we're used to that. Like the old days with the car. It was a car only, you mentioned a little while ago. You know, it was not happening as fast. People were not doing as much. Now they're doing more, they gotta get around. And that's good. Economy, you know, quality of life, you gotta get around. And so we have gotta catch up with that in my view, I'm interested in your view. And we gotta make, you know, public spaces that work better. And these are, transportation is all about public spaces and that means we're remaking our structure, our infrastructure in the community and indeed we're remaking our cities and indeed we're remaking our lives. A whole thing is in transformation. And when you add to that, at the same time in parallel we're remaking our energy generation systems, you know, could this be a better time to be alive or could it be a worse time to be alive? I'm not sure. We'll see. What's your comment? Well, you're right. I mean, it is, the transportation infrastructure is vast and not appreciated because so much of it is parking. And it falls in different silos. So the Department of Transportation doesn't own the parking. They don't really think that much about it. The people who own parking don't really own the roads and then there's local roads and there's state roads and so there's a bunch of silos and it's hard to bring it all together. But there are great signs of that happening. So, you know, it used to be in the U.S. the walking environment was just a social safety net. It was there if somebody absolutely had to but the assumption was everybody else probably would drive except in a few densities where there was still transit. And now we know that we can make those areas livable. Those are places, not just conduits. Those are places in that people linger there or if they shop there or that's part of their living space because it's a place where they can meet their neighbors because it's a nice environment instead of just a conduit again. You know, at one point our house was full of all hallways and shrunken little disconnected rooms so we got to make the rooms, these places that were hallways into kind of rooms again.  But we can make all the rest of the stuff much better. Better quality of life, better quality of city, better economy, the whole thing is better. I mean, do you like your work? Yeah, very much. It's pretty interesting. I guarantee one thing, it's going to get more interesting as more people realize these processes. And you know what's going to make it really interesting in about four or five years or even sooner is autonomous vehicles. Further complication. That changes a lot, that's another disruptor. So that, nobody knows quite how that's going to go. Is it going to be, are people going to like buy them and own them privately and then decide, I can live way out in the country because land is cheap and it's pretty and I'm going to spend all day driving back and forth and then we just have. We use more energy. More emissions go through the roof and we have rivers of metal that make everything unlivable along the conduits or is it more of a shared mobility transit model where you have electric vehicles and lower emissions, more mobility, including for people who don't have mobility now because of income or disability or what have you or the age. So it'll probably be some mix, but policy and practice are going to play right into that. Hard problems. Some kind of regulation. Yeah, regulation, government action, it's really a million things all feeding in and it's critical, it's critical to our lives and our future by community and by nation, but we're almost out of time. So I want to ask you one last area and that is what's your future with Hawaii, May? Do you have some lingering contact here? Will you have some lingering, do you want to have lingering contact here? How can we find you? Are you coming back? Will you come back to our table? Sharon wants to know. So the answer is yes. We have this work that is funded to work through Hawaii DOT, but also with the counties and with the MPO. So I think we're already trying to put some on the books for January. Please come back. Yes, we will. Great, because we need you. Coming back to Hawaii in January from Wisconsin makes a lot more sense than coming here in August. There are many benefits. Yeah. And you have to tell us where you are, so you can give us some feedback in January. Probably no. Oh, we'll be, we're gonna have some check in with our stakeholders and hopefully have a lot to show by then and a lot to do. Well, thanks on a number of levels for coming down here, for talking with us, for participating in the program, and for coming back. Thank you. I'm really glad to be here. Eric Sunquist. Now, Sharon, you have to close. Oh, okay. Well, we're really pleased to have Eric and people like Eric really caring about Hawaii, because I think we sometimes have consultants come in, they don't know about Hawaii, but they come in and they tell us how to do things. And I think you're very respectful of what we have and considered an expert to bring to us what we can glean and really use to our benefit. So we want you to come back. We want to hear from you and we want to make that connection continue. Great, thank you. Thank you, Eric. Thanks for coming down. Aloha. Aloha. Thank you, Sharon. Aloha. Thank you.


Hello, everyone. It's great to be with you all today to discuss one of the most pressing issues in our society and the innovative ways in which we can and must come together to solve it. My name is Mahalak Ghatacho and I'm the Managing Director of Corporate Racial Equity at PolicyLink. My work focuses on igniting the racial equity movement more broadly and deeply in the business community and building the pathway for the anti-racist, equitable corporate leadership we need today to meet the scale of the challenges before us. For those of you that do not know PolicyLink, we are a Black-led National Research and Action Institute based in Oakland, California, devoted to advancing racial and economic equity. For over two decades, PolicyLink has been building and leading the racial and economic equity movement in America, dedicated to amplifying the wisdom and resilience of people of color and low-income communities in order to remake our social and economic systems to work for all of us, not just some of us. Our guiding ethos in this work is equity. That means the just and fair inclusion into a society in which all of us can participate, prosper and reach our full potential. Centuries of racism, exclusion, and exploitation from all sectors in our society have left over 100 million people in America living at or below the poverty line. That includes half of all people of color in this nation. That also includes one quarter of all white people, all of whom are struggling to make ends meet in the richest nation in the history of humankind. The devastating pandemic and our long overdue national reckoning on racial injustice have thrust this reality into sharp relief and exposed the structural failures of our nation. Re-designing our nation now to effectively serve people of color and ultimately all in our multiracial democracy is our generation's greatest challenge. It is also our greatest opportunity to finally truly live up to our highest ideals. Today, I'm going to talk about how the business community is on the leading edge of the racial and economic equity movement, but they just don't know it yet. Consider these points. America's face is changing. By 2045, people of color will be the majority. Our rising diversity is a tremendous asset if only everyone can access what they need to thrive. If the opposite happens and economic conditions do not improve among people of color, a larger and larger share of the population will struggle to make ends meet. We already know from the National Equity Atlas that racial gaps in income and employment cost our nation over $2 trillion in 2018 alone, and the trillions in losses keep stacking up every year. With the changing face of America, growing economic inequity is not sustainable for our society or our economy. America's priorities are also changing. Now more than ever, business leaders are seen as civic leaders. Workers, customers, communities, and investors all want business leaders to do more on racial and economic equity. According to Just Capital's recent polling, 81% of black Americans and 64% of Americans overall say companies have more work to do to achieve racial equity in America. And according to the latest Edelman Trust Barometer, right now the most trusted institution to do what is right on racism is my employer quote unquote at 73%. As America's face is changing and our priorities are changing, the business community has unparalleled resources and skills sitting right on the table, all within reach to bring about the racial and economic equity we all want. On an annual basis, the nonprofit sector has $1 trillion to address social issues, and our government has $3 trillion. Meanwhile, the private sector has $22 trillion in resources annually. On top of that, business leaders possess unique skills in shifting our legal and regulatory frameworks to their will. When CEOs speak, whether with their dollars or their voices, our politicians and lawmakers invariably listen. Those skills, ably directed and wielded, could unlock the public policy wins we need to finally achieve racial and economic equity. This is why the business community is on the leading edge of the racial and economic equity movement. Business leaders not only possess the right skills and resources to significantly advance the movement, but the changing face and priorities of America means they also have every incentive to do so. So how do we do this together? It starts with the CEO blueprint for racial equity. For over five years now policy link together with FSG, a mission driven consulting firm at the forefront of supporting leaders and creating large scale social change. We have been identifying and amplifying how businesses can advance racial and economic equity as a superior growth model. Our research shows the broad based benefits to all of society when businesses address the needs of the most vulnerable within their ranks, within their communities and across society. Last year, our two organizations came together with Just Capital, a leader in evaluating companies on stakeholder capitalism to release the CEO blueprint for racial equity. The blueprint is the pathway for business leaders to tap into their greatest strengths to significantly advance racial equity across all of their domains of influence within their four walls, within the communities in which they are situated and at the broader societal level. It does so by outlining actions and new ways of operating for businesses across their entire footprint. Within the four walls of the company, that includes paying living wages to all workers and designing products and services that drive racially equitable outcomes. Within communities where businesses are situated, that includes developing authentic and sustained connection to communities beyond charity and annual giving campaigns. At the broader societal level, the blueprint focuses on actions that activate the outsized power of businesses to shape our laws and regulatory frameworks and defend our democracy. By meaningfully adopting the actions outlined in the blueprint across all three domains of corporate influence and impact, businesses have the potential to significantly advance racial and economic equity across our nation. So how are business leaders doing so far on tackling racial injustice and economic inequity? We all see bold new diversity commitments and investments into communities of color announced by businesses almost every day. Businesses have also emerged as a leading source of funding for racial justice efforts. But what is the level of engagement of business leaders in racial equity work beyond their public statements? How are they applying the blueprint, if at all, in their day to day operations? In the months following the release of the blueprint, we sought to answer these questions by interviewing 40 C-suite leaders and senior executives, mostly CEOs, spanning 38 companies across a broad range of industries. Together, the leaders we interviewed employ more than 4.3 million workers. The seven takeaways you see here reflect the most common messages we heard from business leaders and the common barriers we see across companies. Today I'll touch on just a few. The first takeaway is that there's a fear of making mistakes. While business leaders have a deeper awareness of shared complicity in perpetuating inequity and greater commitment to listen and learn, they still fear making mistakes and moving forward, whether it's a fear of saying the wrong thing internally or doing the wrong thing externally. We don't want to mess this up, it was a common theme. The third takeaway is that there's still uncertainty amongst business leaders about the power of equity. While all the possible cases for advancing racial and economic equity have been made effectively for years, the moral case, the business case, and the macroeconomic case, business leaders have not fully embraced all the benefits of advancing racial equity within their workplaces and across society. There's still hesitancy around prioritizing racial equity as a source of business innovation and economic growth. Our fifth takeaway is that there's an overwhelming sense of urgency to take some action, but also tunnel vision about the nature of racial equity work. The combination of these two forces present a significant barrier to more meaningful change. We know and research demonstrates that long-term strategies are more likely to create lasting impact. But many business leaders have this overpowering sense of urgency to respond to the public's expectation of change with quick actions. On top of this, business leaders often think of racial equity work quite narrowly as just about diversifying the workforce and undertaking philanthropic activities. But as you've already heard today, it is so much more than that. You can learn more about our findings and how business leaders can tackle each of these common barriers in our latest report, Corporate Insights into the CEO Blueprint for Racial Equity. So where do these findings lead us? Well, it's clear that business leaders need more guidance in centering equity and justice within their four walls, within their communities and across society. So later this month, we will be releasing an updated CEO blueprint for racial equity, in addition to providing additional strategic guidance for business leaders to move from incremental action to enterprise-wide transformation. Plus, to address the number one question we hear from business leaders, what is everyone else doing? We will share profiles of companies making progress in each domain of influence and impact. We're just a few weeks away now from the release of the new blueprint, and we hope you all stay tuned for that. Looking forward, we know the work ahead for the business community is going to be incredibly challenging. While the blueprint provides a North Star for business leaders, they need more than that to play a productive, long-term role in advancing racial and economic equity. The missing ingredient is a set of standards that sets the bar for what good looks like, embeds accountability, and establishes consistency for how businesses should approach, measure, disclose, and speak publicly about their racial equity journeys within the company, within the communities in which they're situated, and within society. This is the next step to support the private sector as a whole towards more equitable ways of operating. Our three organizations, PolicyLink, Just Capital, and FSG, we are now embarking on a multi-year effort to develop rigorous corporate standards for racial equity, informed by those closest to these challenges and working together with a strong ecosystem of partners, including BLab, the Global Impact Investing Network, and many others. You'll hear more about this effort in the coming months, including how you can get involved by sharing your views, your stories, and your challenges. You know, we've never been where we are right now. Never before has there been so much potential for structural transformation that can finally benefit all Americans. But none of us, including business leaders, can do this work alone. We have to work together to co-create the future we all need. It's up to us right now to align efforts across sectors and collectively take action that is commensurate with the scale of the challenge. Our success, the nation's success, lies in building unlikely alliances to maximize impact. All of us, especially business leaders, need to get comfortable assessing 360 degrees of our influence and impact, setting bold, uncomfortable goals, and then holding ourselves, our colleagues, our peers, and our partners accountable. The business community also needs to get comfortable listening to the voices of racial equity movement leaders whose expertise is absolutely necessary to dismantle the barriers holding back the promise of our nation. From the constitutional convention to reconstruction to the civil rights movement, our nation has too often failed to meet the moment when racial equity was within our grasp. The hundred million cannot wait any longer for change. Tinkering around the edges will not cut it anymore, and being neutral is the same as holding the status quo firmly in place. We're now in an age of accountability, and we must go big and work together to finally remake this nation to work for all of us, not just for some of us. So how are you going to lead in this moment and beyond? What is the legacy you want to leave?


The people of Sweden are preparing for war with Russia. In Sweden, fearing a possible war with Russia, the population began to prepare for general defense. Sudwest published information about this. Canned food, portable filters for drinking water, first aid kit, and radio. These are what the government recommends to keep in reserve, the information stated. Even experts have called to collect three months of food reserves. Charlotte Petri, the head of the Swedish Emergency Situations Agency, said that the concept of total protection is to prepare the population to live independently in crisis conditions. The Finnish Security and Intelligence Service warned Sweden of increased threats from Russia after the country officially became the 32nd NATO member ending decades of neutrality in the wake of war in Ukraine. Finland, who shares a 1,340 kilometer long border with Russia, joined NATO on April the 4th, 2023, after Russia began its special military operation in Ukraine. The Nordic countries NATO membership drew military threats from the Kremlin, with Russian President Vladimir Putin accusing the West of dragging Finland into a military alliance and creating a rift between Moscow and Helsinki. According to the Finnish authorities, since joining the Western Military Alliance, Russian operations against the country have increased sharply. Finnish Security and Intelligence Service warned that the same development may await Sweden. We have to be ready. Finnish Security and Intelligence Services acting head Timur Turanen told Swedish local broadcaster SVT Nijeta, you should never underestimate the capabilities of the Russian Intelligence Service. They are skilled and we must be ready, he added. Sweden's accession to NATO is proof that Russian President Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine has failed. Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said when President Putin launched his full-scale invasion two years ago, he wanted less NATO and more control over his neighbors. The Norwegian politician said,


the challenge of the Yukon. The Wonder Dog King, swiftest and strongest of Estimal lead dogs, blazes the trail through storm and snow for Sergeant Preston, as he meets the challenge of the Yukon. Sergeant Preston was typical of the small band of Northwest mounted police who preserved law and order in the new Northwest country where the greed for wealth and power led to frequent violence and bloodshed. But in spite of the odds against them, Sergeant Preston and his Wonder Dog King met that challenge and justice ruled triumphant. It was early spring in the North country, the rivers were frozen and the snow covered the ground, but the days were lengthening. Sergeant Preston of the Northwest Mounted Police was making a patrol from the Selkirk to Whitehorst. About five miles out of town, he stopped his dog team as he recognized the prospector. Hello! Hello, Sergeant Preston! Hello there, Bill! Hello, Sergeant Preston! How are you? Fine, thanks. Anything new around here? No. I'm just on the way over to see Pete Tracy and Little Jones. They ain't seen them for over a week. Well, I'll go with you. Maybe people give us some supper. I sure they will. Come on along. Untang! Untang, you hushies! How's Pete getting along? This time, his wife dying the way she did is pretty hard on him. His claims sure are paying off, though. He's taking lots of gold out of it. Must be hard for that little girl it is, John. It's downright pitiful the way, the way she's tried to take her mother's place. Poor kid ain't bigger in a minute and she's even tried to cook and keep the house clean. Are they rough on a nature, Roland? Well, there isn't much Pete can do. He had to get the gold out of his claim and he hasn't a relative in the world to send John to. Poor kid. Well, if Pete figures he's got enough now or will have at the end of the summer, leave the Yukon and take John back to civilization. Glad to hear it. Well, here's the cabin hooking. Hurry up! Okay. Door's open, huh?   Nobody here. They probably are. Bill, look. My gosh. Pete. He's dead. Shot through the head. Yeah. Well, I wonder where John is. In here. Is that number, Sharpen? Bill, did Pete have any enemies? Not that I know of. Wait a minute. Sharpen, look. Here's why they killed him. Bobby, found out where his gold was hidden. See that blue sport pulled up out of the floor? Yes. That's where he kept it. He showed it to me once. He had between $15,000 and $20,000 worth of gold hidden there. Oh, why didn't he put it in the bank? I told him to, but it's far out of town. And he thought it was safe. Well, it's gone. Well, why wouldn't they kill John, too? Where do you think it's... It's easy for some people to kill a man.  But... Come on, Bill. There must be some tracks around here somewhere. Here, King. Come here, Bill. Look, Preston. Here's some tracks leading north. Yes. Tracks of two men. And here's some smaller ones. They must be John's. Snow's all disturbed. And her tracks don't go no further. She probably wouldn't go with them. They clipped her up. I'm following this trail right away. Is it all right if I go with you, Preston? Pete was a good friend of mine. All right, Bill. I may need you in case we find John. If we abandon her somewhere, you'll have to bring her back. We'll put Pete's body in his bunk and bury him when we get back. Darkness had fallen, but Sergeant Preston and Bill kept on. King, Preston's huge lead dog, led them on the trail of the murderers when it was too dark to see the tracks in the snow. It was past dawn when they came to Lake La Barre. Oh, King. Hi, I'll see you. Here's the lake. Suppose they tried to cross it? No, it's too dangerous this time of year. I wish it were lighter. John's just breaking. He can't see very far. Hey, Sergeant. Huh? Look out there on the lake. Can you see somebody? What? Yeah, I can barely see them. Preston, they've gone to the ice. All the fools they should never have tried to cross. Come on, Bill. Jones with them. We'll leave the dogs here. A quick netball. It's too late. They're half a mile away. We'll have to try. Here, King. Hurry, Bill. Careful, Bill. This ice is treacherous. That's no use. There's a hole we went through. Not a sign of any of them. Oh, little Jones. Oh, if it went through her, I'd say good riddance.  Well, nothing we can do. Come on, King. We may as well go back. The bright spring sunshine dazzled the eyes of little John. The memory of a night of terror and horrid laughter, and she gazed with puzzled wonder in the face of a little old man who was bending over her anxiously.  Joan found she was wrapped in blankets and a big fire was burning beside her. The little old man spoke in a quiet voice. Now, don't you get scared, honey. There's nothing going to hurt you. Try drinking this warm tea. Yeah, that's the girl. Sure was lucky I come along. Neither froze clean through. You found it? I sure did. You lost? Those men. They were taking me away. I ran away from them in the middle of the night while they were sleeping. Men were taking you away? Where's your home? Home? They killed my dad. I saw them shoot him. No, no, no. Don't talk about it. You can tell me nothing. This ain't no, honey. Yeah, just try drinking some more of this tea. There, that's it, honey. Now, what's your name? It's Joan. Joan Tracy. What do you want? Well, I'm just dead. You can call me Uncle Jed, if you want to. Uncle Jed.  Now, take just a little more of this tea. Thank you. I bet you never saw the kind of a house I live in. It's way back in the side of a mountain. The most beautiful cave you ever did see. You live in a cave? Yeah, and you're going to be the first human being besides me ever to see it. Spring had passed and summer was well on the way in the Yukon. Streams gurgled down the mountains from the snow-capped peaks to the rich green valleys below. Sergeant Preston, on horseback with his dog King running free beside him, was cutting cross country over the slopes toward Whitehorse. King stopped to drink from a small stream toward the base of a hill, and Preston stopped his horse for a moment to rest. Oh, oh, there. That's the rest of the world. What's wrong, King? Where are you? What is that? Oh, what's wrong with it? Find something, fellow? Well, what's this? I swear they're lying beside the stream. It hasn't been here very long, either. Well, that's funny. No one lives with them 15 miles a day. I wonder if you can trace her, King? Come on, let's try it. All right, fellow, find her. Leaving his horse, Preston followed King as the dog let him downstream through the pickets. The mounting pause suddenly, softly called King to his side as the clear laughter of a child rang out from a clump of trees ahead. 15, behind me, fellow. Beaver whose unguided slap is there on the water? Well, that's the thing, you said go to the restroom to get out of sight. I'm sorry, Uncle King. I just couldn't help laughing. He looked just like a funny little old grandfathers sitting here. Yes, yes, yes, you're right. And if he had a white beard, he'd look just like me. Oh, no.  Well, you want to stay here when they come back and finish building the dam or are you tired? You've been shipping one place a long time. Oh, I could stay here all day and watch them.  Why, it's the most wonderful thing I ever saw. Man can learn a lot from animals. Beavers know as much about engineering as humans and they don't have to go to school to learn. Well, Joni, we'd better get there. Come on. It's John. John. Who is it? John. It's really you. It was Sergeant Franklin and King. Where did you come from? Well, it's John. I thought you were... How'd you get here? Uncle Jack saw me. It was... It was when... Now, remember, John. You promised me you'd never talk about it again. I'll tell the side just all about it. I'm Jen Haskins, Sergeant. How do you do, then? We've been watching some beavers build a dam. Uncle Jen knows all about wild animals and they know him and aren't even afraid of him. Could we take him up to our cave and show him the baby fox, Uncle Jack? Why, sure, sure. Maybe he'll stay and have supper with us. How about it, Sergeant? Well, yes, I'm going to. I left my horse back then. Oh, Sergeant, I can't wait to show you everything. It's... Oh, it's just like fairy land. The Bright Moon bathed the mountain slope in silver, as Preston sat before the large, comfortable cave that was Uncle Jed's home. A deep silence had settled over the Northland, broken only by the occasional howl of the coyotes. Are you inside, Preston? Yes, I am. I used to be afraid, but then Uncle Jed told me they look up at that beautiful moon and they just have to throw back their heads and sing. Oh, well, I guess that's right. Look how the moon makes my beads shine. Your beads? Uh-huh. Uncle Jed made them for me. Aren't they pretty? What? What a gold nugget. Tony, I think it's your bedtime, honey. You can talk to Sergeant Preston again in the morning. All right, Uncle Jed. Sergeant Preston, tomorrow morning you can help me see the big bat, that bear and her cubs. She brings them here every day. I'll see you in the morning, John. Good night. Good night. Good night, Uncle Jed. Good night. Good night, honey. She's the happiest child I've ever seen, Jed. When did you find her? The second I found her early one morning. You know what happened to her father? Yes, and I thought John was drowned. The men who killed her father went through the ice on Lake Labarge. I didn't know that. If you want to escape from them, the first time they made camp, she was lost when I found her wandering in the hills. Poor child. The shock must have been terrific. Yeah, she was in bad shape all right. It took a month to get her back to normal. I suppose I should have brought her back, Sergeant, but she said she didn't have nobody. It's been so nice having her. I guess I didn't realize before I was so lonely. She hasn't done anybody, Jed. Of course. I know she can't stay up here with me through the winter. And I ain't got too many summers left to go, but I'm going to miss her. Why do you live like this, Jed? Those nuggets who gave John, where'd you got them? I got plenty of them. And there's lots more where they come from. Years ago, I decided I didn't like the world of men. Here, I've had the peace I want, away from murder and greed. But I can't have John. She'll need school. Now, Jed, stop worrying. I'm not going to take her away from you. This has been the best thing that could have happened to her. Sergeant Preston, you mean it, aren't you? You can adopt her legally, Jed. Of course, you'll have to send her away to school in the winter. But summers. She can come back up here in the summers. A few summers I have left. You know, Jed, I think that those summers will teach John more than she'd ever learned in school. Sergeant Preston, I don't know how to take... Well, King's doing it for him. He looked up at the moon and I was joining him.  Larry McCann speaking, this is the Michigan Radio Network.


All right, welcome back, it is still the run-up and we're starting off with the PDP. The crisis within the People's Democratic Party has continued to deteriorate with the G5 governors of the party declaring to support a southern candidate for the 2023 presidential election in Nigeria. And the two major contenders in the election who are from the south are Bola Tinubu of the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, and Pitao B of the Labor Party. The stance of the G5 has complicated the challenges faced by the PDP presidential candidate, Atikua Bubaka, who has been struggling to bring back the party fold, you know. At the Breakeway Group, which is led by the defeated PDP presidential aspirant, Nyesumweke, who is also the governor of River State. The other G5 members are Governor Samuel Ohtom of Benway State, Ifan Yuguanyu of Enugu State, Sheyma Kinde of Oyo, and Okizye Iqbalzo of Abia State. And the... The odds are stacked against the PDP and they are the highest level and the presidential elections are staggering from its loftiest place as the ruling party in Nigeria's return to democracy and 16 years of unbroken domination of the party politics at the center of power. There was a time when parties always regard themselves with stories of how they were too big to be bitten and how they were going to be in power in Nigeria for 60 years at least. Today we'll be discussing the scrabble for ongoing or the war, ongoing war between the G5 and the presidential candidate of the PDP and the possible effect it will have on the coming presidential election. And joining us to discuss this is Charlie Agbo, a lawyer and a PDP chief team. Hello and welcome to the program, Agbo. Yeah, thank you very much. Okay, we had expected that by this time the problem between the G5 and the presidential or all the PDP, let me not even say the presidential candidate, the G5 and the PDP would have been resolved. Why are we taking baby steps up to this moment? I would say there is nothing really extraordinary about this. It is the character of politics.  One will expect that this as natural and as ordinary as one would abnormally think that these skirmishes are, all the players will recognize the importance of racing up to be able to contend with the project at hand, which is the plodging of the government of all people's Congress. I think it's a very important assignment to perform. Undercut by the fact that the party is actually the opposing party. That being the case, there are some advantages, ordinarily it will have, if it were incumbent, which it does not have currently. And therefore one will expect that it should be prepared to be able to deal with the massive project at hand. Having said that, I will actually believe that the problems, these skirmishes will ultimately come to an end. It is the nature of these things. Both parties are exerting themselves to see who is going to blink first. On both sides, there are arguments. The G5 are saying that they expect some balancing in terms of residency of certain positions, particularly the chairmanship. So when you look at the chairman is coming from the nut, the presidential candidate is coming from the nut. And then on to the other day, the chairman of the Board of Trustees was also coming from the nut until that was rectified. Just not quite long ago. So you could see there are issues that actually are on the table for determination. I will say that it behoves the leadership of the party to be fast enough in understanding the importance of time. Time is extremely of the essence materially now. We are looking at an election that will happen barely in the next two and a half months or so. I think the time to resolve this conflict is now. No matter what the underlying factors are, we appreciate the sentiments of the warden in interest. But I think it is the time to play the interest for the party and the larger interest of the country at last. So I'm going to be admonishing those directly and indirectly involved to shoot their thoughts so that we can move the party forward. But how would you describe the role played by the presidential candidate himself? Because, yes, it is a PDP thing. It's a party thing as a whole. But the person who is involved is the leader of the party, the chairman of the party. And if he's not ready to relinquish power, the only other person that could have spoken sense to the two warring parties should have been the presidential candidate. And a lot of people have used this to say that if he cannot resolve internal conflict within his party, then resolving internal conflicts or conflicts in a whole polity like Nigeria will be a difficult thing. And that is a minus to him. So how would you rate his level of involvement and his level of his strategy in resolving this whole issue? Now, it is very important that the dramatist person do not fall into some kind of mischief of the internal conflict that would be operationed by misperceptions if I have to put it that way. It is possible to assume that the reason Wike is pushing forward with what he is doing is more like kind of a statement. It's possible to assume that because it's not on the banner plot for him as well, whatever it is, they'll pull it down. So far as I'm not on the ballot, well, of course, to be tantalizingly, possibly in inviting to look at that underlying perspective, these are all political things that go with so much of Shenanigans. You see, for them that would be extremely unpatriotic if that were what is powering a Wike's interest. And I think it is also under some really higher expectation in terms of his application to the party in this regard and particularly encountering the notion that because he lost the election, that he's not on the ballot that he is powering on with no position for the exit of IU. But I think it's a little bit of a very difficult question. Wherever you have positions that are taken by those who are part of any conflict, something is there. I'm not going to be saying that the presidential candidate ought not to be shifting his ground. I expect him to be shifting his ground. But the command is that shifting his ground is predicated on the exit of Wike. And I think on the diplomatic table, it is important that people understand the importance of dialectics. There has to be given, given take. You know, you have to be able to give before you take it. So I expect both parties to be able to find a middle cost to give and to take. Is it possible that it must not be ultimately that IU exits that this conflict is resolved? If you look at it, the election is not about two months, three months old. I mean, not away. If we talk about a larger entity, unless it was basically a symbolic property, I would say, let's just let him stay. The elections are just here. I think he has a record to have said that he was not resigning in favor of that election. So in the next two, three months, we expect him to exit. Is it that with the proposal that we brought to the table? In terms of the following the aspect of dialectics I'm talking about, the give and take that I'm talking about here. Then on the other side, if one could as well say, what is it so special IU must be there? Even if it is that it is anchored on the chiefs that IU was seen to have been attracted in one or two other candidates, no. Well, whatever it is, there will always be a basis for which there is a conflict. And the most important thing is, as far as I am concerned, look, let us look at the larger interests of the people, the larger interests of the party. And so on the basis of which we say, look, IU, why don't you just throw in the towel? It's not about you. It's not about we. It is about Nigerians. It's about all of us. It's about the collective entrism of the people of this country, or whichever way. Incidentally, I know that a lot of judges, a lot of talking has been going on in this respect. I will expect that we should be approaching the time units of all the efforts to work brokering a reality that can manageable truth in this respect. All of those who are consensual understand that the moment for this is now. So I'm not going to blame anyone. I don't have all the facts, but I make my basic assumptions on the strength of what I assume those snipers want to glean. So in this respect, because when the person is right or wrong, to the extent that I don't have all the facts, I may not be able to determine who is right or wrong. And in any case, if you believe that I'm useful, that is about just an opinion. So that is as far as it can go. And I think it's important that we help to posit at this point. All right. You've mentioned a lot of points, actually. And then one of the things that you said is how that it's about interest. I mean, it's party politics. And of course, people join political parties because of ideologies and interests. And he also mentioned how that the candidate is here, Vatiku Abubaka, is costing a lot of chaos and that is premised on how that Wike was an aspirant and he didn't work out for him. And people are saying that is why he's been very difficult. But then Wike has come out to say that he has no problem with anybody's candidacy, that the interest of the South is what he has at heart. And then let's not hang it on Wike alone. I mean, there are up to six other governors who are in this G5, who are also expressing the same views as Wike. So if we want to say it is party politics and you want to look at the greater good of the party and the country at large, why is it looking like it's people from a certain region that are aggrieved and it's almost as if the party is expecting them to play along because it's party politics, because it is a greater interest. Why haven't we had a concrete meeting set out for the purpose of settling this particular issue? His Excellency is supposed to be in Anambra today. I'm sure he would have arrived by now. Atikua Buubaka, that is the Southeast Nigeria and up to four governors from the Southeast are among the G5 governors. How do you think this is going to play out? I mean, he's in the East for campaigns and everything and he's not in good terms, or they are not in good terms. How do you think that is going to play out?  You know, it's the nature of this business and as in convenience, as you may see, they still find a way to tag along. You see, politics is not exactly like a cup of tea. It's quite engaging, many may assume that because those are who were involved on the land lights that it's all rosy. Now, a lot of underlying elements in politics that makes it, actually politics is a very, very difficult thing to engage in. So, we recognize that they have that vision to contend with. But they also recognize the importance of the moment. These campaigns are here. Okay, so it is expected that there will be, you know, speaking with one boy and there are body languages with no discordant. So as not to send wrong signals to the electorate that are intending to woo, aha, I recognize that fact. But the point I'm making is that it is not always convenient. The issues involved in the power game are not always very convenient things. So, inconvenience is part of it. And then when you confront such circumstances, well, of course, you recognize, you know, that there is a duty to perform. And that is why all of those who are on the line those who are supposed to be part of what is going on as expected to be there. It is part of the internal conflicts that, you know, that characterizes politics. It's not a perfect situation. But it goes on. Don't forget this about interests. You know, whereas the party has a larger interest of the country, there are internal issues. The dynamics that shape, you know, the configuration of, you know, of tendency in the party because it's a human factor. You know, it's a conflict between interests. You know, several individuals will have to cross it out to be able to harmonize with children at a position that they can present ultimately. So, you have this difficulty. But all I'm trying to say is that there is nothing unusual about that, of course. There isn't a claim that we haven't, you know, under the configuration or the coloration of politics.  But one thing I know, you will not be surprised to find out that all of this will still end, you know, in a harmonized position in the fullness of time. It is the nature of politics. I don't see anything extraordinary about it. But I bother about time, you know, for whatever reason. It is time to really begin to put a, you know, I mean to harmonize their position and present a common friend from so that we don't have conflicted signals. You know, you don't have to confuse the message. It is important that Nigerians understand that the party is coming as one united, you know, organization, that one united family.   So in that context, I am expecting that ultimately this matter will be resolved. Those dramas you witness are parts of conflicts. Yes. And they come in various forms. And it's not a Nigerian phenomenon. And it's not a PPP phenomenon. It is the phenomenon of the character of politics, the world over. So it largely will come to an end. But my own position is that the moment for it to come to an end is now. How, how, you know, the question is, how does the party intend to bring it to an end? The G5 sometime ago, I think it was sometime in October, they had a meeting and part of what they were saying is how that they are not going to be intimidated. And that has been a very tiny, but important part of the conversations they've been having. How that, first of all, this 2023 elections, presidential elections were supposed to go to the South. And how that the PDP in all their wisdom thought that it was okay to hand it over to the North, you know, to vie for the seat. And then the G5 governors being from the South, feeling like the party because they think, you know, they have all it takes, all it takes to appoint or to, you know, support who they want for the seat of the presidency, that the G5 probably being a minute part of the party is supposed to string along and play along. And that, you know, feels the part of the conversation that leads it towards intimidation. Do you think this is what it is? And then you mentioned the time factor. This conversation has lingered and all of a sudden, the presidential candidate has sought it worthy to finally come to the Southeast. Do you think that there is, you know, a political will even to use that word? Or do you think that this coming to the East is actually to bring this to an end? Or is it also another, you know, ploy to coerce the G5 governors to also play along as we've seen so far? No, I don't really think that he is trying to coerce the G5 governors. No, it's not about coercion.  You see, there was the permutation. And there is still that permutation, you know, that it's supposed to be anchored on the politic, you know, that the winning perspective, as far as the election is concerned and the material time is going to be the amount. If you remember, there was some delays between the two parties, you know, playing this game and determining, allowing them quite, the order to take a position first, you know, before the party decides to take on you and stuff like that. Between the two parties, you can tell them political parties. You see, I don't think it's about coercion. The G5 governors are talking about equity. That position is clear. The reference, if I may, you know, to the extent that I expect that it recognizes that some individuals may be saying that because it's not on the ballot, but as far as this concern, because as well through the baby, I won't be backward. You have, you know, and stuff like that. I was like trying to get him to understand he has a higher take, because if it were that he was not a candidate, I mean, an aspirant, okay, it would have been, they had a better and lean way to be able to take any position it takes. But then he's constrained by these circumstances, by this possibility of misperception, you know, in terms of his full intention, you know, to, he's constrained actually to take, you know, to go the extra mile in trying to, you know, get the matter resolved. It should be more like, look, I recognize the fact that I was an aspirant, but I have a larger interest. I'm, you know, I'm propagating the interest of the South, or not just in terms of the South is, or the South, I'm propagating, you know, equity as an underlying factor, as a pillar, you know, equity as a pillar, you know, of justice and equity as a foundation of politics.  So if it's important that he recognizes that there are, he has more on the shoulders, you know, than others who did not contest it. And therefore, he or she will be seen to be more attracted in finding ways around this problem. It is in that context that I made the most references. But I also recognize the fact that in independent of that, and I will wish that we are not part of his own reasoning, they have a right to not, to be bothered about the fact that for so many years, that, you know, the residence of, the residence of power, you know, is moving from point A to the same point. It is ordinarily expected that, you know, at the every individual, I will respect the power who have to shift to the South. There isn't a doubt about it. As a matter of fact, it's part of the PDP constitution. You know, the issue is the extent to which these very strict positions, you know, can linger without a resolution. But as far as I am concerned, I'm definitely about the fact that those people who are propagating the Southern presidency are standing on the part of equity, are standing on the part of justice, and they have a right to their point of view. So when you talk about how I'm twisting, you know, I wouldn't say that people would try a thing like that to go to a number, to twist anybody. I wouldn't think about that. I wouldn't think that is the position at all. And in an old warhorse, he has been around for so long. And therefore I expect that that element will rub off on the way that he goes about resolving this problem.   I'm standing on the side of political history or the politics or the history of politics. And I am definite that just like every other conflict that we've had in the formation or in nominations, you know, or even in conflict, generally, you know, involving, you know, sharing of positions and all that, will eventually, since they have all been resolved in the past, this will also invariably pull up the same pattern. And at the end of the day, a lot of people would actually be wondering why they got involved because it will be more like, is this how this ultimately ends? Yeah, but many have not learned their lessons. And that's why they get too quick in holding on to this position. But if you are amazed at the end of the day, how this matter will be resolved. Well, it's not really looking good for the PDP, whatever is happening right now. Because, okay, yes, granted, Wike was on the ballot and he lost. It's like you getting a mate for your house. She can never become the madam or the landlord or whatever it is.  If that mate knows your dirty secrets as it were. Because those secrets will come out. They will be spilled somewhere. That's what I'm seeing Wike to be. And the fact that the PDP doesn't seem to be playing nice, there seem to be just letting things go, speaks to some kind of arrogance, which a lot of people have described the PDP, especially in the past when they were boasting that they are going to rule this country for over 60 years and more. Like, nothing, they happen, like we say in Nigeria. But you see, these things are not looking good for the PDP. Especially when, even after you said that it is in your constitution that power should be rotated, it didn't look like PDP was ready to respect that again. And the power went to the not. Yeah, we know that the last person that ruled was from the South in the PDP. But even if this were to be a verbal agreement, I know countries that have been ruled for years with a verbal constitution and on written constitution. So that's not an excuse. So how are things looking generally for the PDP? From this other side, a lot of people are seeing it like it's looking really bad for the PDP. What gives you confidence that you can even stroll into 2023 and make a mark at all, let alone winning as a party? Yes, you see, I wouldn't say the current conflicts has all of the problems that the PDP has. No, conflict is a part of the business. My own concern is just time. But I recognize the fact that conflicts are never palatable. Like you want to look at it as being party not specials for the party, it could be. You see, but I am resting on the antecedent of political conflicts over time in this trade. And I saw when you imagine that it's going to maroon the party, a resolution comes. So I'm very dead certain that this matter will be resolved. I know my own border is just time. The party is well positioned to rest power from all people's Congress. Of course, you don't expect that anyone is right-sensitive to propagating the APC. You know, if we really look at it, talking about our exchange rate alone is enough to invalidate the party. The party on its own is on its own. But the threat may not resist really come from the APC. I mean, over the years, we've had just like, okay, two parties contending for the position of whatever it is. Now, there seem to be a third and fourth force as it is. Because whether we like it or not is not only the APC and PDP that are talking right now. There are other people who are really promising. And Nigerians seem to be tired with the status quo, with the establishment, with the people who have always been there. So while PDP is fighting with the APC, there are others that are springing up equally making waves. So you cannot really say that you want to rest power from the APC. What about the other parties that are also trying to make sure that both the PDP and the APC do not even find anything in 2023? They are also there. You cannot just write them off. No, that is the incumbent party. Okay, now if you have 50 parties trying to rest power from the incumbent party, there is just one incumbent party. You don't have to, I mean, there are so many of these names. They are not incumbent. We are looking at the government in power. But talking about the government, you can't rest power from a party that is not holding it.  Okay, so they are not in view at all. They are not in view at all. And then when you talk about some of these other policies, there are a lot of these tendencies. Well, you see, the point is that the PDP is so capricious. It's so eager to be able to deal with some of these issues as they come. I want to talk about, you know, mushrooming interests. There are some small political parties in some of the regions. I don't want to mention their names. And then, of course, you don't want to aggregate an answer from public tendencies. Okay, the point is that you can be looking at them when you have an incumbent. The incumbent is there for the all-progressive Congress. And as far as we are concerned, that ordinarily we even expect the party to disqualify itself. In fact, a lot of that, the parade of Congresses have taken this country regarding our exchange rate. It's a check. It's unbelievable. It's unprecedented. And it is possible, really one will expect that it is possible that a political party like that, DC, who is throwing the towel and say, we are not going to part of it anymore. We are failed. So, hopefully. But the point I'm making is, for PDP, we are not going to arrest victory, you know, to wangle defeat from the jaws of victory. You know, because victory is just there to be hanged. There has been a new ballot political party that has no basis, whatever, to contend at all. At all, the party is at the best moment to reclaim power. And in the circumstances, it will be ideal that these conflicts do not come on the way at all. It's a momentous period that we are back to coast to victory on account of the absolute incompetence of the party in power. And so I see nothing stopping it. And so the shimmering, the expectation there, you know, the horizon is looking so good in the circumstances, you know, that nothing can stop the party, you know, from plucking power away from the post-Congress.  When conversations are going on regarding the how, the political party is found missing. It tells you how unprepared this party is. The party, you know, cannot be part of what you are doing for instance. The party cannot be part of an organized debate. You see a party that is hiding from its own self. So in the circumstances, dislodging that party looks, you know, the most auspicious at the moment. And this is for this reason that I will expect that the people from the party should be able to put his house in order to take advantage of this extraordinary opportunity. I don't know because, sorry, because the incumbent right now, I don't remember any time where he attended a political debate yet Nigerians voted for him. Maybe because of other circumstances which could also play here. And I'm not saying that you are resting power. You're trying to take power from the other political parties, but you are just one of them trying to take power from the incumbent. So the race is stiff. And I don't know how you can write off the thing, the fact that people are seeing the PDP as being so incompetent of resolving internal issues that when they come into power in the country that he's divided along so many lines, religious, political, ethnic, whatever lines, so many lines now. And you're saying they're going to coast to power. That's the same language that PDP used in 2015 and power was taken away from them. That's the same kind of way that we were hearing in 2019 as power still didn't come to the PDP. And now internal conflict has taken five governors. Just the way five governors were taken from the PDP prior to 2015 and the lost election. And now five governors are taken from the PDP again and they don't even have the power of incumbency. So I'm just wondering, I'm just wondering how it's looking for the PDP. I hope that you are going to put your house down. Not in gloomy at all, not in gloomy. It's all part of this business like I told you. Politics is not about two plus two is four.  Oh yes. And when you talk about glooting, it is also a part of politics. There is no political party that does not take pride in its capacity in the same power. There's no political party that will tell you it's going to lose power upon its own motion. So, you know, a chess business is part of it. It means it corrects your capacity to imagine what actually, how you can actually deal with your opposition. So it's not really your usual. It will be that because PDP said they were going to stay in power for 60 years or 50 years, that was the reason the party lost power. No, the party lost power through some strategic miscalculation. As far as I am concerned, it had no reason to lose power at all. But it made it all a learning process and then the party is in a better position with the fact of this post-mortem to determine what happened yesterday in projecting how it is going to move ahead for tomorrow. You know, it may be written really little difficult, but like I said, it's all part of it. This is politics. And I mean, insofar as it is about human beings, there ain't no way that there will be solutions. And I just say, I predict very concretely, we are going to have a united house to confront this election. There's no question about it. Don't be bothered about it. Yeah, don't be bothered about it. All right. Thank you so much, Dr. Chalia Bo for sharing your views with us this morning on the run-up. We really appreciate it. Thank you so much for coming up. Thank you very much. Okay. This is where this segment ends. Yeah, well. It is really heated. I really wish that political parties in this present dispensation, I mean, whatever your political party is, or whatever your flag is, I wish that politicians would understand that arrogance would take them nowhere at this point. I mean, if you've been following the trend of what has been playing out in the political space of Nigeria from two years ago, in fact, yeah, from two years ago, from say three years, 2020, in fact, from after the end-sales protests down to this point. If you've been following the trend of things happening, you would know that as a politician, as a political party, you need to be on the side of the people. They need to love you genuinely and you need to have what they are looking for to get that love. I wish PDP would climb down from that. Any other political party, by the way. Yes, but for the reason of this conversation that we're having today, it's about the G5 and the PDP. I really wish that the PDP as a whole would climb down from their high horse and have this conversation with the G5. Yeah, because they need to know that, like he said, it was political miscalculations that led them there. That could have come because of overconfidence in themselves that, okay, we have all the structures, we have all the apparatus, we have everything. And that translates to arrogance that, okay, maybe for us that are not politicians, we see it as arrogance. But I am going to be the one to vote. It is the vote of the people who not necessarily call themselves politicians that makes whoever calls himself a politician to be relevant in any office that... I mean, and the house divided among itself cannot stand. You have a very huge project as big as the presidential seat of a country as big as Nigeria. In front of you. And you're like trading words. Yeah. It's like you're trying to have a relationship. If you are having a relationship, just to say, I'm sorry, I know I was wrong. It goes a long way rather than saying, because I have a lot of money, my wife will always be my wife. Even if I wrong her, I will just give her money. That's what it is. But should I give you your wife's money? It's important. All right, this is where we take a quick break. The news will come up at noon. And after the news, we will return with another very interesting and packed topic. They're not going anywhere. The run-up will return in a bit. Stay with us.