00:00:28.940I don't know if he's listening or watching.
00:00:31.660If he's not, then I guess it was just a good way of telling you all that happens to be my brother's birthday today.
00:00:37.380But let no one say I don't acknowledge the important moments.
00:00:40.860I'll send him a text once I get off air, just in case.
00:00:43.900But I do want to talk today about, we have a lot.
00:00:46.720Jamil Jumaane is going to be here in just a little bit to talk about how he failed to rise up to Bell Media's expectations of him
00:00:54.900being the token black man on their flagship radio station in Toronto and it ended up costing him his
00:01:02.320job. He's now suing Bell Media and we will talk to Jamil about that now. He certainly has landed
00:01:08.320on his feet. He's the president of the Canada Strong and Free Network and is doing fantastic
00:01:13.080work over there. Also going to talk a little bit later on about the potential return of masks.
00:01:19.340We're already seeing little bits and pieces of it here.
00:01:22.440The University of Waterloo has plunged its classrooms back into mask mandate paradise.
00:01:28.440And we are seeing some health units start to talk about masking.
00:01:31.880So that'll be something that we need to definitely keep an eye on.
00:01:35.880It's the only thing that is not covered when there's a mask mandate.
00:01:38.800You can see out of your eyes and that's about it.
00:01:41.720And we are also going to talk about the Public Order Emergency Commission.
00:01:45.020Now, let me say, first off, there was a bit of an unexpected turn of events today, and I'm not in Ottawa, so I didn't see it in person, but I saw the clip going around just like all of you did, where one of the lawyers who represents the commission, he represents the Public Order Emergency Commission, actually collapsed midway through his examination of the witness.
00:02:08.980Now, this gentleman, Monsieur Poliquin, is not clear actually what condition he's in right now.
00:02:15.920The commission has said to protect him and his family or out of respect for him and his family,
00:02:21.220no details will be released about his health.
00:02:24.740That is something that we are going to respect.
00:02:27.060And I mean, obviously, these things happen and not often.
00:02:30.020And we hope he's OK and send our thoughts and prayers.
00:02:32.840But it was an interruption in the proceedings.
00:02:35.420That witness is going to testify tomorrow.
00:02:37.860and the commission has reconvened I think as of about an hour ago but they've done it with a
00:02:43.800different witness so they've just rearranged the schedule a little bit but again when you have
00:02:47.920something going on like this this is the inevitable byproduct things will come up you have to work
00:02:53.000around them what I'm very interested in is what happened yesterday when a document was put forward
00:03:01.640to an OPP representative and this document contained a rough transcript and more of a
00:03:08.700summary I guess of a call between Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Ontario Premier Doug Ford
00:03:14.260when it just to contextualize it here it was February 9th so we're talking about five days
00:03:20.540before the Emergencies Act was invoked and it was a call specifically dealing with the blockade at
00:03:26.900the Ambassador Bridge, which we know from sworn testimony was not connected to the Ottawa protest
00:03:32.360in any direct way. It was certainly inspired by and perhaps a copycat of, but it wasn't being
00:03:39.660quarterbacked or coordinated by Tamara Leach or any of the folks in Ottawa. And they were talking
00:03:46.440about this, and I'm going to let this clip speak to it. This is a lawyer, Alan Haunter, with the
00:03:51.800Democracy Fund, reading the relevant part of this document to the witness from the OPP.
00:03:58.460Lieutenant, you will not have seen this document before, but it's a readout of a conversation
00:04:04.040between the Prime Minister and the Premier of Ontario. In the first big paragraph, Premier
00:04:09.780Ford says, the bigger one for us and the country is the Ambassador Bridge and the state ground
00:04:18.460there what i think is we gotta stop the spread of these protests he goes on to say that the
00:04:26.380attorney general is looking at legal ways to give the police more tools do you see that
00:04:32.620the prime minister says first of all they're not a legal protest they're occupying a municipal
00:04:40.060street and are not legally parked you shouldn't need more tools legal tools they are barricading
00:04:47.900the Ontario economy. And then later in that paragraph, he says, we got to respond quickly.
00:05:00.620So that's a little bit interesting. Justin Trudeau, first off, makes a declaration that
00:05:06.960I'm not sure is rooted in law because no one else has been able to say when this became
00:05:11.160the case that they're not a legal protest. This is the interesting thing. They're occupying a
00:05:16.960municipal street and are not legally parked so that is the extent of the convoys lawlessness
00:05:23.040they were not legally parked so you can just go around and issue a bunch of parking tickets
00:05:27.100and i guess that is the extent of the law enforcement required but what justin trudeau
00:05:31.620said to premier doug ford on this call pmjt you can see it if you look at that summary there
00:05:36.800that you shouldn't need more tools legal tools they are barricading the ontario economy and
00:13:27.300was saying something remarkably honest, which it doesn't sound like he was doing
00:13:31.260in those clips, and saying that you have all of the powers and authorities you need.
00:13:36.580And no one from the government has yet acknowledged what changed between that call
00:13:42.720on February 9th and February 14th when the Emergencies Act came into play.
00:13:48.680And quite to the contrary, we do know for a fact from the sworn evidence
00:13:52.980that there had been progress in negotiations between convoy organizers and the City of Ottawa
00:13:59.060in that time frame, which Justin Trudeau's office knew about, which Marco Mendicino's office knew
00:14:05.440about, and Marco Mendicino personally knew about and was being briefed on. So if Justin Trudeau
00:14:12.320is claiming five days before he invokes the Emergencies Act, four days before he discusses
00:14:17.400with his cabinet and the premiers that it's not necessary it's almost as if this was a move that
00:14:23.720the government knew it didn't need to do but contrary to its claims to the media it wanted to
00:14:29.560do because they wanted that power to go after people's bank accounts they wanted the ability
00:14:34.600to make an example of all of these protesters that had embarrassed the government by bringing
00:14:39.800this message of freedom a message that was unifying people from across this country
00:14:45.000a message that went beyond left and right and actually spoke to people in a very real way
00:14:50.120that that message those people who brought that message had humiliated the government and they
00:14:56.880couldn't stand for that justin trudeau couldn't stand for that and it's a shame it's a shame that
00:15:03.460we don't get to see in real time how the government and the cabinet ministers and all of the staffers
00:15:08.940are responding to this testimony every single day the testimony that comes out further proves
00:15:16.140the lack of necessity behind the emergencies act all of these people police officers career police
00:15:22.080officers well respected by government and by public and by their peers in law enforcement are
00:15:27.240all saying that they aren't backing it up they aren't backing the government up the most support
00:15:33.640government has gotten on this is from police saying yeah when they offered it to us we used
00:15:38.540it, but we didn't really need it. And I think that's very telling. And I also don't think
00:15:43.720that's the bombshell that the Emergency Zacks defenders think it is, because it's like if you
00:15:49.120give someone a big Maserati to drive from home to the office, they're going to use it, even if they
00:15:55.760didn't need it, even if they could have made the same trip on a bicycle, because, well, it's a tool
00:16:00.520that's been given to them, so you might as well make use of it. And I think that is so pivotal
00:16:07.040to this because the emergencies act is very clear it can't be something that the government could
00:16:13.260have dealt with or law enforcement could have dealt with using existing laws and i i restate
00:16:19.520that point almost every time we discuss this inquiry because i think it is paramount for
00:16:24.200people to understand that the police incompetence disagreements different ideas on how best to do
00:16:30.560it. These are not grounds under the legislation to invoke the Emergencies Act. These are not laws
00:16:37.260that are not working. These are perhaps human failings, bureaucratic failings,
00:16:44.100government shortcomings, sure. But it's not evidence that existing laws are unable to deal
00:16:49.680with the crisis, whatever the crisis is. And I think more fundamental to that, I'm not even
00:16:54.580convinced. In fact, I'm convinced that there was no emergency in the first place. And I don't mean
00:16:59.460that just by saying that, well, I personally, Andrew Lawton, don't think bouncy castles are
00:17:04.220an emergency. I think that the government's legislation guiding this is very clear on what
00:17:09.980constitutes a public order emergency. And there weren't any of the criteria that the Canadian
00:17:15.120Security Intelligence Act sets out. There weren't the criteria that the Emergencies Act sets out.
00:17:21.060So for the most part, we are seeing no emergency to begin with. And I think that beyond that,
00:17:29.460people need to realize that Justin Trudeau is not going to be able to get away with this if
00:17:36.040folks are paying attention and that's the big if I've said yesterday that there is never going to
00:17:42.860be satisfaction from people that really don't like Justin Trudeau there's never going to be
00:17:48.100satisfaction from people that just think you know what he shouldn't have done this that people that
00:17:52.680think he should be I don't know brought up on charges before the hag or whatever I'm not
00:17:56.260entertaining that. What's going to happen is we will get a clear cut decision from the commissioner
00:18:01.820or not even a decision, a clear cut report from the commissioner. And that report is going to list
00:18:07.560all of these things that the commissioner has noted. It may not be satisfactory. It may not
00:18:12.900come to the conclusion that yes, the emergencies act was right or no, the emergencies act was wrong.
00:18:18.180He doesn't need to make that decision. But even if he says it's unjustified or certainly makes
00:18:24.900that case without saying it directly. It doesn't result in anything resembling charges. It doesn't
00:18:31.000result in anything resembling civil liability. It doesn't mean Justin Trudeau is forced out of
00:18:35.360office. I think he should resign if that is what the decision comes back as, if for no other reason
00:18:41.660than the standard that he set when he was defending this in the House of Commons. But I think that
00:18:48.340what's key here for people to realize is that we're starting to see evidence that even the
00:18:53.860government itself knew this wasn't necessary. From Justin Trudeau point blank telling Doug Ford that
00:18:59.260to what we also saw last week or two weeks ago in the text messages exchanged between staffers in
00:19:06.100Trudeau's office and staffers in Marco Mendicino's office saying that we need to just lean into the
00:19:11.940narrative. They wanted this as a media opportunity, not as a national crisis needing some massive
00:19:18.440public safety response. So we'll have more of that in the days and weeks ahead. We are on the
00:19:24.380back half of the commission, but there are still a couple of weeks left to go here. I want to talk
00:19:29.560about one of my favorite topics, which is talk radio. I've been a longtime talk radio fan. I
00:19:35.240really cut my teeth in the media industry doing a daily talk radio show. And I know a lot of you
00:19:40.700who listen to this show used to listen to me on the radio, whether it was in London and Toronto
00:19:44.420in Calgary. And I thank you very much for that. But the talk radio of today is very different than
00:19:51.740the talk radio of yesterday and two days ago and several years ago. And I say that with a fair bit
00:19:59.700of sadness because talk radio used to be like the bastion of unequivocally irreverent speech,
00:20:06.540of being able to challenge conventional orthodoxy, being able to have debates,
00:20:10.880air controversial opinions, not for the sake of controversy, but because they are discussions that
00:20:15.700need to be had. And it has gotten increasingly woke in Canada. And I would say there are few
00:20:21.140better able to attest to that than Jamil Javani, who hosted a fantastic show on Bell Media's News
00:20:28.200Talk 1010 in Toronto, although his management seemed to want it to be a lot less fantastic.
00:20:35.160And I want to bring in Jamil to talk about this. Now the president of the Canada Strong and Free
00:20:40.340Network. Jamil, good to talk to you, sir. Thanks for coming on today. Yeah, thanks for having me,
00:20:45.140Andrew. I certainly share your passion for what talk radio used to be. And I mean, it's great we
00:20:50.660have platforms like yours where we can still have some of these important conversations.
00:20:55.160Well, we'll blow the minds of our former employers, both of whom fired each of us. But
00:21:00.140let's talk about this because you hosted a great show on News Talk 1010. You talked about a lot of
00:21:06.400things you introduced yourself to a lot of people who didn't know you and it was fascinating when
00:21:11.840they fired you and and you know it was i'd say there's a bit of a purge going on in radio at the
00:21:17.400time danielle smith i know in alberta was having some issues around the same time frame not connected
00:21:22.120to you or your case but uh there were there were these changes and we've started to see a little
00:21:26.960bit more about this in court documents because you are suing bell media for your termination
00:21:33.180And the one notable one that I really want to talk about here is this accusation that Bell has made to you that you, who, as I understand it, were the only black man on the station, were insufficiently diverse for them.
00:21:47.120That's exactly right. It's very confusing exactly what diversity means to a company like Bell, because they say they want people from different backgrounds, but they don't seem to want anyone to actually bring their perspective to their job.
00:22:00.820So they want to celebrate, oh, this person's from this community, this person has this identity. But then when you want to talk about what's happening in the world, all of a sudden, they'd like for everyone to sound the same, which doesn't sound like diversity and inclusion to me. And I think one of the key examples of this was around all the COVID stuff.
00:22:19.280You know, I hosted my show last year when, of course, COVID was the main thing on the news every single day.
00:22:28.380I come from a community where because of history and because of other reasons, a lot of people were hesitant to get the vaccine.
00:22:35.560And Bell, like, wanted me to talk about that if I was willing to deliver the message that they wanted.
00:22:41.140They wanted me to come on the radio and shame people and hate people and say, you know, mean things about people who wouldn't be vaccinated.
00:22:48.680And my point of view was like, look, I mean, part of diversity is recognizing people have different life experiences. And I'm not going to attack people who make a different decision, even if it's not the same decision I made. And that was where so much of our conflict came from. And you can see even in the court documents, which I encourage people to check out on my Twitter page, I posted a link to where you can read them yourself.
00:23:10.180they basically say like I didn't shill the Liberal Party's lines on COVID-19 and that's
00:23:17.060one of the reasons they fired me which is kind of a mind-blowing thing to say out loud they say
00:23:21.840on the record like I was very surprised to read it to be honest yeah in a way it was weird because
00:23:27.100I read your initial filing and you're making all these claims which of course I should say haven't
00:23:31.620been tested in court about why they fired you and then in their defense they basically reaffirm
00:23:37.240everything you accused them of doing and try to put their own spin on it of course like
00:23:41.540and one of them they say point blank in their defense filing here that you were not committed
00:23:48.280to their diversity and equity and inclusion policies and all of that and some of the other
00:23:53.400things they included as your alleged transgressions I found ridiculous like one of them was you had
00:23:58.780an interview with an MP Kathy Wagenthal who didn't tow the government's line on vaccination
00:24:04.220And you say you were supposed to be more aggressive or assertive in shouting down whatever she was saying.
00:24:10.320And it's like Kathy Wagenthal, I've interviewed her before.
00:24:13.880She was offering the unorthodox position.
00:24:17.800She was challenging the position you could get anywhere else.
00:24:20.260So the idea that you then need to silence her or rebut her, I find ridiculous.
00:24:26.660And again, really a rejection of what talk radio used to be.
00:24:29.860yeah i mean uh you know mp wagenthal is a duly elected member of our parliament for her to be
00:24:38.100given an opportunity to share her perspective on an important issue seems like exactly what
00:24:42.820the media is supposed to do we're supposed to bring forward perspectives that are influencing
00:24:47.700public policy influencing the way politics and government work and yet bell seemed to want just
00:24:54.020one perspective to be allowed on their airwaves which is just i mean as i said i'm surprised they
00:24:59.600admitted it i mean they behaved that way they tried to punish me they certainly conducted
00:25:03.700themselves like a group of people with a bias toward the liberal party but for them to actually
00:25:08.720come out and admit it is a whole other story i mean i was very surprised and to your point also
00:25:13.400andrew about um you know the me not sort of complying with diversity like let's be specific
00:25:19.300about what what they wanted these guys put out last november about a year ago today they put out
00:25:25.780a plan that was about segregation, that was about putting together diversity groups that would have
00:25:32.240meetings based on all the Black people get together, all the Indigenous people get together,
00:25:36.460all the white people get together. That's not diversity. That's segregation. That's literally
00:25:40.560the opposite of diversity. You're telling people that in order to have important conversations
00:25:45.140about our workplace as employees of Bell, we cannot do that with people who look differently
00:25:50.460than us we have to be separated from one another and i'm i'm against diversity by saying i don't
00:25:56.380want to be part of that like this is nuts you you know these businesses want to get into the world
00:26:02.780of micromanaging people's identities and then when someone whether you're black indigenous a woman
00:26:08.940part of the lgbt community whatever it is even if you're a white guy they want to tell you how
00:26:14.060you're supposed to think about yourself and the political views you're supposed to have that's not
00:26:18.940business that's creepy weird approach to diversity and the idea that i was a problematic employee
00:26:26.060because i thought as an individual i should be treated with respect that's nuts and that's really
00:26:31.020at the crux of the lawsuit which is like our business is allowed to treat people this way i
00:26:35.500believe it's against the law and i believe it's illegal and you know we're that's exactly why
00:26:39.980i'm taking them to court when you were hired was there ever a sense that you had in your discussions
00:26:46.300with them, either formally or informally, of what they wanted you to be and what they wanted you to
00:26:51.420say, whether it was a particular position or a particular issue? Or did they just look at you
00:26:56.600and, you know, based on a couple of interviews you'd done and perhaps your book and things
00:27:00.280you'd written, just assume that they had you figured out and they knew where you were going
00:27:03.880to go once you were on air? Yeah, I mean, I think there were a lot of people there who I would say
00:27:09.300have a very simplistic sense of how to work with people who come from a different background or
00:27:14.820perspective than them. And so some of those people, like there's one particular manager named
00:27:19.840in the lawsuit and Bell names her in their statement of defense, Hillary White, ironically
00:27:25.220named, who had a very big problem with me and was constantly trying to, in my view, intimidate me
00:27:32.960and try to like force certain perspectives on me. And when I tried to speak up for myself and you
00:27:38.900can see the dysfunctional workplace at Bell in other examples, like with Lisa Laflamme, for
00:27:43.820example. Danielle Graham is another person who's got a lawsuit against Bell over some of these
00:27:49.160issues. They try to punish you into submission, into compliance. And I don't think that's actually
00:27:56.160what a healthy workplace is supposed to be like. So it was very difficult. There was a manager
00:28:01.720there who did, I think, try to have a genuine, honest understanding of diversity. His name was
00:28:07.300Mike Bendixon. And he was fired a couple months before I was. And I don't know exactly why. But
00:28:13.740I can tell you that when they let him go, you know, it just the one manager who seemed to have
00:28:19.040a healthy view on these issues was gone. And all of a sudden, the place just started to fall apart.
00:28:24.280And that's, you know, and then they blame the employees for that. And it's like, well,
00:28:27.780maybe management should take some responsibility for some of this dysfunction.
00:28:31.620now it's funny because in bell's response they talk about the diversity issues and the fact that
00:28:38.440you misgendered demi lovato or something and they they go on with some of these other things we've
00:28:43.440discussed and then they say oh yeah and his ratings were bad was that ever something that
00:28:47.260was brought to you no in fact you know as i mentioned i only had one ratings period that i
00:28:54.360was uh able to uh do the show for before uh i was fired and suspended and all these other things
00:29:01.600went on so that one ratings period they gave me a bonus for because of the the performance of the
00:29:07.660show and i actually have an email from my boss saying congratulations so the ratings thing is
00:29:13.260very weird i mean the reality is as i'm sure you would imagine you know ratings for all radio went
00:29:18.320down during covid because people weren't commuting to work in their cars as much so i think what
00:29:24.240Bell's trying to do is act like that was sort of my fault as a way to justify the firing. But here's
00:29:29.860what I would say to you, Andrew, if there was a business reason to let me go, why are they bringing
00:29:34.300up all these other things? Like if it was just about business, why couldn't they just say his
00:29:38.060ratings are bad? We had to let him go. Most people would accept that. And if that were the honest
00:29:42.420reason that I was fired, I, you know, why were we having these arguments? Like they mentioned all
00:29:47.940these other things about diversity and Justin Trudeau and Kathy Wagenthal because it wasn't
00:29:53.320about ratings and that they felt the need to address all these other issues because their case
00:29:58.200based on ratings is so weak and you'll even notice and again i encourage anyone you can read bell's
00:30:03.720statement of defense in their own words go on my twitter page and you'll and i post it there and
00:30:08.440you'll read it and see they actually present no evidence to back up their claim about ratings at
00:30:12.840all it's literally they just say it there's yeah it's just like a line basically that they just
00:30:17.160sort of just throw out there and see yeah there's no quotation there are no numbers there's no
00:30:21.320actual information given. Where do they have information? Well, they've got quotes when it
00:30:25.560comes to me not defending Justin Trudeau. They've got quotes when it comes to me not taking their
00:30:31.040position on Demi Lovato and her journey in self-identification. They've got examples for
00:30:37.560that, but no examples to ratings, right? So it's a very bizarre approach they've taken. And it
00:30:42.520seems to me, in my personal view, they've underestimated how much Canadians expect media
00:30:48.200to have some sort of credibility some uh objectivity some effort to be middle of the road
00:30:54.960i think a lot of canadians expect that i don't think that bell is offering them that in their
00:30:59.600media coverage radio is a cartoonishly precarious industry i think like the line when i started out
00:31:06.400is that you hadn't made it in radio until you had been fired like some of those old time radio guys
00:31:11.180would you know get fired on monday morning and they'd be somewhere else tuesday afternoon
00:31:14.860And I think stations have the right to put whatever they want on air.
00:31:18.660And I know you're a free market guy, so you'd agree with that as well.
00:31:22.060Let me just ask then, what is the core of your issue?
00:31:25.600Is it, you know, the fact that they, you know, canceled you for these reasons, or is it something more fundamental?
00:31:33.220Yeah, I mean, the core of the issue is they created certain expectations of me as an employee based on my race,
00:31:40.720based on my the community i come from based on you know the color of my skin or you know my my name
00:31:48.260all these things they created unique expectations on me and then punished me when i didn't meet
00:31:54.040those expectations that is i think by most uh definitions racism it is racist to say because
00:32:02.320of what you look like you have to do your job a certain way and when you don't stay within the
00:32:06.980boundaries we give you, we punish you for being the wrong type of black person. That is what the
00:32:12.300crux of the issue is for me. As I said before, I do believe that in businesses, I do believe in
00:32:18.700capitalism. A lot of the good things about our country are the results of us embracing free
00:32:24.440market economics. At the same time, I'm also a believer in people being treated as individuals.
00:32:30.880I'm a believer in equality before the law. And you cannot, whether you're on the left in this
00:32:36.900case or you're on the right, whatever the example would be, decide you're going to treat people
00:32:41.680differently based on what they look like. And that is fundamentally wrong, in my opinion. And
00:32:46.800that's why I decided to bring this case forward. I think that we've gotten to this point where we
00:32:51.240believe liberals and people on the left, like the management at Bell Media, are allowed to get away
00:32:57.340with racism. And then they accuse everyone else on the other side of being the racist. And I'm
00:33:02.360saying no no you guys are the racists you're treating me differently because of what I look
00:33:07.040like because of who my father is because where my father comes from and that's not right and we're
00:33:12.180going to deal with that through the court system you know this may shock people in this colorblind
00:33:17.220world but I'm not black so I don't have the uh you know the experience of being a member of that
00:33:21.940community but and again I don't even like talking about people in in terms of communities because
00:33:26.820people are individuals and that seems to be the issue they had with you that you were an individual
00:33:31.980And that, you know, your community certainly colors and shapes your perspective, but it doesn't confine you to one particular perspective.
00:33:40.840And I feel that it's just so laughable that this idea of diversity, this idea of having more voices represented from a variety of backgrounds, which is important, only extends when those voices say certain things.
00:35:36.820Like, I know a lot of the coverage has sort of pointed to the fact that Republicans did not have the quote unquote red wave as many expected.
00:35:44.740A lot of these Senate races and congressional races were more competitive than people thought.
00:35:49.380But I knew J.D.'s wasn't going to be that competitive because he's been working his butt off.
00:35:53.620He's been connecting with people in Ohio.
00:36:10.340I think he's going to be fantastic as a senator.
00:36:12.800You know, I think of him as my big brother.
00:36:14.180Like, I love the guy. And so nothing but positive vibes for me. I mean, I can't wait to see what he does when he's, you know, actually in the Senate being able to use his voice for good.
00:36:24.200Well, perhaps you'll be able to get Senator Vance at one of the Canada Strong and Free conferences coming up.
00:36:37.240All right. That is Jamil Javani, president of the Canada Strong and Free Network.
00:36:41.240And again, I should say the documents we were talking about from his court case has not yet been resolved.
00:36:47.420The allegations have been not tested in court, but they are, as you can read for yourself in many cases, pretty much not refuted, but rather affirmed by Bell in its reply.
00:37:00.600They're the ones that bring up the fact that he misgendered Demi Lovato by not referring to them as they or her as she, they, whatever it is.
00:37:09.800And again, by interviewing Kathy Wagenthal and insufficiently being critical of Kathy Wagenthal when interviewing her about her views on vaccination.
00:37:19.020So, you know, it was actually a little bit triggering for me as someone who went through this with a mainstream media company working in talk radio and finding that this place that used to be the bastion of irreverent commentary was all of a sudden becoming very much narrowed and constrained to something else.