BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS

Vancouver Draft Report Encourages Drug Addiction

No one can ignore the drug problems in downtown Vancouver. In certain areas, almost every street corner features a heroin addict begging for money to feed his/her addiction. In each of the past 7 years, there has been an average 147 illicit drug overdose deaths. It is no surprise that Vancouver's downtown Eastside has become a veritable "no man's land" because of the horrendous climate of drug abuse there.

Addressing the Problem?

The Mayor of Vancouver, Philip Owen, undoubtedly well intentioned, has attempted to introduce a solution. A 76-page draft discussion paper written by Donald MacPherson (See p. 4), called A Framework for Action, more commonly referred to as the "Mayor's Plan," has put forward recommendations to solve the problem. If implemented, however, it is a blueprint for disaster. The plan recommends four pillars of change - prevention, treatment, enforcement and harm reduction. It is the harm reduction recommendation that is ringing alarm bells. It is based on the proposition that since drug use occurs, there is a need to minimize its harm by recognizing that abstinence-based strategies are impractical and ineffective.

In this regard, the Vancouver "Mayor's Plan" includes two significant proposals:

1. that controlled trials of administering free heroin to chronic drug users be conducted in Canada; and

2. clinical trials be conducted to determine the efficiency of safe injection and consumption rooms for addicts so that they can allegedly be out of harm's way to shoot up in peace.


These proposed clinical trials, however, are merely temporary or preliminary stop-gap measures which will inevitably lead to the implementation of these policies. That is, it is a foregone conclusion that the trials will be found to be "successful," and that public resistance to this fundamental alteration in Canada's drug policies
(i.e., prohibition of illicit drug use) will be, as a consequence, lowered. It is obvious from the Report that this is the objective of the so-called "clinical" trials, i.e. to implement these questionable policies in Canada

The major task force discussion paper is available on the internet at:
http://www.city.vancouver.bc.ca or www.crimepreventiondrugtreatment.com

Problems with Harm
Reduction Programs

The most grievous problem with harm reduction programs for drug addicts is, quite simply, they do not work. Examples of their failure abound, especially in Australia where drug use has significantly increased after harm reduction programs were implemented.

Countries such as Sweden and US, on the other hand, have taken a successful tough approach to illicit drug use. The "get tough" approach in Sweden is a case in point. Sweden took a very liberal approach to drugs in the '60s and '70s, and ended up with the highest rate of drug abuse in all of Europe. In the late 1970's, Sweden did a major reassessment of the situation and decided to get tough on drugs. It introduced mandatory treatment for some drug-related offenses.

It began to implement strict policing and stiff penalties for drug offenses and made extensive use of education and community involvement.

After 15 years of this approach, Sweden achieved the lowest rate of drug use in the Western world. "Get tough" policies on drugs work.

The following figures set out in 1997 by the UN World Drug Report show the difference in results between Australia's and Sweden's approach to the drug problem. The two sets of data provide a remarkable contrast.

Sweden Australia
Lifetime prevalence of drug use among young people 9% 52%
Use in previous year 2% 33%
Estimated dependent heroin users per million population 500 5000-16000
Percentage of dependent users aged under 20 1.5% 8.2%
Methadone patients per million population 50 940
Drug-related deaths per million population 23 46
Percentage of all deaths at age under 25 1.5% 3.7%
Average months in prison per drug offense 20 5
Drug offenses per million population 3100 1000
(Sweden - arrests; Australia - convictions)

Similarly, in the US during the '70s, the message was that drug use is okay. The US then decided to get tough on drugs. Here are the results of the latter policy: those 12 years and older who used drugs on a monthly basis in the US in 1979 were 25 million people (14% of the population). In 1998, with a get tough policy on drugs, that figure dropped to 13.6 million (6% of the population).

Liberalized policies in the Netherlands have resulted in dramatically increased drug use among young people. Monthly use among 12 to 18-year-olds in the Netherlands increased from 2 per cent in 1992 to 11 per cent in 1996.

Needle Distribution Centres

Another recommendation in the Vancouver Mayor's Plan is that the needle exchange sites in Vancouver, where addicts come for free needles and which handed nearly 3.3 million needles last year should be expanded. What the report does not say, however, is that although 3.3 million needles were handed out, relatively few needles were returned (exchanged). It does not require much imagination to know what happened to the discarded needles. They were used off site, in streets and alleys, where they were abandoned, posing a significant risk to individuals. In Melbourne , Australia in 1997, the number of needles and syringes distributed increased from around 3,000 per month in 1997 to more than 12,000 per month by the end of 1998. The number of needles and syringes found in Melbourne parks and streets between July 1999 to June 2000 rose to 13,000.

What also occurs, is that the needle exchanges become a "honey pot" or meeting point for drug users and dealers who know that the needle exchange is a "no-go" area for police. This has led to such areas gaining recognition as a safe area for drug dealers to operate. Not surprisingly, this has also led to a demise of businesses in these areas because of drug related crime. Shoppers are terrorized by syringe wielding drug users and area households are regularly burglarized - all thanks to the authorities providing the go-ahead for drug users and protection for drug marketers.

Little wonder that a group of Vancouver Downtown Eastside business owners and residents have come together to form an organization called the "Community Alliance" to specifically fight the recommended so-called "harm reduction" programs there.

Unfortunately, what is also ignored in the Vancouver Mayor's Plan, is the fact that Hepatitis C increases via the needle exchange centres. That is, there is a close correlation between the number of needles exchanged and the spread of Hepatitis C. For example, in Frankfurt, Germany, 90% of intravenous users involved in "safe" injection rooms were Hepatitis C positive. In Australia, it was found that more than 50% of those attending these needle distribution centres were infected with Hepatitis C. An investigation commissioned by the World Health Organization found no evidence at all that needle exchange facilities have aided the situation.

Further, a study published in the British Medical Journal found that in a study carried out in the Sydney, Australia needle exchange program there was an alarming rise in the number of Hepatitis C cases, especially among those under the age of 20. Yet, our own Minister of Health, Allan Rock, has stated that he strongly supports the needle distribution centres, and denies that they are leading to a spread of Hepatitis C. According to Mr. Rock:
…The availability of needle exchanges has not led to an increase in drug use. On the contrary, needle exchange programs have reduced the rates of needle-sharing and have linked drug users with much-needed health services.


It seems the medical truth about drug use is in direct conflict with Mr. Rock's wish for so-called "progressive" policies, no matter how destructive they may actually be to the rest of society and drug addicts in particular.

Unsubstantiated Success
Stories from other Jurisdictions

The controversial recommendations in the Mayor's Plan for harm reduction were buttressed throughout the report by repeated so-called "success" stories in Switzerland and Frankfurt, Germany and the Netherlands, where this approach is now being carried out. The "success" in these jurisdictions, however, is questionable. Any such studies are unreliable at best and have been sharply criticized by other studies undertaken by experts in the field.

Further Pressure for
Liberalizing Drug Laws

Further pressure to make free heroin injection sites available has also come from the NDP. In August 1998, NDP MP Libby Davies (Vancouver East) introduced a motion in the House of Commons to set up clinical trials for a heroin prescription program. On February 9, 2001, Mr. Davies again demanded that heroin trials be conducted in safe injection sites and the decriminalization for the possession of drugs be implemented (Hansard, February 9, 2001, p.469). Added to this, the Vancouver Sun carried out a week long series of articles on drug use in November. These articles supported the Mayor's Plan, giving favourable accounts of how addicts will be greatly assisted by the harm reduction programs.

Concerns of Those
Working with Addicts

On the other hand, those individuals who actually work with drug addicts see "harm reduction," as recommended in the Vancouver Mayor's Plan, as a showy distraction from the real need: more detox beds, long-term treatment and counselling. They argue that addicts want to get clean, and there is a very delicate window of opportunity once they are willing to change. They need access to detox centres at the crucial moment will not benefit from facilities and government approval to continue with their drug problems.

Drug Courts

There is one bright spot in Canada, however, with respect to our drug addiction problems. Crime prevention funds are now supporting the establishment of special drug courts in Ontario and Vancouver. The drug court will be up and running in Vancouver in April and a drug court has been in existence in Toronto since December 1998. Under the guidelines of these courts, addicts charged with non-violent criminal offenses - trafficking, theft, soliciting for prostitution - avoid jail by agreeing to treatment and monitoring through regular urinalysis and counselling. Those who complete the program drug-free, receive a suspended sentence or a conditional discharge. Those who fail, return to the regular court system for sentencing.

The Ontario court has proved to be an outstanding success. Britain and Australia have similar courts in place and so does the US with more than 600. In Britain, a 1999 survey found that the crime rate among graduates of drug-treatment programs fell to half of what it had been.

UN Opposes Illicit Drug Dependency

Over the years, Reality has included many articles about the UN - most of it not complimentary! However, in this one area surrounding the control and use of illegal drugs, the UN has been exemplary. It firmly opposes drug cartels that smuggle and manufacture drugs around the world. These policies are based on the fact that there is no safe use of illegal drugs. As a result, the UN has established its UN International Narcotics Control Board representing the international scientific community, to monitor illegal drug use around the world.

There are three UN Treaties on Controlling Drugs which are aimed at keeping all illegal drugs illegal. The purpose of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (1961) was to combat drug abuse by coordinated international action. It attempted to limit the possession, use, distribution and manufacture and production of drugs, except for medical and scientific purposes. Further, it required that nations take all legislative and administrative steps necessary to prevent the illicit use of drugs. The 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Substances deals with the control of synthetic drugs to prevent their abuse, but permitted their use for therapeutic purposes. In 1988 the Convention Against the Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances dealt with comprehensive measures to stem drug trafficking, such as provisions against money laundering and to facilitate the extradition of drug traffickers. It also required heavier penalties for drug supply and trafficking and required that the breach of such legislation be a criminal offence.

Over the years, the UN General Assembly has also adopted numerous Resolutions and Decisions to control drug use.

The most recent drug control measure by the UN took place in September 2000 in Palermo, Sicily, Italy. This conference was called The Third Global Conference on Drug Abuse Prevention which issued a Declaration on Drug Use which is referred to as the Palermo Declaration. The Declaration provided, in part, as follows:
  • We support the three pillars of drug policy -- prevention, treatment and
    enforcement / interdiction.
  • We conclude that drug prevention, meaning the promotion of life without drug abuse, should be the governing point of all drug strategies and policies.
  • We recognize the important contribution of drug intervention and treatment as the path to a drug-free life.
  • We recognize that interdiction and enforcement play an important
    complementary role in reducing drug use.
  • We support no use of illegal drugs and no abuse of legal drugs.
  • We reject all efforts to legalize drugs.
  • We support laws and policies aimed at preventing drug use and restricting the availability of drugs in the society.
  • We support existing United Nations Conventions on narcotic drugs and
    psychotropic substances and expect governments to comply with these.
  • We support the upholding of proper scientific standards and ethics in all
    research, practices and evaluations related to narcotic drugs and
    psychotropic substances.
  • We oppose any strategies or policies which encourage or enable
    continuous drug use, such as so-called "harm reduction / harm
    minimization" ideologies and practices
Canada was one of the signatories to this Declaration. To date, 81 countries have signed this Declaration which requires 124 signatures before it becomes a binding convention or treaty.

The Vancouver Mayor's Plan discussion paper, which recommends that Canada would be open to changing its laws and perhaps permit addicts to be provided with free heroin at drop-in centres is in direct opposition to the Palermo Declaration and existing UN treaties.

Reasonable Canadians may well ask why the Canadian government slavishly adheres to treaties and conventions furthering feminism and abortion (the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women - CEDAW), and the break-down of the traditional family (UN Convention on the Rights of the Child), but appears ready to ignore its international obligations on the control of all illicit drugs. To conduct the clinical trials recommended in the Vancouver "Mayor's Plan" is to contradict our international obligations.

Please write to the following, urging them not to amend our legislation to conduct trials of administering free heroin to addicts and providing them with "safe" injection sites and needle exchanges. These proposals are totally unacceptable and contrary to our international obligations.

Please write to:

Hon. John Manley
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Lester B. Pearson Bldg Tower A
10th Floor
125 Sussex Drive
Ottawa ON K1A 0G2
Tel 613-995-1851 / Fax 613-996-3443

The Honourable Ms. Anne McLellan
Minister of Justice
Justice Building
284 Wellington Street
Ottawa ON K1A 0H8
Tel 613-992-4621 / Fax 613-990-7255

The Hon. Allan Rock
Minister of Health
Brooke Claxton Bldg
Address Locator 0916-A
Ottawa ON K1A 0K9
Tel 613-957-0200 / Fax 613-952-1154

Your MP
c/o House of Commons
Ottawa ON K1A 0A6

Also please write to:

Mr. Donald MacPherson
c/o Vancouver's Coalition for
Crime Prevention And Drug Treatment
#201 - 111 Water Street
Vancouver BC V6B 1A7

Footnotes:

1Gilligan, Jack, "Creating the Culture" Australian Drug Summit 2000, Sydney, 14 June 2000.
2Koopmans, Frans, Director Drug Rehabilitation Centre, Dordredat, Netherlands,
"The Dutch Experience" Australian Drug Summit 2000, Sydney 14 June 2000.
3City of Melbourne Draft Action Plan 2000-2003, August 9, 2000 page 9.

BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS