Stealth Plan to Change our Drug Policies 

By C. Gwendolyn Landolt

National Vice President, REAL Women of Canada

Most Canadians are not aware that the Liberal government is engaged in a stealth campaign to shift Canada’s drug policies from its current three pillar foundation of enforcement, education, and treatment and rehabilitation, to that of “harm reduction.”  The latter strategy is based on the proposition that drug use is hard to stop and society should learn to live with the non-medical use of drugs.  Harm education includes: 

   1.      decriminalizing marijuana;

  2.      reducing and eliminating penalties for drug offences;

  3.      providing free drugs (maintenance programs) for drug addicts;

  4.      establishing needle exchange programs; and

  5.      teaching responsible drug use to adolescents, instead of working toward prevention of drug use. 

Unfortunately, “harm reduction” condones drug use and encourages the downward spiral of addicts, condemning them to be forever locked in the cycle of degradation, with their only focus being on how to obtain the next injection whenever, wherever and from whomever.  Rehabilitation is not high on the list of priorities.

This shift in policy to harm reduction is being carried out quietly, behind the scenes, by way of bureaucratic initiatives, which authorize “pilot projects,” supposedly in order that these controversial strategies may be assessed. 

The argument in support of these drug strategies always remains the same.  It is supposed to get the addicts off the streets, reduce AIDS and Hepatitis C, reduce crime, and lead to safer communities. Unfortunately, none of this has happened.  Neither crime, nor drug overdoses have decreased.  Preliminary figures released by the BC Coroner’s last November indicate that the number of deaths by drug overdose increased, since the safe injection site was opened in Vancouver in 2003.  Instead of curtailing HIV and Hepatitis C, the infections have increased in areas where harm reduction policies have been implemented. These areas have become “honey pots” or meeting points for drug users and dealers, who know that these sites are a “no-go” area for police.  This has led to such areas gaining recognition as safe havens 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 both the go-ahead for drug users and protection for drug marketers.

In short, these pilot projects do little to change the drug scene, nor help the addict.  

It is significant that similar pilot projects have been tried in Europe and found to be unsuccessful in dealing with drug addiction, despite claims to the contrary.  For example, the Swiss government introduced the same trials that Canada is now undertaking, and claims they were a success.  However, independent evaluations of these trials by the UN International Control Board and independent researchers found the Swiss trials were deeply flawed, both scientifically and medically.  Similarly, the Canadian trials, according to critics, are designed to garner positive results, not accurate information.  The result of the trials in Canada, unfortunately, will be promoted as a success, and will be given as one of the reasons why our drug laws should be relaxed.

Auditor General Sheila Fraser, however, reviewed Canada’s current drug laws, and in her report of February 2001, stated that there was a fundamental failure of leadership and coordination, a lack of resources and a failure to enforce Canada’s drug policy by the federal government, which has led to increased problems with the non-medical use of drugs.

The Liberal government, however, will now use its own failure to properly implement its drug policy as yet another reason why it is necessary to relax our drug laws.

Although these government “pilot projects” are laughable to anyone with common sense, they are, in fact, very dangerous indeed, since they indicate the direction in which the Liberal government is headed.  Count on it to make amendments to our national drug policy based on the unreliable “results” of these pilot projects.