Donate

Category: All

  • Supervised Consumption Services and Community Support

    Supervised Consumption Services and Community Support

    Supervised injection sites help save lives and protect communities. This was the conclusion of over 30 research studies on Vancouver’s own supervised injection site (SIS) known as Insite. And Canada’s Supreme Court agreed in September 2011, ordering the federal Minister of Health to grant a Section 56 exemption to the Controlled Drugs and Substance Act to allow Insite to continue to operate.

    To scale up harm reduction and support the development of similar services throughout the province, the BC Ministry of Health has now revised its “Guidance Document for Supervised Injection Services.” Written for health care professionals, it provides advice to health authorities and other organizations considering supervised injection services in their local areas.

    According to provincial policy, anyone who wants to offer this service will need to consider how they will sustain the support of local groups like medical health officers, police departments and other potentially interested groups. The decision of Canada’s Supreme Courts makes brief mention of future applications for a section 56 exemption:

    [153] The CDSA grants the Minister discretion in determining whether to grant exemptions. That discretion must be exercised in accordance with the Charter. This requires the Minister to consider whether denying an exemption would cause deprivations of life and security of the person that are not in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. The factors considered in making the decision on an exemption must include evidence, if any, on the impact of such a facility on crime rates, the local conditions indicating a need for such a supervised injection site, the regulatory structure in place to support the facility, the resources available to support its maintenance, and expressions of community support or opposition.

    This last sentence has raised concerns about the likely success of future supervised consumption services. Despite overwhelming evidence of their successes, harm reduction services continue to generate public controversy, meaning that some members of a community are likely to object to supervised consumption services. But the existence of opposition does not necessarily mean that potential applicants must halt their efforts. In fact, the Supreme Court’s judgment is not a checklist of requirements for a successful application but rather a description of the factors the Minister must consider when making a decision. Potential applicants must be able to demonstrate that they have gauged public support and can offer evidence that it exists. Applications, as the B.C. provincial government suggests, must include evidence of positive support along with opposition.

    It is important to remember that Insite did not necessarily start out with full community support. Rather, over time, and as the facility continued to operate, the surrounding community felt its positive effects and researchers were able to demonstrate its effectiveness in terms of health and social order. This does not mean that if one group objects then the application will necessarily fail. Potential applicants for an exemption will need to describe what efforts will be made to respond to community concerns and they will need to consider how they plan to educate their community about the positive effects of these services.

  • Coalition Spotlight: Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network

    Coalition Spotlight: Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network

    The HIV epidemic is one of the most crucial public health issues of our time. What at one time seemed to be an insurmountable challenge has been abetted by education, research, innovation, and an immeasurable amount of hard work. The tools to curb the spread of HIV and improve the lives and health of those living with the disease are now more widely available, but the possibility of fostering an AIDS-free generation still faces a number of obstacles, most of which relate to unrealized human rights, access to medicine, harm reduction, and unjust laws.

    One of most prolific groups working on solving the problems that are currently hindering the fight against HIV/AIDS is the Toronto-based Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network. Celebrating its 20th year of operations this December, the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network is Canada’s leading advocacy organization dedicated to legal and human rights issues related to HIV/AIDS. The network’s mission is to promote the human rights of those living with and vulnerable to HIV/AIDS, in Canada and abroad, through research and analysis, advocacy and litigation, public education and community mobilization.

    One such issue that the Legal Network is currently working on is the matter of syringe exchanges in Canadian prisons. Syringe exchange is critical to any comprehensive strategy to prevent the spread of infectious diseases, but the distribution of sterile injection equipment is not currently permitted within any Canadian prison — despite the overwhelming evidence of the benefits of prison-based needle and syringe programs (PNSPs) around the world

    To challenge this policy, the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, along with Prisoners with HIV/AIDS Support Action Network (PASAN), CATIE, the Canadian Aboriginal AIDS Network (CAAN) and Steven Simons, a former federal prisoner, launched a lawsuit on September 25th against the Government of Canada over “its failure to protect the health of people in prison through its ongoing refusal to implement clean needle and syringe programs to prevent the spread of HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) in federal institutions.”

    Rates of HIV and hepatitis C among Canadian prisoners are 10 to 30 times higher to that of the overall population. Although illicit drug use is strictly prohibited within correctional facilities, its prevalence is an undeniable fact.

    While the question of giving prisoners access to clean injection equipment might at first glance seem counterintuitive, it’s actually quite straightforward given the evidence that PNSPs benefit prisoner health, and in turn, the public health at large.

    For more information on the court case and PNSPs, visit the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network’s website for the campaign – Prison Health Now.

    In addition to matters directly related to drug policy such as PNSPs, the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network deals with issues such as discrimination, Aboriginal communities, women’s rights, sex work, income security, and so forth (click here for a complete list).

    Other current campaigns and activities include:

    Positive Women: Exposing Injustice

    A 45-minute documentary film that tells the personal stories of four HIV-positive women, “Positive Women Exposing Justice” explores the reality of the criminalization of HIV non-disclosure in Canada. For more information, visit the film’s website.

    HIV Non-Disclosure and the Criminal Law

    On October 25th, the Legal Network released several publications analyzing two recent Supreme Court rulings on cases of HIV non-disclosure. A summary of the decisions and a longer analysis are available here.

    Making Good on Canada’s Pledge: Affordable Medicines for All

    For many years, the Legal Network has spearheaded a global campaign to reform Canada’s Access to Medicine Regime (CAMR), which would allow Canada to ensure greater access to affordable, generic medicines for AIDS and other health issues in developing countries. Central to this campaign is Bill C-398, which if passed will fix and streamline CAMR, allowing medications to get to those most in need.

    For more information on Bill C-398, visit the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network Medicines for All website.

    On December 4, 2012, at 7:00 p.m., philanthropists, funders, members, community organizations, people living with HIV/AIDS, and allies will gather at the Law Society of Upper Canada (Convocation Hall) in Toronto to celebrate the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network and honour the recipients of the 2012 Awards for Action on HIV/AIDS and Human Rights. Click here for more information on the event.

    The Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network is a Canadian Drug Policy Coalition partner in change, working towards a better drug policy for Canada based on evidence, human rights, social inclusion and public health.

  • Bud Osborn: Drug War Poems & DTES history

    Bud Osborn: Drug War Poems & DTES history

    Bud Osborn’s prose charges drug policy debates with deep revelations and compassion. As a long time poet and social activist living in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside, Bud is a light for many. His evidence is wrapped in poetry that can only come from first hand experiences. He turns the suffering he sees into poignant words aimed at shattering the paradigm of prohibition.

    At an epicenter of the war on drugs in Canada, the residents of the Downtown Eastside have long known the harms of prohibition. On September 22, 2012 the community gathered under a tent at Oppenheimer park for a day of open dialogue and discussion and food. After the acknowledgment and welcoming to Coast Salish Territory, Bud opened the day with this poem on the drug war and the story of the neighborhood. Please share this video and let his words inspire more discussion and change. Together we can build a future of collective self-determination and social justice.

  • Envy and Love in Portland

    Envy and Love in Portland

    Is it possible for a Canadian interested in issues like scaling-up harm reduction and drug law reform to envy the U.S.? That’s the worrisome question that crossed my mind as I sat in the opening plenary of the 9th National Harm Reduction Conference in Portland, Oregon.

    Two U.S. states recently voted to pass ballot initiatives that would end the prohibition of cannabis use by adults. And in the spirit of dignity, law reform and harm reduction activists have championed a myriad of community-based and public health department-led initiatives to scale-up overdose prevention and response programs. That reality is evident here in Portland, given the number of sessions devoted to this topic. Speakers like Willie Dudley of Casa Segura in Oakland, CA, talked about the empowerment experienced by peers who’ve been trained to respond to overdoses with the opiate agonist Naloxone.

    And then there’s Gil Kerlikowske. He’s the head of the White House’s Office on National Drug Control Policy. Given the recent U.S. election outcome, it looks like he gets to keep his job as Obama’s drug Czar. Typically that office has championed the war on drugs and all its brutality, but Kerlikowske delivered welcoming remarks to the delegates in Portland via video feed. He took pains to note that he was the first person in his position to do so. Likely his appearance at this conference is the result of the hard work of relationship building done by people like Allan Clear, head of the New York-based Harm Reduction Coalition. Kerlikowske reiterated his support for syringe exchange and echoed the commitment made by his office this past summer to support the scale-up of overdose programs including making Naloxone more readily available.

    Of course rhetoric is one thing and reality is another. Behind Kerlikowske’s words is still the reality of the U.S.-led war on drugs, which includes American support for the militarization of the drug war along the Mexico/U.S. border. There’s still a federal ban on funding for syringe distribution re-imposed by a Republican controlled congress in 2010. And there are still thousands of arrests daily for drug possession. One need only to turn briefly to Michelle Alexander’s book, The New Jim Crow, to be astutely reminded that this drug war is a racist one. But then again, these realities are also true in Canada where First Nations people are disproportionately imprisoned, where Canada also supports the militarization of the U.S./Mexico drug war and where harm reduction has been redlined in the National Anti-Drug Strategy.

    Yes it’s true that we have deep political resistance to harm reduction in Canada but nevertheless we must figure how we can work together across the country to scale-up harm reduction services. We can’t keep it secret anymore. The proponents of harm reduction have created a profoundly important practice of health engagement and we have something to teach the rest of the system. So let’s get that conversation going. If you’ve already started, let us know what works best and we will share that wisdom with everyone who will listen.

  • A Seismic Shift in Drug Policy

    A Seismic Shift in Drug Policy

    Watching the vote in last night in the U.S. was quite an amazing experience. We watched history being made yet again and not just with the re-election of America’s first black president.

    Yes, a second term for Obama was a rare feat given the poor economic situation in the U.S. and the vulnerability that brings for an incumbent president. A second term for Obama is without a doubt a historical event. But there was more – there was a seismic shift in the world of drug policy. In the belly of the beast of the war on drugs, in the country that historically has promoted a vigorous global assault on drugs and drug users, citizens of Washington state and Colorado sunk a wedge a mile wide into the monolithic paradigm of drug prohibition. In both states the voters have overwhelmingly supported the regulation of marijuana for adult use.

    Prohibition is upheld by a global consensus enshrined in international drug treaties. Much like the mortar that held the Berlin Wall together, it holds fast as long as no one challenges the logic of the system in a significant way. As long as things stay the same and no one has the courage to confront the absurdity of the status quo, the status quo prevails. But once the wall starts to be dismantled by ordinary citizens and the authorities stand aside, it is over. The mortar crumbles like dust. What was inconceivable only a few years ago seems like common sense today. Just like that wall in Berlin came tumbling down on November 9th, 1989, prohibition is collapsing before our eyes. The citizens of the U.S. have peacefully voted to overthrow the tired and worn out policy of drug prohibition and common sense has prevailed. It’s about time.

    There are many questions about how these two states will move forward and actually implement the regulations they have proposed. As they say, the devil is in the details. But that’s the grinding day-to-day work of finding the best regulatory regime that meets the many competing goals that are important to our communities – public health, public safety, civil liberties, education about the harms and benefits of substance use and the stewardship of our youth within a culture that has so many mixed messages around drug use. This is important work that we believe will improve the quality of life in those states that made this decision to move forward. The fact that resources will be focused on how to best regulate marijuana rather than whether to regulate this ubiquitous product is the most important point for those of us in Canada.

    Now that the U.S. has opened the door and started down that path towards regulation, the old excuse that Canadian politicians always use – that we can’t change anything until the Americans do, is gone. So let’s get on with it.

  • Drug Policy 101: Dangers of an Unregulated Drug Market

    Drug Policy 101: Dangers of an Unregulated Drug Market

    “We need to recognize that it’s not deviant or pathological for humans to desire to alter their consciousness with psychoactive substances. They’ve been doing it since pre-history… and it can be in a religious context, it can be in a social context, or it can be in the context of symptom management.”

    – Dr. Perry Kendall, Provincial Health Officer, British Columbia

    If the past century of prohibition has proved anything, it is that the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act has failed to discourage Canadians from using illegal drugs. Likewise, prohibition has also shown us that the financial incentive to produce and sell illegal drugs is far more powerful than the deterrent effect of the criminal law.

    This ongoing flow of supply and demand has, of course, resulted in a large and highly profitable black market for drugs in Canada. One aspect of this black market that goes unaddressed by the criminal justice system is that prohibition results in a situation where Canadians are consuming a completely unregulated product.

    Because the product is unregulated, its quality is not just questionable, but potentially dangerous. And those individuals who use drugs of questionable quality often have no idea as to the nature of the substance they are consuming.

    Some of the most illuminating examples of the dangers of an unregulated market can be found in relation to the differences between “ecstasy” and MDMA. In its pure form, and taken in controlled doses, MDMA is a relatively safe substance when compared to other drugs, legal and illegal.

    Many scientists and doctors have argued in favour of its regulation, including former UK government drugs advisor David Nutt, who recently conducted a televised study of MDMA’s therapeutic potential, and BC Provincial Health Officer Dr. Perry Kendall, who went on the record stating that MDMA could be “safe” for adults if consumed responsibly, and has called for a public dialogue on a regulatory regime. Such a dialogue could enable a full and honest discussion on the benefits and harms of using substances such as MDMA and similar drugs.

    But because MDMA isn’t currently regulated by a governing body, we have “ecstasy” which is regulated by the criminal element that currently controls its distribution. “Ecstasy” as opposed to pure MDMA, can contain a combination of various drugs, such as PCP, ketamine, methamphetamines and others. This leads to unknown purity, unknown dosage and the possibility that a pill could be contaminated. And the results of consuming pills of unknown origin can be tragic. Examples of the dangers of the current ecstasy market include a string of deaths throughout western Canada, where individuals using ecstasy died because the pills they took were cut with PMMA; a stimulant that has been linked to a number of deaths around the world during the same timeframe.

    These and similar deaths have lead many communities around the country to call for a different approach to how we deal with drugs like ecstasy, as “Just Say No” programs and wishing abstinence upon young people is clearly not working.

    Next Steps:

    As the current approach, which relies upon fear and ignorance to dissuade Canadians from using MDMA has failed, Canada should adopt a knowledge-based approach to best ensure that those who use MDMA and other drugs stay safe and informed.

    One of such existing approaches is the Dutch Drugs and Information Monitoring System (DIMS); a country-wide system of labs that will analyze substances without any threat of legal recourse. Since the 1990s, the Netherlands government has used this system as a measure to prevent the harms associated with unexpected and dangerous substances found in “party pills” and other drugs. The three main substances that DIMS tests are ecstasy/MDMA, amphetamine/Speed, and cocaine, and has tested some 100,000 drug samples since being established. Implementing such a system in Canada would have numerous public health benefits, including allowing drug users to have a full understanding of what they are actually taking, while also enabling public health authorities to respond more effectively when hazardous substances appear on the drug market.

    Long term solution: A regulated drug market

    MDMA is subject to the UN convention on psychotropic substances, rendering it illegal around the world, and any country that attempted to regulate it would be in violation of this treaty. However, there is currently legislation in front of the New Zealand government that would see the creation of the world’s first regulated recreational drug market.

    Under the new regulations, synthetic drugs, also known as “legal highs” or “party pills” would have to undergo an approval process before being brought to market. This process would place the burden on the synthetic drug industry, which would have to prove its products are safe before being made available to the consumer. Taking up to two years, the approval process will determine the effects and side-effects of a proposed drug, measuring it against an established health criteria.

    While it will only cover new drugs, i.e. those not covered by existing UN treaties, New Zealand’s proposed system could function as a blueprint for other nations to pursue the regulation of recreational drugs in the future.

  • The Drug War in Your Passport

    The Drug War in Your Passport

    On October 18th, 1929, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in England, the highest court in Canada at the time, made a landmark decision that would forever change the role of women in Canadian politics. It repealed a previous ruling by the Supreme Court and made official women’s status as “persons” in Canada, which meant that from that point on, women were eligible to become members of the senate.

    The individual largely responsible for this ruling was the trailblazing women’s rights activist Emily Murphy, who three years prior became the British Empire’s first female magistrate. Along with four other women, who came to be known as “the famous five”, Murphy campaigned for this crucial shift in the meaning of the word “person”.

    Murphy’s legacy is alive and well today, with statues and art depicting her campaign located across the country. And now, according to a recent announcement, she will also be appearing in the pages of the new Canadian passports, alongside Terry Fox.

    But Murphy has another, lesser-known legacy. She is, perhaps more than any one individual, responsible for the criminalization of cannabis in Canada and the beginning of this country’s 90-year war on pot.

    From 1920 to 1922, Murphy wrote a series of articles for Maclean’s magazine, which would later be collected in her book “The Black Candle”. These writings, which amounted to an explicitly racist, anti-immigrant diatribe, were aimed at “educating” the Canadian public as to the dangers of drug use and drug trafficking.

    Informed by her experience as a magistrate in Alberta and a tour of Vancouver’s Chinatown, Murphy surmised that drug addiction was “a scourge so dreadful in its effects that it threatens the very foundations of civilization.”

    In “The Black Candle” she argued that substances such as cannabis, opium and cocaine were being trafficked throughout the country as part of a vast conspiracy aimed at corrupting the “purity” of the white race and the destruction of Anglo-Saxon communities.

    Of cannabis users she wrote:

    “The addict loses all sense of moral responsibility. Addicts to this drug, while under its influence, are immune to pain, and could be severely injured without having any realization of their condition. While in this condition they become raving maniacs and are liable to kill or indulge in any form of violence to other persons, using the most savage methods of cruelty without, as said before, any sense of moral responsibility.”

    Capitalizing on the anti-Chinese sentiment in Vancouver at the time, she successfully elevated and expanded upon the moral panic associated with opium to the national level and helped persuade the Canadian government to enact stricter drug laws.

    In 1921, An Act to Amend the Opium and Narcotic Drug Act increased maximum sentences for trafficking and possession from one year to seven years. And in 1923, informed by Murphy’s argument and “evidence”, the Canadian government became the first western country to ban cannabis.

    It is a strange and tragic irony that Murphy, who used a contrived drug scare to attack immigrants, should after all these years appear in Canada’s new passport; a document that is meant to enshrine and protect the rights of all Canadian citizens, new or old.

  • Reporting on Canadian Drug Policy

    Reporting on Canadian Drug Policy

    The CDPC is in the process of preparing a report on Canadian drug policy. Due out this winter in advance of the next meeting of the International Narcotics Control Board, this report will assess the state of Canada’s drug policy frameworks using a public health, social inclusion and human rights lens.

    In Canada, as in most other places in the world, the best-funded response to problems associated with drug use has been to increase law enforcement efforts, resulting in the incarceration of increasing numbers of people who use drugs.

    Our critical assessment of policy frameworks will reveal the extent to which our governments are committed to effective policies that prevent and reduce harms associated with alcohol, tobacco and other drugs and seek alternatives to criminalization.

    This report will provide the baseline data for future reports on drug policy in Canada and it will be a cornerstone in the Coalition’s advocacy work. The CDPC is seeking your help with this project. If you have any information you would like to share about your organization or your experience with drug policy in Canada, or if you want more information about this project, please contact Connie Carter, Senior Policy Analyst, by email at [email protected].

  • Meeting up with the Caravan for Peace, Justice and Dignity

    Meeting up with the Caravan for Peace, Justice and Dignity

    Gillian Maxwell and CDPC Executive Director Donald MacPherson travelled with the Caravan for Peace from Baltimore to DC where their campaign to bring the realities of the drug war in Mexico to those in the US ended after meetings with US officials on Capitol Hill. The closing ceremony took place in Malcolm X Park where Sicilia gave a poetic and heartfelt speech about hope for the future and building a civil society movement for change through the connections that had been established during the Caravan’s presence in the US. Canadian leadership to end the drug war in Mexico is sorely needed at this time. CDPC will continue to work with our Mexican and American partners towards this end. 

    Having been part of the birthing process of the North American caravan that was inspired by the heartbreak of Javier Sicilia over the death of his son at the hands of a Mexican cartel, it seems only fitting to be joining it at the very end of its journey coast to coast across the United States.

    The Canadians rallied to the call and joined the Caravan in Baltimore for a Town Hall meeting on ending the War on Drugs. I was slated to speak on the panel to talk about the story of INSITE opening in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside. It is a heroic tale of desperate circumstances, overcoming adversity and being part of a movement that went from local to national and prevailed. I talked about discovering the unique quality inside of us that we all have to offer to our community and how connecting to that is what makes the difference.

    It was the first time I told this story from a personal perspective. I had my doubts but was encouraged by others who reminded me that I have been saying for years that we need to talk about drug policy reform in a more interesting way than statistics. Put your money where your mouth is, so to speak.

    I stood in front of an audience of people who understood suffering only too well. There were the beleaguered African American community members from Baltimore, whose gracious and welcoming demeanour is totally disarming. Yes, they could talk about being stigmatised and persecuted for taking a stand.

    Then, there were the members of the Caravan led by the inspirational being that is Javier Sicilia. He is unwavering in his commitment to keep going and speaks so eloquently of the issues that keep a wealthy and proud country like Mexico caught up in the past.

    And then there were the rest of the Caravan pilgrims; mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, spouses and children of those who have been disappeared or killed. They are innocents whose lives were totally changed by an experience completely out of their control, and for most, without any hope of resolution or justice. Impunity is the worst betrayal of these gentle souls. Not only were their loved ones in the wrong place at the wrong time, the perpetrators of their murders are allowed to go free. There is no peace for these families and certainly no hope of justice. However, their quiet presence, their insistence in not being silent and asking for accountability is beyond dignified.

    So, I stood in front of this group of people and spoke about the trials and tribulations of a community in the north who were indomitable and dedicated in their creative efforts to stand up for people dying unnecessarily of drug overdoses and HIV/AIDS. I had reservations about my own story, as I hadn’t experienced the violence and tragedy that the caravan had emerged from. But many of the members came up to me and shook my hand afterwards and thanked me for speaking. Then I realised that in that moment we shared our humanity. It is all we have to offer each other and it is enough.

    – Gillian Maxwell