Category: Regulation

  • How a Prorogued Parliament Could Help Harm Reduction

    How a Prorogued Parliament Could Help Harm Reduction

    Today the Conservative government prorogued the Canadian parliament. What this means is that the current legislative agenda, on hold when parliament recessed for the summer, is now dead. This move does not come as much of a surprise given the recent cabinet shuffle that signaled some shifts in direction for the current government, and prorogation will give them a chance to reboot its legislative and parliamentary agenda.

    This is potentially good news for those of us who have been watching the progression of Bill C-65 (Respect for Communities act). The extensive provisions of Bill C-65 promised to make it more difficult to implement new supervised injection services in Canada because of the myriad levels of approval that service providers would need to demonstrate in their applications (potential service providers must make an application to the federal Minister of Health for an exemption to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act if they wish to shield clients and staff from potential drug charges). Now that Bill C-65 is dead it gives us some breathing room to continue to work on getting more supervised injection services in Canada.

    But dead does not necessarily mean buried. The CDPC will be watching closely when the Harper government announces its new legislative agenda in the fall. There’s always the chance the Harper government could reintroduce the bill in either its current form or as a revised attempt to muzzle harm reduction in Canada. Stay tuned. You know we will be.

    In the meantime, September 30, 2013 (9/30) is the second anniversary of the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision that allowed Insite (Vancouver’s supervised injection site) to stay open. The CDPC is working with our partners across the country to encourage local groups to host events and activities that mark this important occasion and raise the profile of safer consumption services in Canada. We hope you will join or help organize one of these events in your community.

    For organizations: Consider creating a mock injection site open to the public and the media and ask local supportive nurses to be on hand to answer questions. You might also want to do something simple like creating a media release making the case for these services in your city.

    For individuals: Send a letter to the local paper expressing your dismay at the lack of support for safer consumption services in your region or write an editorial for you local paper and along the lines of the letter suggested above. Visit your local MP, mayor, or other politicians and make the case for these services in your community. Let them know that the safety and health of every member of your community is important and that’s why you support these services. And don’t forget to the write letters to the Prime Minister’s Office expressing your concerns about the lack of federal support for harm reduction services.

    We are creating a tool kit of ideas for this day so contact Connie Carter if you would like more information.

  • The Harm Reduction debate: Political Expedience vs Progress

    The Harm Reduction debate: Political Expedience vs Progress

    On June 24th, the Urban Health Research Institute released a report on 15 years of data on drug use in the city of Vancouver. The results of their analysis are significant, but predictable to those who work in the field – harm reduction has saved lives and led to a decrease in drug use, while the war on drugs had failed to do either.

    Since the mid 1990’s, the number of people sharing needles has fallen dramatically while usage of needle exchange services and methadone treatment programs has increased. This means that far fewer people are getting HIV and Hep C from drug use and fewer are dying of overdoses because of services like Insite. Such would not have been possible without key champions and advocates from across the spectrum including health, municipal, and police officials, and of course organizations of people who use drugs including VANDU.

    An equally apparent takeaway from this report is that the “war on drugs” in Vancouver has completely failed to meet any of its objectives. Data from the same 15 years shows that despite the millions spent on drug enforcement and interdiction, drug availability and pricing has remained unaffected and stable.

    The findings in this report also illuminate the many misperceptions about harm reduction services that we often see in the media. One such misperception is that harm reduction services are somehow the opposite of abstinence-based drug treatment. In fact, when people access harm reduction services, including unused drug use supply distribution and methadone, they are often taking the first step towards abstinence and recovery.

    The Conservative Party of Canada is capitalizing on these misperceptions to support and promote the introduction of Bill C-65, the Respect for Communities Act. This legislation, if passed, will make it more difficult to set up life-saving supervised injection services in other parts of the country and is part of a sustained attack on harm reduction programs by the government’s National Anti-Drug Strategy.

    We know from talking with people from across the country, that many Canadians are concerned about this hostility to well-established harm reduction services, which are supported by organizations such as the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, UNAIDS, and the World Health Organization.

    It’s time to take a deeper look at the myths about harm reduction and expose them for what they are – politically expedient and uninformed dismissals of well-researched and successful health care services. It comes down to a rather obvious choice: Do we want people to use drugs openly in our streets or in other unsafe and unhygienic conditions, or do want to provide services that have shown to engage people in life-saving health care and drug treatment? It’s as simple as that and the Urban Health Research Institute’s report underscores this point with a wealth of data.

    Harm reduction services are based on a pragmatic, non-judgmental approach to the provision of health services that respects the dignity of people who use drugs and values their human rights. Because these services have minimal requirements for involvement, they are often the first points of entry to other health and social services.

    Harm reduction is not the only approach to problematic substance use but it is a major means of preventing the transmission of disease, overdose and death, connecting people to services and opening a pathway to change. These services have key secondary benefits such as increased access to health services, housing referrals, referrals to drug treatment, counseling, education, and testing for HIV and HCV.

    So next time you hear politicians saying they favour drug treatment over harm reduction consider the possibility that these services are part of the same continuum and ask them why they keep repeating these myths despite the existence of so much evidence to the contrary.

  • Why Decriminalize Drugs?

    Why Decriminalize Drugs?

    On Thursday, May 24th the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition released a report on Canadian drug policy. The report calls for the replacement of Canada’s National Anti-Drug Strategy with one focused on health and human rights, the scale-up of comprehensive health and social services, including housing and treatment services that engage people with drug problems; more robust educational programs about safer drug use, the decriminalization of all drugs for personal use and the creation of a regulatory system for adult cannabis use.

    The Canadian media responded quickly to our recommendation to decriminalize personal possession of drugs with questions about how this approach would work, especially when it comes to drugs like heroin and cocaine. Canada’s Conservative government also reacted swiftly to media coverage of our report and publicly dismissed our proposal to decriminalize the personal use of all other drugs.

    Let’s be very clear about what the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition is recommending: the full legal regulation of cannabis for adult use and the decriminalization of possession of small quantities of all other drugs for personal use. We do not at this time recommend full legal regulation of drugs other than cannabis; nor do we suggest that all currently illegal drugs should become widely available. Decriminalization of possession of these drugs will not address the harms associated with an underground market. But it is a first step towards a more effective policy. Decriminalization, a strategy currently in use by up to 30 countries world-wide, has been quietly adopted in the wake of the escalating costs of prohibition and its failure to stem the tide of drug use and eliminate drug markets.

    Politicians still insist that decriminalizing drug use would send the “wrong message”. This idea is grounded in the false belief that criminalizing drugs keeps people from using them and lessening penalties for drug use will in fact result in higher rates of drug use.  But in countries and regions where decriminalization has been implemented, this has just not been the case. As the Global Commission on Drug Policy suggested in 2011,

    “A key idea behind the ‘war on drugs’ approach was that the threat of arrest and harsh punishment would deter people from using drugs. In practice, this hypothesis has been disproved – many countries that have enacted harsh laws and implemented widespread arrest and imprisonment of drug users and low-level dealers have higher levels of drug use and related problems than countries with more tolerant approaches. Similarly, countries that have introduced decriminalization, or other forms of reduction in arrest or punishment, have not seen the rises in drug use or dependence rates that had been feared.”

    International comparisons also show us that there is no correlation between the harshness of enforcement and the prevalence of drug use. Even in states that have decriminalized all drugs, the sky has not fallen. In 2000, Portugal moved to decriminalize all drugs, including cocaine and heroin, at the same time as it scaled up the availability of services to address drug use problems. By moving personal possession away from law enforcement, drug use did not rise significantly, especially when compared with neighbouring countries. Portugal has also seen a reduction in illegal drug use among problematic drug users and teens, a reduced burden on the criminal justice system, and a significant drop in HIV infections and drug-related deaths.

    Prohibition has failed. Drug use is still high, incarceration for drug offenses is increasing and despite billions of dollars spent over the years, law enforcement has failed to meet its objectives of protecting public health and public safety.

    One of the drugs that causes the most health and public safety harms – alcohol — is completely legal and widely available yet other drugs with a relatively small public health footprint remain completely illegal. Using the criminal law to discourage a behaviour like drug use only throws the law into disrepute because a complex phenomena like harmful drug use is the result of many factors, none of which the law, police, courts or prisons are prepared to address.

    In preparing our report, we talked to people across the country – service providers, family members, people who use drugs — and they told us again and again that Canada’s outdated approach to drug policy is hurting our citizens. In fact, using law enforcement to curb drug use increases its harms by driving it into the shadows. The criminalization of drug use also makes it more difficult to engage people in vital and life-saving health care services.

    We need to overhaul our approach to drugs. Globally, the current system of drug control is under considerable pressure to change. Some national governments have begun to chart their own paths when it comes to drug control, including experimenting with decriminalization. It’s time to follow suit, and modernise Canada’s legislative, policy and regulatory frameworks that address drugs.

  • Canada’s New Marijuana Medical Access Program

    Canada’s New Marijuana Medical Access Program

    On June 10, 2013 the Minister of Health released the new regulations that will govern access to cannabis for medical purposes in Canada. The regulations are the result of consultations over the past two years and introduce significant changes to the program. The regulations eliminate previous requirements that patients submit an application to Health Canada requesting authorization to possess cannabis. Instead they must seek a document from their physicians that they would then present to a licensed producer. Though this move could potentially streamline access to cannabis for medical purposes, the Canadian Medical Association has released a report that suggests that many physicians believe they do not know enough about the benefits and risks of cannabis to “prescribe” it to their patients for medical purposes. The irony of this situation is that the prohibition of cannabis has limited the amount of research into its medical benefits (though research is increasing).

    In addition, the new rules eliminate personal and designated production by individuals in their homes by March 31, 2014. This means that current options to access cannabis for medical purposes will be replaced by regulated and commercial Licensed Producers and medical cannabis dispensaries remain excluded from the supply chain by these new regulations. Many patients produce their own cannabis in order to access strains that they have found to be helpful. Maintaining one’s own garden is also cost-effective. Even the government’s own regulatory impact statement notes that the cost of medical cannabis will go up with the new rules. These cost increases could potentially act as further barriers to accessing cannabis for medical purposes.

    The exclusion of medical cannabis dispensaries from the supply chain is counterintuitive. The personnel working in these dispensaries are experts on using cannabis to treat a variety of medical conditions. Dispensaries also offer a range of patient-centred services and supports that help challenge the isolation many patients experience. And Canadian medical cannabis dispensaries have developed a rigorous accreditation program to ensure consistency in both the quality of their services and the products dispensed at these sites. Without dispensaries, patients will have to submit their doctor’s authorization to a licensed commercial producer and then receive their medication by courier, without the supports accorded by face-to-face consultations.

    The odd thing about the new rules is that they introduce a fully commercialized route of access to cannabis for medical purposes while keeping the overall prohibition of this drug fully in place. Indeed some of the provisions for producers of cannabis for medical purposes may serve as a model for production of cannabis for a legal, regulated market. At the same time, the requirements for licensed producers are quite strict and could make it very difficult for small growers to transition to this new regime. It is also unclear how many licensed producers will be approved by Health Canada. This later point is key for patients who want to able to access a range of strains of cannabis.

    All in all, these new rules will likely result in new barriers to accessing cannabis for medical purposes and will end up costing patients more money over the long-term.

    – Connie Carter & Lynne Belle-Isle

  • If The War On Drugs Isn’t Working, Why Are We Still Fighting It?

    If The War On Drugs Isn’t Working, Why Are We Still Fighting It?

    When leaders from the Organization of American States gathered in Cartagena last April, Prime Minister Stephen Harper offered a rare concession on the topic of drug policy.

    In response to the chorus of dissent coming from countries like Guatemala, Mexico and Colombia, Harper stated:

    “I think what everyone believes and agrees with, and to be frank myself, is that the current approach is not working, but it is not clear what we should do.”

    But as the Canadian Press reported yesterday, it would seem that the Harper government is steadfast in its commitment to dysfunctional anti-drug strategies:

    “Spillover from Mexico’s violent drug war is prompting the Harper government and the Canadian military to become more involved in helping defend the tiny, Central American country of Belize.

    A series of internal reports, obtained by The Canadian Press under the access to information law, show the government has quietly increased co-operation with the Commonwealth nation, formerly known as British Honduras.”

    While details are scarce, the Canadian military has been actively participating in a variety of counter-narcotic operations in the region. For example, in December, a Canadian Forces press release indicated that the Canadian Navy was involved in a “large drug bust”.

    From the release:

    “Working alongside our American and multinational allies, HMCS Ottawa’s successful operation demonstrates our Government’s commitment to address the illegal trafficking of drugs in the Caribbean basin”, said the Honourable Peter MacKay.   “I’m proud our sailors act as excellent ambassadors for our nation, for making Canadian streets safer by patrolling the seas to our south and for working with like-minded nations to better protect citizens of our continent.”

    This particular dimension of the war on drugs – military interdiction ­– has been especially damaging to those Central and South American states that have hosted broad counter-narcotic conflicts. And tragically, the mistakes that have been made time and time again seem to be materializing in Belize.

    The rationale for the Canadian military’s involvement in Central America and the Caribbean is built on a series of faulty premises. Firstly – that military might and securitization can defeat drug cartels. One need only look to Mexico, which saw an explosion in violence after President Calderón declared war on the drug cartels, to see how woefully dangerous an idea this is.

    Secondly, regardless of the Canadian military’s interdiction efforts, the supply of illegal drugs to Canadian consumers has remained the same. As with all attempts over the last forty-plus years to control the flow of narcotics into Canada, as long as a demand exists, the supply will continue. No counter-narcotic activity, no matter how costly or logistically sophisticated, has ever managed to halt the flow of drugs across Canadian borders. All it does is shift violence from one theatre to the next, destroying communities and causing unneeded deaths as conflict spills from state to state.

    And so the question is – if war on drugs isn’t working, as PM Harper has stated, then why are we still fighting it?

    Thankfully there is a silver lining to the Belize report – if one scrolls below the fold and scans the comment section, you’ll find an outpouring of common sense from readers.

    As one commenter put it:

    “The single biggest thing we can do is end the drug war at home.”

  • Attorney Generals Speak Out On Pot Prohibition

    Attorney Generals Speak Out On Pot Prohibition

    Last Friday, in a commentary piece for the Globe and Mail, four former B.C. Attorney Generals came out in very clear terms and said what needs to be said: Canada’s pot laws don’t work.

    “As four former attorneys-general of British Columbia, we were the province’s chief prosecutors and held responsibility for overseeing the criminal justice system. We know the burden imposed on B.C.’s policing and justice system by the enforcement of marijuana prohibition and the role that prohibition itself plays in driving organized crime and making criminals out of otherwise law-abiding citizens.”

    – Ujjal Dosanjh, Colin Gabelmann, Graeme Bowbrick & Geoff Plant

    This is the paradox of prohibition. Rather than reducing the flow of drugs, prohibition generates a profitable black market, especially in the case of a widely used substance such as cannabis. While banning drugs and applying the criminal law to those who produce, distribute and possess them is intended to stifle the market and curb use, in reality, it only makes the market more robust and profitable where are any consumer demand is present.

    But the economic arguments against prohibition, while indisputable, neglect the real problem, which is moral in nature – prohibition puts our government, courts and police in a position where they are directly harming, rather than protecting, the Canadian public.

    The Canadian Drug Policy Coalition commends British Columbia’s former attorney generals for speaking out on the issue of cannabis regulation. The time has come for Canada to build a drug policy that does more good than harm – one that focuses on protecting the health and safety of Canadians.

    If you agree and would like to help, please consider becoming a member or signing up to our newsletter and we will keep you updated on upcoming events, actions and campaigns.

  • 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.

  • 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.