Donate

Category: Harm Reduction

  • IT IS NOT A CRIME TO SAVE A LIFE

    IT IS NOT A CRIME TO SAVE A LIFE

    Supervised Consumption Sites (SCS) and Overdose Prevention Sites (OPS) are critical, evidence-based interventions that save lives. In Ontario, an estimated 6 to 7 people die every day due to the toxic, unregulated drug supply.

    Despite this, the provincial government has increasingly restricted access to these essential services through funding cuts and stricter regulations. In response, communities are taking action. Grassroots organizations, volunteers, and harm reduction advocates are stepping in to operate OPS independently and meet urgent local needs.

    This document provides an overview of key legal considerations for individuals and groups involved in supporting or running an OPS in Ontario.

  • FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Province moves to circumvent B.C. Supreme Court, harm reduction nurses slam “recipe for preventable death”

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Province moves to circumvent B.C. Supreme Court, harm reduction nurses slam “recipe for preventable death”

    Victoria, B.C. | April 26, 2024 — The Harm Reduction Nurses Association is profoundly frustrated and disappointed to hear the British Columbia provincial government’s announcement that they have sought permission from the Federal government to recriminalize all people who are at risk of dying from the unregulated drug crisis who lack access to housing or 24/7 safer use spaces in their communities.

    “The B.C. government’s actions today will put people who use drugs and people who rely on public space at further risk of harm and death,” says Corey Ranger of the Harm Reduction Nurses Association. “We all want and deserve communities where all people, whether they use drugs or not, can access safety and well-being. By imposing these restrictions on the decriminalization pilot without offering real solutions like expanding overdose prevention services and access to housing, the province has declared some lives unworthy of saving.” 

    The BC Supreme Court injunction to prevent Bill 34, the Restricting Public Consumption of Illegal Substances Act, from coming into force found that the province’s proposed restrictions on decriminalization would lead to irreparable harm. The Harm Reduction Nurses Association has previously reached out to the Province with an offer to collaborate to address concerns without causing further harm, through a range of legal and policy changes that would better protect the lives of people currently at risk of overdose and increase public safety. 

    “Rather than focus on solutions appropriate to the eight-year emergency we are in and thousands of lives lost, the Province has chosen to do an end-run around that court decision,” says DJ Larkin, co-counsel for HRNA and executive director of the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition. 

    “This pushes people who use drugs out of sight, to covert and isolated use. Combined with a toxic and unpredictable drug supply, that is a recipe for preventable drug poisoning death. We don’t want people to die hidden in alleyways,” says Ranger. “We don’t want any more families to have to grieve their loved ones. We want effective solutions. And we know that criminalization is no solution. This is a step back.” 

    HRNA members say B.C.’s actions directing healthcare workers in hospitals to follow policies that “prohibit drug possession, use and purchasing of illicit drugs,” will further impede nurses’ ability to ethically provide compassionate and life-saving care to people who use drugs. 

    “Principles of equity, autonomy and justice are embedded within nursing regulatory professional practice requirements,” says Michelle Danda of HRNA. “These policy directives will further marginalize and stigmatize people who use drugs and create division between nurses and patients as opposed to a community to support care. We need nurses to unite around compassionate, evidence-informed care.” 

    “To keep everyone safer – including nurses and all healthcare workers – we need widespread access to safer use spaces, including inhalation services,” says Ranger. “We can achieve safety without resorting to punitive measures.”

    HRNA has outlined a number of actions the Province could take that would help, not harm, including: 

    • Rapid scaling-up of supervised consumption sites wherever they are needed 
    • Exploring options to responsibly regulate the drug supply for safety 
    • Scaling up access to regulated, evidence-based voluntary non-profit treatment 
    • Investing heavily in affordable housing and poverty reduction 

    More than a century of prohibition has demonstrated that enforcement has not decreased drug availability or use, is extremely expensive, and is clearly linked to an increased risk of overdose and cycles of homelessness. 

    “The decriminalization pilot has its drawbacks, and ultimately does not address the unregulated toxic drug supply that continues to drive this crisis,” says Larkin. “Even so, it is an important part of a broader shift. To be effective in reducing harm and supporting healthy communities, it must be accompanied by additional actions. Blaming the decriminalization pilot for systemic issues of rising homelessness and visible poverty scapegoats those already suffering. When we see public drug use, it is because people do not have housing, services or safe places to go – and because people want to stay alive, not die alone and out of sight.”

    Today’s announcement is a direct circumvention of the Bill 34 injunction and poses the very same risk for irreparable harm. 

    -30- 

    Links and Resources: 

    • B.C. Supreme Court Ruling on Injunction Application 
    • Bill 34 – Restricting Public Consumption of Illegal Substances Act
    • April 16, 2024 HRNA Press Release
    • December 30, 2023 HRNA Press Release 

    Media Contact:

    [email protected]

  • Open Letter to Saskatchewan government Re: Health Policy Changes

    Open Letter to Saskatchewan government Re: Health Policy Changes

    January 25, 2024

    To: 

    Hon. Scott Moe Premier of Saskatchewan [email protected] 

    Hon. Everett Hindley Minister of Health [email protected] 

    Hon. Tim McLeod Minister of Mental Health and Addictions [email protected] 

    Re: Recent Saskatchewan Health Policy Changes 

    Premier Moe, Minister Hindley, Minister McLeod; 

    We are writing on behalf of the HIV Legal Network and the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition to express our grave concern at the Saskatchewan government’s recent health policy changes, announced January 18, 2024. 

    The changes, which include restricting access to vital harm reduction supplies and information encouraging safer substance use, will jeopardize efforts to combat the transmission of HIV and hepatitis C, shutter cost-effective and proven health interventions, and contradict decades of established scientific evidence, best practice in public health, and international guidance. Ultimately, they put people in Saskatchewan at risk. 

    Communities across Canada face intersecting challenges of poverty, homelessness, a dangerously unregulated drug supply, and health inequities. To meaningfully address these challenges and improve life for all people, governments must implement compassionate, evidence-based public policy that upholds principles of public health and human rights. 

    For nearly six years, the provision of sterile pipes and information on safer inhalation has been part of efforts to reduce the transmission of hepatitis C and HIV, promote safety for people using drugs in Saskatchewan, and connect people to health and social supports. This abrupt policy change not only undermines these efforts but also puts people at risk of harm, placing an undue burden on communities, Saskatchewan’s health system and those who work within it, and community organizations. 

    The shift to a “one-for-one” needle exchange is not only outdated but counterproductive, likely increasing rates of infection in Saskatchewan and exacerbating the challenges faced by people at risk of overdose. Given the province’s unfortunate distinction as a hot spot for HIV transmission in Canada, and the disproportionate impact this has on Indigenous communities in Saskatchewan, it is crucial to reconsider this policy. 

    The policy appears fiscally reckless, as the cost to manage new cases of HIV and hepatitis C is considerably high. Preventing new infections through sterile supplies and safer use information is a vastly more cost-effective approach. We urge the government to responsibly steward public funds by continuing to invest in health interventions proven to reduce transmission and alleviate the strain on health care systems. 

    The Saskatchewan government’s inability to cite any evidence in support of these policy changes raises serious questions about the decision-making process. A focus on a “recovery-oriented system of care” need not come at the expense of cost-effective, evidence-based strategies with proven benefits to public health. Evidence has consistently demonstrated how harm reduction supplies and information can connect people to health and social supports, including voluntary treatment. Limiting access to safety education and health services does not decrease substance use: it only makes people less safe. 

    The HIV Legal Network and Canadian Drug Policy Coalition urge the Government of Saskatchewan to reconsider these policy changes. To ensure the well-being of all residents, we invite you to engage in a constructive dialogue with people with lived and living experience, front-line and health workers, health and scientific experts and other affected communities. We would welcome an opportunity to discuss this issue with you and offer research and policy resources on effective measures to ensure the well-being of all people in Saskatchewan. 

    Thank you for your attention to this matter. We look forward to your response. 

    Sincerely, 

    DJ Larkin, Executive Director, Canadian Drug Policy Coalition 

    Janet Butler-McPhee and Sandra Ka Hon Chu, Co-Executive Directors, HIV Legal Network 

  • Canadian Drug Policy Coalition/ Doalition canadienne des politiques sur les drogues

    For Immediate Release: Nationwide Support Rallies as Vancouver Police Target Safe Drug Supply Program

    Vancouver, BC | October 27, 2023 —

    Advocates, community organizations and concerned members of the public across the country are adding their names to an open letter condemning the October 25 arrests of members of the Drug User Liberation Front (DULF). 

    Please see below for our response to the criminalization of the Drug User Liberation Front’s heroin, cocaine and methamphetamine compassion club in Vancouver, and view the live document which will be updated continuously with new signatories.

    Media are invited to contact organizations listed among the signatories directly for comment. 

    Canadian Drug Policy Media Contact: [email protected]

    RE: Vancouver Police Press Release, “VPD executes search warrants in Downtown Eastside drug investigation”

    To:

    Vancouver Police Department

    City of Vancouver, and

    Province of British Columbia: 

    The signatories of this letter condemn the criminalization of community-regulated safe drug supply distribution in Vancouver on October 25, 2023, executed through search warrants, arrests and interrogations by Vancouver Police Department. 

    Unregulated drug toxicity is the leading cause of death in BC for persons aged 10 to 59, accounting for more deaths than homicides, suicides, accidents and natural diseases combined. In this urgent context, the Drug User Liberation Front (DULF) operates a compassion club to save lives and reduce the harms of the unregulated drug market. 

    DULF has been public about its activities since its first safe supply action on April 14, 2021. Its second action in July 2021 was conducted in plain sight of a Vancouver Police Department station with officers in attendance. In 2022, the City of Vancouver issued a business license to DULF. That year, the Province of BC initiated a $200,000 grant through Vancouver Coastal Health to help cover DULF’s overhead costs. 

    DULF was transparent in its application for a Controlled Drugs and Substances Act exemption to the Government of Canada, publishing both its application and the Government’s denial of the exemption for public examination. 

    DULF has conducted formal evaluation of its compassion club in partnership with qualified researchers at the BC Centre on Substance Use (BCCSU). The data show the program is keeping people alive and in better health, with lower reliance on criminal activity. The removal of funding not only hinders DULF’s compassion club, it closes down a critical overdose prevention site – an outcome with legal precedent to be reversed.

    The statement issued by Vancouver Police on October 26, 2023 is an apparent attempt to distance governments and police from the active and passive roles that each have played in DULF’s activities while political backlash builds against safe supply more broadly.

    International reporting on DULF includes articles in Time Magazine and The Guardian. It is inconceivable that any institution operating in drug policy or enforcement could have remained unaware that DULF operates a compassion club. 

    If political institutions took issue with DULF’s activities, carried out with a clear aim to minimize harms to its community while more than 2,000 people are killed each year in BC by policy inaction, they had ample opportunity to respond when DULF distributed regulated drugs in front of a Vancouver Police station in 2021, requested a business license from the City of Vancouver, and approached Vancouver Coastal Health for funding. 

    Given the transparency with which DULF has operated, it is fair to conclude that these institutions are disingenuously betraying people who are at risk of death while a seven-year unmitigated public health emergency persists.

    In solidarity with DULF, the signatories of this letter demand that Vancouver Police, the City of Vancouver, and the Province of BC: 

    • Immediately cease criminalizing community-regulated safe supply in BC;
    • Restore DULF funding cut by Vancouver Coastal Health; 
    • Formalize a commitment to create a framework to uphold and protect community-regulated safe supply in BC. 

    To view the growing live list of signatories, including individuals, click here. 

    MEDIA: Please engage organizations directly from the list below. 

    Signed: 

    National Organizations

    Canadian Association of People Who Use Drugs

    Canadian Students for Sensible Drug Policy 

    Canadian Drug Policy Coalition

    CATIE: Canada’s Source for HIV and Hepatitis C Information

    Drug Policy Alliance (USA)

    EACH+EVERY: Businesses for Harm Reduction

    Harm Reduction Nurses Association

    HIV Legal Network

    International Network of People who Use Drugs

    Moms Stop The Harm

    Regional Organizations

    4B Harm Reduction Society, Edmonton, AB

    Alberta Alliance Who Educate and Advocate Responsibly, AB

    Bonfire Counselling, Vancouver, BC

    Canadian Students for Sensible Drug Policy – Vancouver, Vancouver, BC

    Canadian Students for Sensible Drug Policy – Calgary, Calgary, AB

    Coalition of Substance Users of the North (CSUN), Lhtako Dene Nation, BC

    Corporación ATS / Echele Cabeza, Colombia

    Disability Arts & Activism Archive, BC

    Harrogate Psychological Services, Edmonton, AB

    HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic Ontario (HALCO), ON

    Kootenay Independent Safe Supply Society, Nelson, BC

    Kootenay Insurrection for Safe Supply, Nelson, BC

    Kykeon Analytics Ltd, Victoria, BC

    Langley Community Action Team: We All Play a ROLE, Langley, BC

    Medicine Hat Drug Coalition, Medicine Hat, AB

    Metzineres – Refuge Environments for Drug Users, Barcelona, Spain

    PAN, Vancouver, BC

    Sure Shot Harm Reduction, Ottawa, ON

    People For Reproductive Rights and Freedoms, Edmonton, AB

    Pivot Legal Society, Vancouver, BC

    Prairie Harm Reduction, Saskatoon, SK

    Project SAFE, Philadelphia, USA

    REMA Feminist & Antiprohibitionist Network, Spain

    Ryan’s Hope, Barrie, ON

    SafeLink Alberta, AB

    SAFER Victoria, Victoria, BC

    Solid Outreach Society, Victoria, BC

    Student Overdose Prevention and Education Network, Hamilton, ON

    The POUNDS Project, Prince George, BC

    Toronto Overdose Prevention Society, Toronto, ON

    Tri-Cities Community Action Team, Tri-Cities, BC

    United For Change Edmonton, Edmonton, AB

    Vancouver Community Action Team, Vancouver, BC

    We Care Substance Use Resource Society, BC

    Workers for Ethical Substance Use Policy, Vancouver, BC

    Whistler Community Services Society, Whistler, BC

    WILD collaborative harm reduction association, Vancouver Island, BC

    Your Journey, Airdrie, AB

    Youth RISE, Edmonton, AB

    -30-

  • INTÉRÊT GRANDISSANT À L’INTERNATIONAL POUR L’ANALYSE DE SUBSTANCES : POINTS FORTS DE HR17

    INTÉRÊT GRANDISSANT À L’INTERNATIONAL POUR L’ANALYSE DE SUBSTANCES : POINTS FORTS DE HR17

    Avec une attention internationale grandissante sur les impacts et le grand potentiel des services d’analyse de substances, un certain nombre d’évènements à la conférence de HR17 ont présenté des résultats de recherche ainsi que l’expérience sur le terrain de cette pratique novatrice de réduction des méfaits.

    Pour la première fois de son histoire, la 25e Conférence internationale sur la réduction des méfaits (HR17) tenue à Montréal, au Canada, a donné une place importante à l’analyse de substances dans leur programmation. L’analyse de substances est une intervention de réduction des méfaits qui fournit aux personnes qui consomment des drogues de synthèse des informations sur la pureté, la puissance et la composition de celles-ci. La hausse de l’intérêt international pour la mise en place de services de l’analyse de substances a permis à plusieurs personnes d’assister à un atelier parallèle, un panel et une conférence de presse. Ceux-ci ont abordé les répercussions de l’analyse de substances sur la santé et le bien-être des personnes qui utilisent de la drogue dans divers milieux ainsi que les multiples comportements liés à l’usage de drogue. À l’occasion d’une conférence sur la réduction des méfaits dans le contexte d’une crise de surdose d’opioïdes, l’analyse de substances sous forme de bandes de tests de fentanyl était offerte sur place dans la salle médicale de la conférence.

    Le 14 mai 2017 avant l’ouverture officielle de HR17, les membres d’un Groupe de travail national canadien sur l’analyse de substances ont organisé un « atelier sur les services d’analyse de substances ». Un évènement gratuit et ouvert à tous, l’atelier a été suivi par des intervenants locaux et internationaux venant d’une variété de disciplines. Certains ayant des connaissances très approfondies tandis que d’autres venaient pour apprendre davantage sur les principes fondamentaux de l’analyse de substances, les différents modèles d’évaluation de la recherche ainsi que de prestation de services actuellement utilisés dans le monde. Parmi les conférenciers figurent Helena Valente (Université de Porto, Portugal), Brun Gonzalez (Programa de Análisis de Sustancias, Mexico) et Mireia Ventura (Energy Control, Espagne). Les participants ont eu la chance d’avoir accès à différents points de vue des intervenants sur la raison d’être de l’analyse de substances, des méthodes efficaces réalisées sur le terrain et sur la façon de développer et de soutenir les programmes existants. Les intervenants ont convenu que l’analyse de substances offre beaucoup plus que les résultats des tests. Elle comprend l’éducation et le soutien concernant l’usage de drogues et rejoint surtout les personnes qui utilisent des drogues, mais n’interagissent pas avec les services de santé au sujet de leur consommation de drogue. Traditionnellement, la majorité des efforts de réduction des méfaits ont mis l’accent sur les personnes qui s’injectent des drogues. M. Gonzalez a qualifié l’analyse de substances comme étant essentiel au « spectre complet de la réduction des méfaits », une approche qui fournit des services appropriés à toutes les personnes qui consomment des substances psychoactives malgré où il se trouve dans leur trajectoire de consommation. Des preuves grandissantes suggèrent que la plupart des gens ont l’intention de changer leurs comportements si leurs résultats après une analyse de leurs drogues révèlent certains contenus inattendus ou inconnus qu’ils envisageaient de prendre (par exemple, ne pas prendre la substance, réduire leur dosage, ne pas l’utiliser seul, etc.). Mme Valente a souligné que, bien que les preuves empiriques indiquent que l’analyse de substances est une intervention utile, aller au-delà de la recherche sur l’intention du comportement constituera une étape importante dans l’établissement de données probantes pour soutenir l’extension de ces services. La Dre Ventura a souligné la valeur de l’analyse de substances dans le suivi des marchés de la drogue et permettrait aux décideurs et aux autorités sanitaires de disposer de données pour notamment répondre aux tendances dangereuses du terrain. De plus, elle note que son organisme, Energy Control, est responsable de la détection d’environ 65% des nouvelles substances psychoactives. Cette information est ensuite transmise à son gouvernement. Les participants ont quitté l’atelier dynamisés, ayant élargi leurs réseaux ainsi que leurs connaissances sur l’analyse de substances.

    Un panel en simultané intitulé «Drug Checking: From Dance Clubs to the Dark Web» a continué la discussion sur l’analyse de substances le 15 mai 2017 et a permis aux délégués de la conférence d’apprendre encore plus sur les évaluations de projets novateurs sur l’analyse de substances. Le Dr Mark Lysyshyn a présenté un exemple venant de Vancouver, l’une des villes du Canada confrontées à une crise importante de surdose d’opioïdes. Ils ont offert aux personnes fréquentant le site d’injection supervisé (SIS) Insite des bandes de tests afin qu’ils puissent vérifier si leurs substances contenaient du fentanyl. Les recherches du Dr Lysyshyn ont révélé que le fait de proposer l’analyse de substances pour le fentanyl permettait aux clients d’utiliser les résultats afin de réduire les risques, par exemple, en réduisant leur dose qui diminuerait ainsi leur risque de surdose. Ceci suggère que l’analyse de substances pourrait être une intervention utile pour prévenir les décès par surdose dans les sites d’injection supervisés. Les présentateurs ont également participé à une conférence de presse plus tôt dans la journée où les journalistes ont eu la possibilité de poser des questions ciblées sur leur recherche sur l’analyse de substances. Julie-Soleil Meeson, membre du Groupe de travail national canadien sur l’analyse de substances, a également fait des remarques lors de la conférence de presse sur les efforts déployés partout au Canada pour mettre en œuvre des projets concrets d’analyse de substances.

    Au-delà de la diffusion de l’information sur la recherche sur l’analyse de substances, HR17 était également un point de diffusion pour les bandes de tests de fentanyl, certains délégués de la conférence les ramenant à leurs organisations au Canada et à l’étranger. Bien qu’aucun résultat n’ait été recueilli durant la conférence, le bouche-à-oreille a indiqué qu’une quantité notable de résultats des bandes de tests était positive pour la présence de fentanyl.

    Nous espérons que l’accent mis sur l’analyse de substances à HR17 a non seulement créé un espace pour apprendre et pour partager, mais a également inspiré la poursuite des efforts visant à créer des stratégies de réduction des méfaits qui répondent aux divers besoins des personnes qui utilisent des drogues.

    Écrit par: Tara Marie Watson, Caleb Chepesiuk et Nazlee Maghsoudi et traduit par Julie-Soleil Meeson, tous membres du Groupe de travail national canadien sur l’analyse des substances.

  • Façons de contribuer

    Façons de contribuer

    Alors que 2016 tire à sa fin, nous nous remémorons le drame qui perdure au Canada; le nombre sans précédent de décès liés aux surdoses cette année. À la CCPD, nous prenons un moment avec vous, nos sympathisants, pour reconnaitre les répercussions dévastatrices de ce fléau sur les familles et communautés d’un bout à l’autre du pays. Nous pleurons avec ceux d’entre vous qui ont perdu des êtres chers et nous reconnaissons que ce drame aura des retombées à long terme sur chacun de nous. Nous voulons garder en mémoire ces membres importants de nos collectivités que nous ne verrons plus en 2017.

    À l’aube de 2017, nous vous encourageons à vous impliquer au sein de votre communauté afin de renverser la situation. Comme il peut être difficile de savoir comment être utile, nous recommandons les mesures suivantes.

    Façons de contribuer :

    • Communiquez avec vos gouvernements et autorités sanitaires locaux. Demandez à connaitre la manière dont ils collaborent avec les services d’intervention et de prévention en cas de surdose;
    • Faites don de votre temps, argent, ressources et autres formes de soutien, afin de venir en aide à vos organismes locaux de réduction des méfaits, au niveau de la rue;
    • Faites-vous défenseur de l’accès immédiat aux opiacés réglementés pour les consommateus de drogues. Le marché illicite est toxique;
    • Plaidez en faveur de l’expansion immédiate et vigoureuse des programmes de traitement de la toxicomanie aux opiacés, tels que les traitements de prescription médicale d’héroïne, l’accès aux traitements à l’hydromorphone, à la suboxone et à la méthadone.
    • Écrivez à votre député et appelez à la dépénalisation des consommateurs de drogues et à la réglementation de toutes les drogues illicites, pour mettre un terme au marché illicite une fois pour toutes.

    De nombreux organismes partout au pays travaillent inlassablement à mettre fin à ce cauchemar. Vous pouvez faire votre part en soutenant leurs efforts. Vous trouverez ci-dessous quelques unes des organisations auxquelles nous faisons référence.

    Edmonton – Streetworks 

    Victoria – Yes to Supervised Consumption Services

    Vancouver – Overdose Prevention Society 

    Vancouver – PHS Community Services Society

    Si vous souhaitez apporter votre appui à la Coalition canadienne des politiques sur les drogues et soutenir nos efforts en faveur de nouvelles options politiques en matière de drogue au Canada, vous pouvez faire un don ici.

    Soutenez dès maintenant vos services locaux de réduction des méfaits, ainsi que les efforts déployés par les secouristes afin d’assurer la sécurité de tous. Nous attendons avec impatience l’occasion de changer les choses en 2017.

    Nous sommes conscients que des changements systémiques doivent être apportés pour faire en sorte qu’une telle situation ne se reproduise plus, pour que nos politiques en matière de drogues nous protègent mieux, mais à ce moment précis de 2016, nous désirons honorer les travailleurs sur les lignes de front qui oeuvrent pour sauver des vies dans nos colectivités.

    Aux secouristes, nous tirons notre chapeau. Que vous soyez membre d’un regroupement pan-national de consommateurs de drogues, sur les premières lignes des services de réduction des méfaits, membre de la famille d’une personne ayant perdu la vie suite à une surdose, anéanti par cette perte mais défendant vigoureusement un changement au niveau de nos mesures de santé publique et politiques sur les drogues, bénévole pour un service local de réduction des méfaits ou dans un site éphémère d’injection supervisée dans une ruelle, ambulancier, pompier ou policier surmené répondant au nombre accablant d’appels d’urgence, infirmier ou docteur tentant de sauver une vie en salle d’urgence ou l’une des milliers de personnes assurant la prestation des services de première ligne d’un bout à l’autre du pays et ayant de la difficulté à répondre à la demande, nous vous remercions de vos efforts inlassables. 

    À tous ceux qui ont œuvré à améliorer la stratégie canadienne en matière de drogues, nous vous remercions du travail accompli cette année. Les progrès accomplis en 2016 ont été assombris par  le désastre humanitaire qui se déroule dans un grand nombre de nos communautés, au moment où les gens meurent de surdoses à un niveau jusqu’ici jamais vu. Si nous ne travaillons pas déjà ensemble, nous vous invitons à communiquer avec nous. Plus que jamais, nous devons unir nos efforts.

     

  • Canada needs to vote against a government that supports Bill C-2 & C-36, and here is why…

    Canada needs to vote against a government that supports Bill C-2 & C-36, and here is why…

    Sex workers who work in the Downtown Eastside (DTES) of Vancouver, British Columbia have faced some of the most extreme violence in Canadian history: Robert Pickton, Donald Bakker, and others have preyed on female identified sex workers here for decades.  So why are the sex workers in this part of Canada more vulnerable than in any other part of the Country? What makes Vancouver different?

    The difference cannot be attributed to Canada’s sex work laws that conspire to force sex workers to work on the street in isolated locations to avoid the police – as that applies to all sex workers across Canada. The difference is the sheer number of injection drug using sex workers that live and work in the DTES. As Canadians, we are letting this community of vulnerable workers down in two very tangible ways with these two recent pieces of legislation:

    The Respect for Communities Act (C-2), and the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act (C-36).

    Bill C-2, a Conservative bill that became law this past summer, outlines a new, extremely prohibitive framework for setting up new supervised injection facilities (SIF) across the country, and will also make it difficult for the only existing SIF, Insite in Vancouver, to meet these requirements and remain open. Street based sex workers in DTES have benefitted from the health and safety services provided by Insite over the last 12 years. This new legislation does not directly impact all sex workers in Canada, but it creates a huge disservice to the street based sex workers who also inject drugs.

    Bill C-36, a Conservative bill that became law in November 2014, is one that continues to criminalize the buying of sex between two consenting adults, but NOT the selling of sex.  In a June 5th 2014 CBC News interview, Katrina Pacey from the Pivot Legal Society, referring to Bill C-36, stated that, “This is not the “Nordic” approach, nor is it a Canadian variation on the “Nordic” approach. It is an unconstitutional variation of our broken laws that impose more danger, more crimination, and fewer safe options, contrary to the requirement of the Supreme Court of Canada to address these dangerous and ineffective laws.”

    As a nurse at Insite, a female sex worker once confided in me that there was concern about a violent john in the area. Due to this risk, she had arranged for someone to ‘spot’ for her (‘spotting’ is the act of looking out for someone’s safety who is engaging in sex work). But Bill C-36 actually considers ‘spotting’ a criminal act in itself, as it equates this activity to being employed by a sex worker, and as such serves to criminalize those who are only wanting to help keep people safe from harm.

    So what are the consequences of both of these bills?

    Addressing C-2, the research shows that many more lives would be saved from overdose and disease with increased SIF’s, but those benefits are being dismissed. And even for people who believe that treatment is the only option for people who use drugs (PWUD), a well-known fact is that, once you are dead, you can no longer receive treatment.

    With C-36 we are continuing to criminalize all activities around sex work except for the actual act of selling sex. Working indoors would undoubtedly be safer, especially if there were other sex workers working together in the same facility, perhaps with a body guard. But they are unable to do so due to the current law prohibiting sex workers to employee staff and work indoors as a regulated business. As such, sex workers often choose to work in remote, isolated areas outside and alone because they do not want to be targeted by law enforcement.

    Bills C-2 and C-36 only serve to maintain an environment where vulnerable Canadians are at risk from physical harm, disease and death. Harm reduction facilities like Insite provide heath and safety services that have been proven, through extensive documentation, to save lives, which is precisely what health care and human rights legislation should be designed to achieve. Bill C-2 and C-36 however, do not.

  • The Political Parties Response to our Drug Policy Questionnaire

    The Political Parties Response to our Drug Policy Questionnaire

    Last month, we worked with the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, and “moms united and mandated to saving the lives of Drug Users” (mumsDU) to send out a policy questionnaire to all the political parties to get their opinion on issues surrounding an ever-changing drug policy landscape. Our intention was to gauge the direction each party would take Canada if elected on October 19th.

    Fortunately, with the notable exception of the Conservative Party which didn’t respond, the responses we received are very encouraging. All parties gave us answers that indicated a different approach to drug policy would be taken after the votes have been counted, but there are subtle differences between the parties on each of the issues. Below is a summary of answers the parties gave us.

     Does your party support restoring harm reduction as a key pillar in Canada’s federal drug strategy, including support for supervised consumption services as one important component of an overall federal strategy on drugs — and as part of efforts to prevent the spread of HIV and hepatitis C (HCV), associated with unsafe injection drug use?

    All responding parties agreed that harm reduction needs to return as a key pillar in Canada’s national drug strategy, including support for safe-consumption services. The NDP mentioned that harm reduction was a “fundamental pillar in framing Canada’s drug policy”. The Liberal Party recognized the importance of harm reduction policies and would prioritize “evidence based policies”. Both the NDP and the Green Party voiced their opposition to Bill C-2, legislation that makes it difficult to open supervised-consumption sites, and promised to address the bill after the election.

    Does your party support Good Samaritan legislation as one important component of a comprehensive approach to addressing the pandemic of death by drug overdose in Canada, and expediting access to naloxone by making it a non-prescription drug?

    We found it encouraging that not only did the Liberal Party agree that Good Samaritan legislation should be enacted, but they correctly cited the United States as a leader in this regard. The Green Party answered both of our concerns in the questionnaire by supporting passing Good Samaritan legislation and easier access to naloxone. In fact, the Greens were the only party that explicitly mentioned that they would allow naloxone to be offered over the counter. Neither the Liberal Party nor NDP mentioned rescheduling naloxone, but instead both mentioned that they would be interested in working with experts and civil society groups such as the CDPC on creating better legislation and good policy on this issue if they were to form government.

    Does your party support considering new approaches to regulating and controlling cannabis production, distribution and possession, as a way of minimizing the harms of the cannabis industry and cannabis use, promote public health, and respect the human rights of adults who use it?

    Ever since Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau admitted to smoking cannabis after being elected to public office, which was followed by promising to legalize and regulate cannabis if elected, drug policy has become an active topic in electoral politics. The NDP mentioned that “no one should go to jail” over possession of small amounts of cannabis, a position they’ve held for over 40 years, since the release of the LeDain commission. The Greens have a position similar to that of the Liberals, full legalization, and mentioned that it’s time for Canada to have “an adult conversation on ending the war on drugs”.

    Given the scientific evidence of the ineffectiveness of mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent drug offences, does your party support eliminating the use of such sentences and again allowing judges to employ discretionary practices for these offences?

    Mandatory minimum sentencing is one of the signature pieces of legislation that the Conservative government has put out since winning their majority in 2011.  Both the NDP and Green Party directly mention their opposition to the Conservatives’ Bill C-10, which puts in place mandatory minimums for non-violent drug offences. The Green Party states clearly that it would repeal Bill-10, while the NDP and Liberals say they would consider policies that reduce crime, prevent re-offending, support rehabilitation of offenders and victim’s rights. The Liberal Party does not outright say what their stances on mandatory minimums are for non-violent drug offences in the questionnaire. Instead, they state that mandatory minimums do not deter crime, but that they do have a place “when necessary to protect the public from specific threats.”

    Does your party support Canada advocating at the 2016 UN General Assembly Special Session on Drugs (UNGASS)  for a comprehensive approach to drugs based on evidence, public health objectives, and human rights standards, including support for harm reduction programs?

    Does your party support the creation of a mechanism within the United Nations that brings countries and civil society experts together to consider alternatives to drug prohibition as the main strategy for controlling drugs?

    All political parties that responded agree that Canada needs to take a progressive role at next years United Nations General Assembly Special Session on Drugs (UNGASS). The NDP simply answered “yes” to our questions, and the Green Party said that “Canada should be a leader at the 2016 UNGASS to promote progressive and science-based drug policies that accomplish pressing public health objectives”. The answer from the Liberal Party was clearly the most fleshed out, and well researched. They agreed that civil society groups need to play a strong role both nationally and internationally “in order to find real solutions that are based on evidence.”

    Overall these responses are quite encouraging and indicate that if any of these parties were elected on October 19th, we would see a significant change in direction towards a public health approach to drugs in Canada.

    Check out the full party responses here:

    Liberal Party of Canada Response

    New Democratic Party Response

    Green Party of Canada Response

  • Canadian Drug Policy Coalition/Canadian HIV / AIDS Legal Network Policy Briefs

    Canadian Drug Policy Coalition/Canadian HIV / AIDS Legal Network Policy Briefs

    Harm Reduction Brief

    Canada is known around the world as a leader in harm reduction. It is host to the first, and only supervised consumption site in North America, Insite, which has saved lives and helped to build a healthier community in one of the most at-risk neighbourhoods in the county. Unfortunately, the federal government has moved away from harm reduction and more towards a criminal approach to drugs. Of course, there is a way forward. In our policy brief, we make the case that not only should the federal government restore the harm reduction model, but expand upon what is already in place. Please click and read below.

    CDPC-HarmReduction-Brief English

    CDPC-HarmReduction-Brief Français

    Overdose Brief

    The tragedy of drug overdose has increased dramatically in recent years. The rise of fentanyl, an extremely potent opioid, has dramatically increased overdose deaths in recent months. Policy change at the federal level is urgently needed. Fortunately, overdoses are preventable. From allowing for easier access to lifesaving medication such as naloxone, to testing the purity level of street drugs, there are several actions the government can take right now to put an end to these avoidable deaths. Our policy brief contains many commonsense policy solutions that the government can enact immediately. Please click and read.

    CDPC-Overdose-Brief English

    CDPC-Overdose-Brief Français

    Cannabis Brief

    Cannabis law is changing around the world. From the United States to Latin America, a wider consensus is growing that cannabis prohibition has failed to prevent both the sale and consumption of the plant for non-medicinal purposes. Public opinion in Canada and worldwide is experiencing a paradigm shift, and the mindset of policymakers needs to change with it. Clearly, an alternative strategy to this broken system needs to be taken seriously. In the following brief, we outline our strategic recommendations on how the federal government can end prohibition, and use its power to begin the process to create a regulatory system that works.

    CDPC-Cannabis-Brief English

    CDPC-Cannabis-Brief Français