Category: Non classifié(e)

  • 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    The shift to a “one-for-one” needle exchange is not only outdated but counterproductive, likely increasing rates of infection in Saskatchewan and exacerbating the challenges faced by people at risk of overdose.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 

  • FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: BC Supreme Court rules in favour of Harm Reduction Nurses Association, pauses coming into force of BC’s public drug consumption law 

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: BC Supreme Court rules in favour of Harm Reduction Nurses Association, pauses coming into force of BC’s public drug consumption law 

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: BC Supreme Court rules in favour of Harm Reduction Nurses Association, pauses coming into force of BC’s public drug consumption law 

    xʷməθkʷəy̓əm, sḵwx̱wú7mesh & səlilwətaɬ lands | Vancouver, BC | December 29, 2023 

    Today, the BC Supreme Court granted a temporary injunction to the Harm Reduction Nurses Association (HRNA), suspending the coming into force of BC’s Restricting Public Consumption of Illegal Substances Act until March 31, 2024. The court granted the injunction on the grounds that in severely restricting public drug consumption, the Act would cause irreparable harm to people at risk of injury and death amid a public health crisis.  

    This temporary injunction provides time for the Court to assess whether the law violates Charter rights and is outside of BC’s constitutional jurisdiction. 

    The province passed the Act in November, imposing sweeping restrictions on the decriminalization pilot that launched January 31, 2023, which removes criminal penalties for the possession of small amounts of some illegal drugs. The proposed Act would prohibit drug use in most public spaces. The Harm Reduction Nurses Association, represented by lawyers Caitlin Shane of Pivot Legal Society and DJ Larkin of the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition argued this would exacerbate many harms decriminalization aims to reduce through increased interactions with law enforcement, displacement, drug seizures, fines and arrests. 

    BC Supreme Court Chief Justice Hinkson agreed, concluding that, “It is apparent that public consumption and consuming drugs in the company of others is oftentimes the safest, healthiest, and/or only available option for an individual, given a dire lack of supervised consumption services, indoor locations to consume drugs, and housing.” 

    British Columbia initially launched the decriminalization pilot to reduce police and criminal justice involvement with substance use, in an effort to reduce harm, destigmatize drug use, and prevent fatal overdose in the context of a public health emergency that causes 7 unnecessary deaths each day. Evidence shows enforcement has not reduced drug availability or use, is costly, and is linked to an increased risk of overdose and cycles of homelessness.  

    The BC Supreme Court ruling determined that the province’s proposed ban on public drug consumption cannot come into force until at least March 31, 2024, due to the irreparable harm it could cause to people at risk of death or serious injury from the unregulated toxic drug crisis. In his judgement, the Honourable Chief Justice Hinkson concluded, “I am satisfied… that there are serious issues to be tried [and] that irreparable harm will be caused if the Act comes into force.” 

    The decision preserves the status quo of the law in BC. The province’s decriminalization pilot project remains in effect, allowing for the possession of small amounts of some drugs. The restrictions to the pilot also remain in effect, including that drug possession remains illegal on the premises of elementary and secondary schools, playgrounds, child-care facilities, around splash pads and skate parks, and for anyone under 18 years old. 

    HRNA is a non-profit national organization comprised of nurses who work alongside people at severe risk of overdose and death due to Canada’s toxic unregulated drug supply. “We’re concerned this proposed law would threaten the lives, health, and safety, and Charter rights of our clients, many of whom live in communities that lack safe, indoor locations where drug use is permitted,” said Corey Ranger, HRNA President. “This law would drive our clients into more remote and isolated locations away from services and emergency care.”  The application was filed alongside a Charter challenge to the law, which is likely to be heard in the new year. A statement from HRNA regarding its decision to take legal action is available online.  

    Since BC’s decriminalization policy took effect, there has been no documented increase in public drug consumption. Instead, concerns highlighted in government documents released through access to information requests mention recent “media frenzy” driving anti-poverty/anti-homeless sentiment, the spread of misinformation about the decriminalization pilot, and the province’s continued treatment of drug use as a criminal rather than a health matter.  

    If brought into force, BC’s law would have authorized displacement, fines, arrest and imprisonment for people who use drugs in public, regardless of the availability of safe, legal spaces to use drugs or people’s housing status.  

    “This law cannot be compared to laws restricting alcohol, nicotine or cannabis consumption in public. Because our governments have refused to regulate the drug supply itself, the contents and potency of the drugs are unknown. That is at the core of why so many people are at risk of overdose,” says DJ Larkin, one of HRNA’s lawyers and Executive Director of the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition. Chief Justice Hinkson’s judgement states, “I accept that the unregulated nature of the illegal drug supply is the predominant cause of increasing death rates in British Columbia.  

    “Ultimately, legislation outlining where people can and can’t ingest drugs of any kind likely makes sense,” says Larkin. “But we must start from regulating what is in the drugs, how they are packaged, and who, where and how they are purchased. That would provide the safety that people need.” 

    “Today’s decision recognizes that substance use cannot be legislated without scrutiny,” says Caitlin Shane of Pivot Legal Society and one of HRNA’s lawyers. “At a time when nearly 8 people die each day in BC alone due to a toxic unregulated drug supply – and as a 2016 Ministerial Order requiring the establishment of overdose prevention services province-wide remains unfulfilled – it is critical that BC lawmakers be guided by evidence rather than fear.” 

    -30- 

    Media contact: 

    [email protected]

    604-341-5005

  • Safe Supply Interview: Michael Nurse and Andre Hermanstyne

    Safe Supply Interview: Michael Nurse and Andre Hermanstyne

    Michael Nurse: Andre, I want to thank you for being here. For agreeing to share your perspective on some of the findings from the Imagine Safe Supply research. Could you talk briefly about your background, like your pursuits, your work, and how you came to be experienced and interested in the concept of safe supply?

    Andre Hermanstyne: I am a former substance user. I’ve tried every substance at least once from fentanyl to crystal meth; f. I have held many different positions on the frontlines of the Social Work field, including for Black CAP, creating Canada’s first harm reduction program focusing on the needs of African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB) people. I’ve worked also for the Jewish response to homelessness. and for public health as a counsellor at the primary injection site located at Dundas Square in the heart of Toronto.  I believe in and access safe supply programs. I’m really interested in commenting on this research because change only occurs once there is suitable data to support necessary changes. I feel like as somebody who is a racialized person, that we are often left out of the discussion while harmful effects impact us at higher rates than many other cultural groups. 

    Michael Nurse: As you are speaking of safe supply, what is your understanding of the purpose of safe supply. Why safe supply?

    Andre Hermanstyne: So right now, there is a poisoned drug supply. So, for instance when a person purchases fentanyl there is a reasonable expectation that fentanyl is what they will receive. Often this is not the case as its often adulterated and mixed with different agents. Some of these agents are supposed to create an additive effect in order to produce a better high. But the result is lowering the respiration of the user to the point where they stop breathing and eventually die. Safe supply provides a pharmaceutical equivalent of street drugs. So, like the hydromorphone or, Dilaudid, many people are also being prescribed morphine in a slow-release form called Kadian. Many users like the pills so that they can inject them and use them in a safe way. Now these are manufactured pharmaceuticals, and we know exactly what is in it. How much the dosage is and that they are not adulterated. So as a result, my understanding is that it has resulted in a lot less death. 

    We know that people who use drugs struggle with a lot of complex issues. And some of those issues can be addressed  when they come in weekly to access their safe supply through an appointment with their Doctor.– dental care and health care and things of that sort can also be addressed just by virtue of them coming in to access safe supply. 

    Michael Nurse: OK, that’s a very significant point, thank you for sharing that. And thank you for such an articulate response to that question. I would like us to focus on some selected findings from the Imagine Safe Supply research related to safe supply for African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB) people and their communities. Findings from the research indicate that some of the challenges to effective safe supply services for ACB communities include a lack of culturally specific harm reduction spaces for ACB people, a need for harm reduction services developed for ACB people, and significant absence of ACB people in leadership and decision-making for frontline services. Considering these expressed concerns and challenges, how prepared would you say the ACB community are for delivering safe supply services that are accessible and relevant for ACB people who use drugs?

    Andre Hermanstyne: We are ready for it because if you look at some of the stats around incarceration rates and when I think of my own personal experience of being incarcerated, it was as a direct result of an era of problematic substance use. Selling drugs just to support my habit. Stealing things, committing robberies and stuff like that. Now I don’t have to engage in those type of behaviours. I know I can go to my doctor and get what I need. Such a relief, I haven’t had a criminal charge in over a decade. 

    Michael Nurse: But reflecting on the challenges that were mentioned from the findings, do you think that these are things that need to be addressed for safe supply to be effective?

    Andre Hermanstyne: Yes. How they are addressed, I don’t know. I don’t have the answer for that but yes, they do definitely need to be addressed. 

    Michael Nurse: OK yea so, some of the findings from the research suggest that effective and sustainable safe supply for ACB people and their communities require an approach and understanding that is uniquely ACB. And by uniquely ACB I’m talking about services that are developed to respond to aspects of culture, language, nationality, class difference, between and within ACB communities. So we are looking at challenges and aspects of the ACB community that need to be considered to develop safe supply. How does the idea of ACB specific safe supply correspond to your vision of safe supply services for ACB people? 

    Andre Hermanstyne: I think that it is needed. A culturally specific approach is needed. 

    Michael Nurse: Another key finding indicated that for safe supply to be successful in ACB communities an involvement of ACB women at all levels, particularly in leadership roles, is essential. And considering that many ACB homes are led by women, what are your thoughts about the importance of Black women in the development and practice of safe supply for ACB people? 

    Andre Hermanstyne: I had some time to really think about this question and how I want to respond to this. So, my wife and I   had a friend, whom was pregnant and gave birth to twins. Now the twins decided to come early, and the woman gave birth at 23 weeks which was just a little over half of the full 40-week process and extremely premature. They were girls. Both parents were ACB people. The girls ended up surviving. What the doctor said, which I found to be very interesting, was the reason that they survived was because they are Black females. And out of every child that is born with any type of challenges around the birthing process, the Black female has the highest chance of survival. So that speaks to the strength of Black women and the need to heal a lot of the trauma that we as Black men have inflicted on Black women and that was experienced by the transatlantic slave trade. So, I think it is important that we heal, we spend some time healing our Black women and they are in my estimation a critical piece to the development and success of any program especially this one.

    Michael Nurse: You are talking about in general as well? 

    Andre Hermanstyne: Yes, and specifically to this program of safe supply. 

    Michael Nurse: What is the uniqueness that you see for Black women in the development of ACB services? I know some people say that Black women do most of the caring in the community, that Black women are involved in organizing support for people. Do you see this as a significant factor? 

    Andre Hermanstyne: Absolutely. Not only from those viewpoints but just the strength that a Black woman possesses just by her presence alone. Her knowledge and her insights are needed. We can’t move forward without the Black woman. 

    Michael Nurse: That’s a very deep answer, thank you for that. Another question, the research heard that religion and faith influences stigma about drug use in ACB communities. And that it would be important to find ways to engage religious leaders in addressing stigma or harm reduction or even safe supply. What are your thoughts on this issue? 

    Andre Hermanstyne: I totally agree that we need to address the stigma that is associated with religion because from a religious aspect these are sins. Drug use is sinful behaviour. So, it’s an all-or-nothing kind of abstinence-based approach. But a harm reduction approach, we meet people where they are. I think engaging those ministers who have more of a progressive stance and encouraging them to then bring that message, or package that message to deliver it to ministers who hold more conservative values.  

    Michael Nurse: And you know, I’m going to say I always learn from talking with you. And even that comment that you made about reaching out to the more progressive ministers to get that connection is a distinction that I really didn’t consider. Is there anything that you would like to say about safe supply for ACB people that we haven’t covered here?

    Andre Hermanstyne: No, but it just seems that you guys are on the right path and like I said earlier we can’t have anything without the necessary research. And you know the challenges that we’ve had working together at Black CAP, just to get funding for ACB programming. And even after I left, I heard that the drop-in had been cancelled because the building management didn’t want  people who are using substances attending any program held in that building  So, I mean we need to start knocking over some of these barriers and having a space for people who are Black who are choosing to use drugs, that they can feel safe. And live. 

    Michael Nurse: Andre, I want to thank you for being here. And for being open to sharing your experience and expertise on this topic. 

    Andre Hermanstyne: Thank you so much Michael and if at any point you have any more questions or whatever feel free to just give me a call.

    Michael Nurse:  Thanks Andre. 

    Andre Hermanstyne: Thank you very much, I appreciate you Michael man. 

    Michael Nurse: I appreciate you too my brother. 


    Imagine Safe Supply is a community-based research project that explored participation in safe supply in Canada for people who use drugs and frontline workers. For more information on this research please visit here.

  • Imagine Safe Supply in African, Caribbean, and Black Communities: An Interview with Michael Nurse

    Imagine Safe Supply in African, Caribbean, and Black Communities: An Interview with Michael Nurse

    Michael Nurse is a harm reduction practitioner, activist, and advocate. He resides in the city of Toronto where he has worked for the past 20 years delivering harm reduction-based street outreach from a lived experience perspective.

    Frank Crichlow is the Board President of the Canadian Association of People Who Use Drugs and President of the Toronto Drug Users Union. He works at the South Riverdale Community Health Centre in Toronto as a Community Health Worker and is a community advocate with multiple organizations for people who are unhoused and who use drugs within African, Caribbean, Black, and racialized communities.

    Frank Crichlow: The Imagine Safe Supply research looked at the meaning of drug user participation in safe supply. It found that the community values of people who use drugs would be central to the development and role out of effective safe supply. What is safe supply to you? And what kind of value-based considerations are there for safe supply within the African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB) community?

    Michael Nurse: I see safe supply as a concept that offers transformation, that reshapes the way that people access drugs which are now deemed illicit or that are not regulated. But for me it’s problematic. At this time safe supply doesn’t really address all illicit drugs in use. It’s a particular focus on opioids. If you look at people who use crack cocaine, which in my home city of Toronto is predominantly people of African descent, even with crack cocaine people are experiencing overdoses from opiates which they never intended to use. So, to just have a focus on people who use opiates, to me it’s a very narrow focus. And it doesn’t really address the whole idea for me of safe supply, which is to transform the way that people access drugs which are currently illicit or not regulated. Yes, ACB people do use opiates intentionally, but I find we mostly use stimulants. And safe supply doesn’t address that use. 

    What I would like to see is a focus on safer supply. For me that would be saying OK we are intending quality assurance when people access drugs that are now deemed illicit. Until I see that approach, I don’t really see safe supply as a concept that is working in a broad and meaningful way for people of African descent.

    Frank Crichlow: It’s important that those drugs should be included. Crack is a drug that Black people use, and we only have 2 or 3 safe consumption sites in Canada where people could go and smoke these drugs. Personally, as an ACB person, I would feel a lot better knowing that we have a safe place to go, and we feel safe in do

    Michael Nurse: I agree.

    Frank Crichlow: The research found that while there is a broad need for more representative leadership from the Black community within frontline care, there may be specific considerations around the leadership of Black women in safe supply. Black families and communities are often matriarchal, and we heard that it would be important to involve mothers, grandmothers, and extended family members in these discussions. This leadership was also seen as important to address the increased risk that Black women face within drug use communities due to targeting and harassment. What are your thoughts on the importance of Black women in leadership around safe supply?

    Michael Nurse: Yes, I see a need for developing the presence, leadership skills and knowledge of women of African descent in safe supply. And indeed, this applies to most marginalized and racialized women. In the context of African People’s communities, it should be known that women are pretty much the anchors in homes. Most homes are held together and are led by women. So, I mean, it would be a fundamental flaw in any design for a community service that does not take into account the role women play in maintaining spaces for people. Remember, if we’re talking about this being a project that is being led by people with truly lived experience, women have a tremendous amount to offer from their lived experience. So that alone should say yes, women need to be factored in in  a very high priority way. Because women carry that burden already, they play those roles already.

    Frank Crichlow: But when you look at most organizations, Black women are seen mostly in frontline worker roles. There is just one community health centre I know of where we have a Black woman in an executive leadership position. To me, there is a need for women of ACB communities to be in higher positions. They are skillful and knowledgeable enough to be in those positions. 

    Michael Nurse: You also bring up another point Frank. In most cases women in the ACB community are the trusted figures. They are the ones we go to for care, for advice, for intimacy, in these areas they are the trusted figures. When we look at the mistrust that we as People of African descent have in institutions, in organizations, you can see clearly why there is a need for more Black women within those fields. Just to heal that image, just to break down distrust between us and the service entity as we seek access to care and support. And also for the institutions that already exist to offer services in response to our real needs or desires.

    Frank Crichlow: Where is that distrust coming from? 

    Michael Nurse: That distrust is coming from the histories of this type of engagement.

    Frank Crichlow: Of whiteness?

    Michael Nurse: Not necessarily from whiteness. I would say it comes from the system, the institution, the whole capitalization of how people live, you know. It’s about business, it’s all about money, it’s all about funding. Organizations will dump you in a moment, dump programs in a moment, if it means that they can get a better handle on their money. So, the distrust doesn’t just come from whiteness, even though you could make that connection due to the high incidence of white privilege in the field and our society in general. But It comes from the way that money is prioritized in our society, with people being secondary.

    Frank Crichlow: Yeah, but we have to remember, many Black women haven’t gotten over how they’ve been treated within these organizations. All that people report to is White people. How many people report to Black women in leadership roles?

    Michael Nurse: I don’t know if I agree with you there, Frank. Because to me the treatment of Black people, women, or men in general, from organizations they need to trust isn’t just a fact of race. For example, I strongly believe that some of the most demeaning treatment a person of African descent can get from a police officer, is from a Black police officer. 

    Frank Crichlow: Yea, that’s true.

    Michael Nurse: If it is within the culture of society – be it black, white, yellow, green, brown, pink – we all buy into it because it is a system that controls how we access services. If we don’t really allow the people who are experiencing this to drive it, then we end up with the same model that we’ve always had. And I wouldn’t just pin this on White people. I would pin this on the cultural system we live in. It is still White people who are visible in representing the system, but we are also represented in there.

    Frank Crichlow: It was just a point that I was raising about how some of us feel because of whiteness and how they look at us as weak people.

    Michael Nurse: I don’t think you can package everything into whiteness. Because you know the Franz Fanon book “Black Skin White Mask”? I think some of it speaks to this experience. Once we have to exist within the system, we make choices based on the system and what it allows us. So, to me this is a struggle not against people but against the system. That’s where I see it.

    Frank Crichlow: Okay, I could accept that. But I still believe that one of the main struggles is how we have been treated. 

    Michael Nurse: Fair enough. But let’s say nothing changes within the way that safe supply is being developed and administered and the focus continues to be on opiates, after People of African descent are hired on to promote and help drive this work. As Black people, wouldn’t we be perpetuating the same kind of mal treatment that was always there before?

    Frank Crichlow: I would say no. 

    Michael Nurse: What would change? Would we have the ability to make changes on the spot as we work, as people? 

    Frank Crichlow: Exactly, see that’s the challenge. That is where we have to challenge the system to make those changes.

    Michael Nurse: So, the action is still against the system?

    Frank Crichlow: Yes.

    Michael Nurse: Yeah, so that to me it is where we meet. And for me, the key is for people to collaborate to change the system. We need to point out challenges, but also encourage people of all types to join in and fight to change the system and culture that seeks to dictate how people live and how they access safety and care. Yeah, that is where I see it. There definitely is a need for change and we need collaboration among all people to bring about this change.

    Frank Crichlow: The Imagine Safe Supply research team heard that discrimination around gender and sexuality for Black LGBTQIA+ people leads to increased mental health risks and associated drug use. Do you see this as a problem in terms of LGBTQIA+ discrimination within ACB communities? How do you think we can provide a safe space for the Black LGBTQIA+ community with safe supply?

    Michael Nurse: Of course, any kind of racism or oppression has a lasting effect on mental health. For me, that goes without saying. There are definite barriers against LGBTQIA+ people, against queer people, and this is compounded for LGBTQIA+ people who use drugs. It appears to me that discrimination expands according to how different you are from the mainstream, from the status quo. I remember when Black people I knew began to inject. It took a long time for that to be talked about with service providers or even in the community. People resisted telling other people within the community that they were injecting drugs because it was frowned upon. Injecting with needles was seen as much less desirable than smoking crack. Add now being LGBTQIA+, then you step into a whole new set of discrimination. 

    And remember that most ACB communities are grounded in the Church. That’s where many black people seek spiritual and social guidance, connection with each other, social organizing. Predominantly, most of that comes through the church. And the church says sexual activity or love exchange between same sex genders is sinful. So, starting with that, the Church is actively subscribing to the social alienation and oppression of LGBTQIA+ people. How then do you expect LGBTQIA+ people to access places that offer safe supply if hanging over their heads is the stress of having to navigate discrimination and other oppressive social and cultural barriers based on their sexual preferences? 

    It does mean that we need to address and deal with the social harms the Church presents. One segment of a community or population doesn’t represent everybody and cannot be dictating to all people how people live. So, the Church’s influence and involvement in maintaining harm to a segment of the population has to be addressed. It’s been suggested that a way to move this change forward is by finding the progressive members of religious communities and showing them the benefit of harm reduction and safe supply. If that works, it works. If it doesn’t work, straight out, confrontation. Because I believe in justice. You don’t need to pussy foot around this. Things need to change, definitely. 

    Frank Crichlow: The Church seems part of the problem because the church should be addressing those issues. 

    Michael Nurse: The Church is part of the problem and the Church appears unwilling to address these issues, but that doesn’t mean that  we should ignore them. We need to bring it forward and fight. My trust and my hope are not really in the Church, my hope is in the people. I certainly don’t have to accept anything that the Church says or that doesn’t make sense to me. I’m looking at progress. I’m looking at people beginning to assert their existence. To say, this is what I need. Look at me, I’m here! For me, that is where safe supply and harm reduction need to be led. How will people who use drugs come out of the shadows? It shouldn’t be a shadow issue. It shouldn’t be a shadow movement. We should be out of the shadows, living our lives. I mean respecting each other.

    Frank Crichlow: So, should the Church address harm reduction or safe supply?

    Michael Nurse: What I would say in answer to that question is that the Church needs to get real. The message that’s coming out of the Church in terms of sin and how people live their lives, is it touching people today? You know, it isn’t touching people today as it used to. My thing is more about focusing on how we collaborate to have laws, policies, programs, and services that represent us as people. And realize that we can.

    Frank Crichlow: The reason why I ask that question is because you know when anything happens, the grandma and the great grandma say, “because you don’t believe in God” and they start praying, and they want you to start praying. So, what if they would go tell the preacher that the Church should address these issues of discrimination? 

    Michael Nurse: Yeah, you know, I remember when dancing and winding up and so was seen as really wrong within the Church. Frank, you can’t really go into a Caribbean church these days and not hear reggae and soca music jamming, people singing to this music. It has changed, and the change doesn’t necessarily have to start within the Church, it has to start with people. And if it is right for the people, they will take it to Church, people will take it wherever, because it will reflect their lives.

    Frank Crichlow: Yea. 

    Michael Nurse: It does need to be real.

    Frank Crichlow: Particularly at the barber shop. Anywhere Black people congregate, these conversations should happen. 

    Michael Nurse: Yes!

    Frank Crichlow: Everywhere Black people congregate, whether a street corner, whether in a bar, anywhere. And I think that is the solution there. 

    Michael Nurse: We also have to take on a responsibility in terms of being proactive in challenging stigma and discrimination. The first time I walked into a needle exchange there were all these messages and images on the walls, and stuff that reflected positively on me and my lifestyle. And this wasn’t done because I asked for it. It was done because I was recognized by a group of mindful people, and they created that space. I always see communities as an extension of that needle exchange. And we don’t need to just make that space comfortable; make the whole organization, the social space comfortable. Bring those images and messages out so that people know. Make posters and stuff. Give them to the barber shops, give them to the church, too! Put that up there! When people come in, let them see this, show them that you represent this, that you’re okay with it. Show them that this is good, you know. I feel like that’s something that we can do, just promote that goodness, you know.

    Frank Crichlow: Great, very good points, Michael. Thank you very much. 

    Imagine Safe Supply is a community-based research project that explored participation in safe supply in Canada for people who use drugs and frontline workers. For more information on this research please visit here.

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

    Ceasefire Now

    The Canadian Drug Policy Coalition (CDPC) is working towards a future in which drug policies and legislation, as well as related institutional practices, are based in evidence, human rights, equity, and public health principles. We recognize that current drug policy is rooted in colonial systems and structures and are working to centre decolonialism, anti-racism, and abolitionist values and practices in our efforts.   

    At this moment, it is impossible for CDPC, as an organization that works to uphold human rights, combat racism, and defend autonomy, to remain silent. We support and echo: 

    1. demands for an immediate ceasefire to stop genocide in Palestine, unconditional humanitarian access to Gaza, the protection of civilians and humanitarian personnel, and immediate end to the destruction of housing and life-sustaining infrastructure in Gaza; 
    2. demands to release all hostages and political prisoners;
    3. condemnation of Canada’s failure to support key UN resolutions to end catastrophic violence and illegal settlements; 
    4. calls to condemn and take action to end the recent spike in anti-Palestinian, anti-Arab, Islamophobic and antisemitic sentiment and violence across the country and the world; 
    5. calls to defend freedom of expression, and demonstrations of solidarity without harassment or retribution; 
    6. academics in their work to interrogate Canada’s foreign policy as informed and shaped by its own history of settler colonialism

      CDPC knows there is more to be said regarding the humanitarian crisis and mass displacement of the Palestinian people from Gaza and the West Bank unfolding before us, and more work to do in expressing solidarity. This is a statement on behalf of CDPC as one organization, not a network of organizations. We are committed to working with our network partners to articulate the interconnectedness of these struggles for freedom and human rights. We are committed to continued learning and engagement, and to advancing our mandate in ways that centre human rights, evidence and people who use drugs through processes of shared learning and co-creation. 

      We aim to approach our learning and action with humility and, as with all our work, we seek to centre lived experience, evidence, and human rights and to engage through collaboration and co-development with network partners. CDPC is committed to ongoing learning and action as best we can. We know that this takes commitment and that our grounding and ability to name intersecting oppressions in solidarity with broader struggles will grow and expand over time. We also honour our commitment to developing our work in coalition with people who use drugs and the network of partners we collaborate with, and to build shared political consciousness both within our drug policy work and in how we seek to show solidarity. Below is a list of some of the sources we have been reflecting on in our ongoing learning. 

      Annex:  

      Statements (in alphabetical order):  

      Artists & Academics in Canada (4000+ signatures)

      Centre for Gender Advocacy

      Feministes racisées statement (FR)

      Hamilton’s open Letter in support of Sarah Jama  

      Hind Khoudary, journalist in Gaza, explaining the impact of the blockade of medication, treatment and menstrual products   

      Ireland’s Dun Laoghaire constituency’s TD (MP) statement

      Lawyers and law students defending freedom of pro-Palestinian expression

      Professors, Staff, Librarians of McGill University

      Backlash and response to Professors, Staff, Librarians of McGill University

      People’s Potato (Concordia university)

      The Red Nation – Indigenous solidarity with Palestine

      Spain’s minister of social rights 

      SPHR Concordia  

      Zahraa Al-Akhrass’, the only Palestinian journalist at Global News, after being fired   

      Journalists on the ground (in alphabetical order):  

      Plestia Alaqad  

      Motaz Azaiza  

      Bisan  

      Yara Eid, based in London, one of the only surviving journalists of Ain Media  

      Ahmed Hijazi  

      Saleh Al Jafarawi (graphic content)  

      Hind Khoudary  

      Sources :

      https://www.cjpme.org/2022_05_31_canada_exports_arms

      https://globalnews.ca/news/10056886/canadian-special-forces-deployed-israel/

      https://byblacks.com/news/item/3611-black-community-rallies-around-ousted-mpp-sarah-jama-nobody-should-be-censored-for-condemning-what-the-un-has-documented-for-decades

      https://www.instagram.com/p/Cy_YCzYLGpc/

      https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/SForum/SForum2015/MahmoudDaher.pdf

      https://www.newarab.com/news/displaced-palestinians-gaza-are-hungry-and-terrified

      https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/resource-pdf/UNFPA-Situation-Report-2.pdf

      https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=undergradawards_2021

        

    1. Imagine Safe Supply for African, Caribbean and Black Communities An Interview with Marc McKenzie

      Imagine Safe Supply for African, Caribbean and Black Communities An Interview with Marc McKenzie

      Marc McKenzie is a semi-retired frontline worker with Shepherds of Good Hope supportive housing in Ottawa. A lifelong human rights and development proponent in the social services world, he has worked in case management, mental health, and addictions harm reduction advocacy and is a founding member of the Men’s Health Group operating through the South Riverdale Community Health Centre in Toronto. Marc has a passion for music, especially jazz, and served as the transportation co-ordinator of the first Toronto Downtown Jazz Festival. For two years in the mid-90’s, he also was the host of two radio programs at CKWR, then a community radio station, in Waterloo, Ontario. Marc has a keen interest in the connectedness of all things: “Personal discovery, growth, and development is the best gig ever…so much life available, through listening”. 

      Frank Crichlow is the Board President of the Canadian Association of People Who Use Drugs and President of the Toronto Drug Users Union. He works at the South Riverdale Community Health Centre in Toronto as a Community Health Worker and is a community advocate with multiple organizations for people who are unhoused and who use drugs within African, Caribbean, Black, and racialized communities.

      Frank Crichlow: Marc, could you share a little bit about yourself in terms of your work or pursuits and how you came to be interested in the topic of safe supply?

      Marc McKenzie: My interest in safe supply started when, many years ago, a lethal herbicide called paraquat started to be sprayed on marijuana crop, which made its way into the consumer marketplace in Canada none-the-less, as part of the war on drugs campaign. At that time, Mexican pot dominated the North American market, and the spraying of their fields was carried out by the Mexican government in response to mandates set by the American government. The action started quietly, almost covertly, without notification to the public, but was outed by the American anti-discrimination group NORML (National Organisation for the Reform of Marijuana Laws), a private advocacy group. To me, the war on drugs is foolish at best and unconscionable at worst, and I don’t think that humanity can thrive under that mentality. After first working for large corporations for a number of years, I redirected my energies to social work and advocacy. I started with peer work and then, over time, moved on to other forms of social work. At every turn, whether working on the frontline, in case management, housing, or some other aspect of support services, the need for comprehensive harm reduction – from operating philosophy through to integrated service delivery – always presents itself.

      Frank Crichlow: There is currently a gap in culturally oriented harm reduction and safe supply models for African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB) communities. Imagine Safe Supply research findings point to the importance of ACB leadership in the development of organizational and social policies, and a greater involvement of racialized communities in the development of drug policy in general. For example, we heard about a desire for ACB and Black LGBTQIA+ counsellors that can respond to the cultural aspects of people’s needs. My viewpoint is that there are Black people in the lower staffing roles or who are receiving services, but where is the leadership? My question to you is, what advice would you give Black people transitioning into organizational leadership roles in social service and frontline organizations that would be part of safe supply access and support?

      Marc McKenzie: The concept, “safe supply”, is seated in a radically different perspective from that of any other mindset that has ruled society up to this point. At the societal level, embracing it calls for a paradigm shift in core belief. History shows that legislators and elected officials are generally slow, if not disinclined, to move towards such a big swing. Among their many concerns is mainstream public opinion, even if making the move is an act of true leadership. Skillful advocating to the public is key to opening channels of discussion towards gaining a sense of permission to rethink, let alone act.

      To Black people in service leadership roles, I would say if you don’t already have a solid grasp of the factors that form(ed) the history and subsequent present circumstances that shape the ACB experience, then make that learning a priority and share what you learn. Whether through intensive immersion or relaxed conversation, look to soak up as much relevant socio-political insight as you can, such as theory and practice of class stratification and the nature and full objectives of the systems by which Canada operates. Be mindful of your information sources and of your influencers. A grounded understanding of that mechanism – how it all works and to what ultimate ends – furthers the prospect of independent-minded growth and development. Successful advocacy for safe supply calls for the pursuit and maintenance of informed original thinking.

      Home-grown talent is needed. Look to develop streaming programs that can cultivate new leaders, especially from within the ACB community. This goes for those who could be mentors, as well. In society at large, inequities that plague the ACB community and especially those needing safe supply, as unique and glaring as some of those are, are largely underexposed and remain unperceived. The war on drugs narrative currently owns centre stage. More and new vitality is needed; I think the ACB community voice would benefit from steady grassroots on up development, meaning steady progressive job positions for peers, frontline workers, and beyond, and for those who can mentor. Community self-determination and strength development needs to have more of a voice, and ears listening who are motivated to respond. Safe leadership means being in regular and ongoing meaningful contact with people who have current, recent, or long past /elder lived experience.

      Check yourself closely and ongoingly as best you can, to have an updated sense of where you and your team truly stand on relevant issues and service ideas, and why. Know your limits. Know what the Canadian Constitution and the UDHR (Universal Declaration of Human Rights) say on human rights. Challenge status-quo practices that work against human rights and the promotion of health and well-being.

      Gather input through dialogue from as wide a range of sources as you are able, including input from those opposed to the viewpoint you represent, to build community through relationship. Model open-mindedness and support the work of other safe supply stakeholders and allies. Look to contribute towards, utilize, and reference networks active in any medium that aim at furthering harm reduction ideals and services. Support initiatives that promote healthy self-determination. Grass-roots development and action is vital; demonstrate a spirit of advocacy in action as a community standard.

      Bring the conversation forward at all relevant discussion tables and look for opportunities to have best ideas explored. In a country said to be aspiring to democracy, the way forward is through dialogue. True resolution of contentious matters is more successfully negotiated than fought. Do not be sidelined from pushing the discussion envelope beyond the existing company and/or industry narrative and practices. Use evidence-based awareness raising as an orientation for listeners. At meetings, through in-house and outside partner workshops, at community “town-hall” and “coffee house” gatherings, in any relevant forum, humanize the concern. Report on real-life lack of safe access story outcomes and the related further implications. Link these to the nation’s determinants of health, and health and well-being agenda. This also has implications for the CDSA (the Controlled Drug and Substance Act of Canada) and the broader Canadian legal framework in which many of the downstream inequities that negatively impact the ACB community play out.

      Finally, be mindful of developing and maintaining an empowered proactive perspective rather than a reactive, victim-centric one. Having a personal need for safe supply or not, we share origins and overall group history with all the ACB community, and generally face some form of the same barriers, one way or other.

      Frank Crichlow: We heard about needed aspects of equity for Black women in relation to safe supply. One, there’s a need for anonymous, non-medical safe supply avenues where Black women can speak about substance use without judgment or police involvement. Two, there is a need for spaces at harm reduction gatherings and conferences for Black women. Third is the need for better access to support services for Black women, such as mental health and housing. Question, are there any additional areas that you think deserve attention to ensure safe supply equity for Black women? What kinds of safe supply and harm reduction support do you think Black women need, and what are the considerations around this access?

      Marc McKenzie: So, within the situational context of our society, Black women typically occupy the lowest rungs of the socio-political and socio-economic ladders. For me, theirs qualifies as a “special status” which arises from racism coupled with gender bias. I believe the inequities you mention (and others) are expressions or symptoms of the mentality that brokers power in this society.

      Reordering society to support rather than oppress Black women – and therefore all Black community since the women are the nexus of its well-being – would quite naturally over time result in greater equity and abundance for everyone. By this I mean all of society, considering that in humanity if anyone suffers, everyone suffers. But this support would be at the material expense of those who currently enjoy the “privilege of more” as their circumstance and way of life. Oppressing the lives of Black women is the surest way to gut all Black people.

      For ACB women needing non-medical safe supply, for a start, the relationship between these women and the police (and by extension the judicial system) needs to be improved and demonstrated through routine actions to the point where the women can know they are not being targeted or dismissed; that they are related to and are served as full-value members of society. This is tricky because ultimately, the police and courts serve the status quo. Still, often enough an event that spirals into more downstream negative outcomes for these women, and by extension their families, begins with a situation the police come into, or are not called into when they should be because of fear and trust concerns. In my view, how the police and courts treat a group of people generally sets the tone for how they are regarded by most other services, and by broader society overall.

      As a place to start, a presence of ACB female police officers and other first responders, especially in lead roles, would likely invite a sense of approachability and reasonable engagement. Same goes for all other support services, especially counselling. In particular, a visible Black LGBTQIA+ councillor presence would be invaluable to this community. Such representation could help people move out of the silos they live in around substance use and step towards relationship building, brought on by action and response informed by recognition, respect, cultural affinity, and understanding. These are attitudes open to progressive solutions and which move away from the existing “war on drugs” impasse. Along with this, having non-uniform officers from “community-oriented-policing” units visibly involved in social justice and advocacy initiatives, even when just as listeners, demonstrates a willingness by “the system” to develop practical humanistic relationships with communities, which is an important signal to young people coming up.

      Still, there is a primary factor present to this day, deep in the psyche of much of the ACB community at large, that underpins its vulnerability. Its impact expresses in a spiral of forms, but its origins come back to oppression and the denial of self-determination. The commonly used terms “baby mother” and “baby father”, for example, indicate it. These terms originated as a way of Black slave men and women who’d had a child together, referring to each other, arising from the slave owner program of disallowing marriage amongst them and pairing each with different sexual partners at each “breeding” session, as if managing cattle. This was a routine practise in Black slave history in the Americas, for a long time, applied as a device intended to damage the psyches of slaves through the disruption of family ties. It rendered these people “emotionally diminished” and thus easier to control. Additionally, any member of the union – man, woman, or child – could be sold off separately to another owner, at any time.

      The result was a fragile and injured alliance between the women and men, and children chronically raised in forced single parent, variable half-sibling situations, as prescribed by external forces and not resulting from choices based in self-determination. Because the program operated to serve the interest of commerce, the drive of the institution of slavery-for-profit trumped human kinship ties. Enslaved people’s sense of grounding commitment between the sexes, and parent-child relationships, were destabilized if not torn apart (divide and conquer) and the ACB community has yet to fully recover. The ties between women and men are still often described and exercised more through the existence of a child they co-create, than by direct lasting commitment to each other as full-value people and equals. Self-esteem issues linger as a slave trade hangover and emotional trust remains at a premium, just as the program always intended. Subsequently, the sense of grounding and empowerment that a lineage of stable relationships between parents, grandparents, and ancestors provides the psyche of a child stands on shaky ground. With the weight of such historical scars on their shoulders, the children, in turn, live out the cycle as new marks for underdevelopment and exploitation.

      The downstream impact is that society targets, discriminates against, and punishes people who come from this history. This impact plays out in myriad ways including restricted access to housing, stigmatization, discriminatory education streaming, reduced job opportunities and prospects, fear of the process around acquiring citizenship status and equity, and more. There is barrier-ridden health care that often means no situational or culturally sensitive (and sometimes, instead, even inappropriate) care available, and deliberate negative agenda-driven high incarceration rates have additional harmful impacts on development and stability.

      These factors become the normalized circumstances that shape the lives of many in the ACB community. And reflexively, support services all too often treat members of this community as societal outcasts. This is the framework that harm reduction for the ACB community needs to know of, and to inform about, if it is to formulate appropriate responses to this community’s needs. And yes, I know that there are other important questions to be asked and answered, but you have to start with knowledge and sharing of the formative elements. Connecting the dots and letting everyone in on the secret(s) brings this matter out of the shadows, and at least invites permission to service providers across the board to think boldly in terms of solutions. Remember, we’re asking the system, which is reflected in the mainstream, to rethink itself.

      The unique plight of the ACB community, especially with regard to harm reduction and safe supply, remains virtually unknown to the general public. Typically, politicians, even if they know, don’t want to deal with it. That is why I feel that, for the long term, the development of a grassroots leadership through people who can share ownership of the movement is the next step to bringing sustainable growth and improvement. Of course, this needs to be done while continuing to petition against the long list of existing and still developing day-to-day inequities and harms. 

      At the end of the day, this initiative signals a spiritual, transformative quest for all of society. Safe supply and harm reduction are not really to be conditional privileges. They are actually woven into the human birthright.


      Imagine Safe Supply is a community-based research project that explored participation in safe supply in Canada for people who use drugs and frontline workers. For more information on this research please visit here.

    2. 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-

    3. When law and policy is unjust, communities have no choice but to act.

      When law and policy is unjust, communities have no choice but to act.

      The Vancouver Police Department (VPD) arrest of Drug User Liberation Front (DULF) founders on October 25th, 2023 is an act of political and moral cowardice.  

      In the context of unrelenting loss driven by the unregulated drug market, DULF has taken courageous and ethical action to supply safety-tested substances to people who use drugs at great personal risk of arrest under Canada’s controlled substances laws.  

      DULF’s work saves lives. Through their small, community-led model of safe supply, they have demonstrated how access to safety-tested drugs of known potency and contents can reduce overdose, keep people alive, reduce hospitalizations and stabilize lives. DULF’s work has support from leading researchers, physicians and health care providers, public health officials, and community groups. 

      DULF has been transparent and communicative about their actions. They have made every effort to proceed legally, including by applying for an exemption from Health Canada which was denied last year. In the midst of the ongoing unregulated drug crisis, DULF made the ethical choice to proceed without formal approval.  

      The VPD chose to enforce these unjust laws after more than a year of DULF’s compassion club operating in plain sight. There is no conceivable possibility that the VPD, the City of Vancouver, the Province of BC or any other public or private actor with any familiarity with the drug policy landscape in Canada has been unaware of DULF’s actions since their first action. Police have discretion as to when, where and how to enforce the law — they chose the path of harm, and they did not have to.  

      When law and policy is unjust, communities have no choice but to act. The VPD themselves agree that their actions could “absolutely” result in drug users who rely on the compassion club’s services consuming more dangerous substances. Premier David Eby said earlier this week that while DULF is doing life-saving work, the government cannot tolerate illegal activity. The BC government and the VPD are using the law as a shield to justify what even the VPD admit is a dangerous and harmful act.  

      People who use drugs have long known they must take care of each other in the face of government violence and neglect. Sterile needle distribution was once illegal; Insite, Canada’s first legal safe injection site, overcame multiple legal challenges to exist. History has demonstrated that drug law and policy change lag far behind need, and that governments will eventually adopt the lifesaving responses that communities of drug users initiate. We believe this pattern will be replicated, and that history will once again vindicate DULF’s actions.  

      Until then, we unequivocally assert our support for DULF founders and their life-saving work. Inspired by them, we will continue to advocate for urgent and vital reforms to drug law and policy with every tool we have.

    4. Connecting the Dots on Public Space and Drug Policy 

      Connecting the Dots on Public Space and Drug Policy 

      Every person, regardless of their housing status or relationship to drugs, should be able to access safety. We expect our governments to uphold that, not put people at further risk. But that’s not always what happens.  

      Last week, the City of Barrie, Ontario discussed a controversial proposed public space bylaw that would introduce fines ranging from $500 to $100,000 for distributing food, water, clothing, shelter, or other essentials – like harm reduction supplies – to assist people without city authorization. This is not only unbelievably cruel, it’s bad policy: this bylaw punishes people harmed by systems, rather than addressing root causes. It doesn’t solve any problems, just introduces new ones.   

      As a national organization working with community groups across Canada, we know this proposed bylaw in Barrie is no anomaly – it’s just one particularly troubling example of law and policy that further endangers people at risk of dying from unregulated drugs, under the guise of public space legislation.    

      That’s why last week we filed a report with the United Nations Rapporteurs on Homelessness and Extreme Poverty outlining how laws like Barrie’s proposed bylaw violate human rights and put people at risk. Together with community partners, we’re calling attention to the need for a different path: one that upholds the human rights of all people and advances community health and wellness.   

      So, how do public space bylaws relate to drug policy? Let’s connect the dots. In Canada, most public space is regulated through municipal bylaws and other provincial, territorial, or federal land use legislation. These bylaws often criminalize activities related to drug use at the intersection of poverty and homelessness – like using drugs in public space. But the thing is, because our drug laws have made the unregulated market so dangerous, public space may actually be the safest place for people to use drugs, especially in communities that lack supervised consumption services. Being somewhere visible ensures proximity to others and access to emergency health care, outreach services, and harm reduction support. When we criminalize drug use in public space, we don’t solve the problem – we just push it out of sight, and in doing so, make it more dangerous.     

      There is a better path. This is a policy problem, and together we can change policy. To build communities where we can all access safety, we need to implement public health and human rights-based drug policy at every level of government. This includes full decriminalization of drug possession, equitable access to safe regulated supply programs, harm reduction equipment and services, and evidence-based, voluntary treatment that aligns with people’s needs and informed consent. It also means ensuring public space bylaws don’t target people who use drugs.   

      This UN submission is one step we can take to draw attention to this misguided approach, and support elected officials to enact good policy. As Barrie City Council and municipalities across this country navigate issues of public space, CDPC and our community partners are committed to advocating for the rights and well-being of people who use drugs, their loved ones and their communities – that’s all of us.