IDEOLOGICAL PREJUDICES NOT SMART

The clock is ticking on the future of one of Canada's most important
and unique attempts to deal with drug addiction. Perhaps that's a good thing.

It may very well be good that the federal government is sending
signals it will soon no longer support Vancouver's supervised
injection facility [Insite]. Getting Ottawa out of the picture may
actually create some certainty and stability for the controversial
facility in Vancouver's notorious Downtown Eastside.

That's because Health Minister George Abbott has said the province
supports the facility remaining open, which suggests the B.C.
government is willing to operate it should the feds decide to bail.

Insite, which opened its doors in 2003, has been allowed to exist
because the federal government granted it an exemption from the
country's narcotic laws [illegal drugs, notably heroin, are allowed
to be on the premises].

But the exemption expires on June 30. A host of supporters of Insite
have pooled efforts to keep the facility open - including a court
challenge - and goodness knows they're pushing a big rock up a steep
hill when it comes to dealing with the feds.

It's clear the whole philosophical and medical underpinning of Insite
- - which recognizes that drug addiction is primarily a health issue,
not a criminal one - makes the Harper government very uneasy. I've
written before about the completely ineffective war on drugs that
stresses enforcement and prohibition.

Despite that ongoing failure, ideological conservatives and
right-wingers still cling to the notion that simply catching drug
addicts and throwing them in jail solves the problem.

Their approach is, of course, wrong and there is very little positive
evidence to back up their assertions that they're on the right track.
Still, the Harper gang has left enough clues that they prefer to keep
the ideological blinkers firmly in place.

The fact that Insite's effectiveness has been cited in 20 articles in
leading peer-review publications such as Lancet and the New England
Journal of Medicine seems to matter little.

The fact that studies by the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority and
noted criminologist Neil Boyd from Simon Fraser University [released
just this week] show numerous benefits arising from Insite's
existence [fewer drug overdoses, reduced transmission of HIV/Hep C
viruses, more public order in the area, and a 40 per cent treatment
rate for drug users] seem to matter little. The fact that B.C.
provincial health officer Perry Kendall, one of the world's most
credible authorities on harm reduction, is a passionate advocate of
Insite, seems to matter little. Instead, opponents of Insite are
reduced to relying on a couple of Vancouver police officers who don't
like the fact the facility exists [although more than a 1,000 ex-U.S.
drug police officers think the whole approach to fighting drugs has
been a dismal failure, and support some kind of end to prohibition].

And opponents are left quoting from a single, dubious study that
suggests the experiment has been a failure. But when one looks
further, it turns out the study's author is the research director of
the Drug Prevention Network of Canada, a prohibition group led by
former Conservative MP Randy White.

For the federal government to give greater weight to such a flawed,
questionable report [done, by the way, for a non-scientific anti-drug
organization] over such esteemed and credible sources as the Lancet,
the New England Journal of Medicine and Dr. Kendall would be a travesty.

But then again, maybe that would be a good thing. If we can get rid
of ideological, moralistic attitudes shaping our approach to dealing
with drug addiction then maybe we can make some progress on that
bleak landscape.

So a word to Ottawa: hand this facility over to the B.C. government.
Let it continue its operations and good work.

Keep your ideological prejudices to yourselves. This province, and
particularly the people who literally need Insite to stay alive,
would be all the better for it.