News (Media Awareness Project) - CN ON: PUB LTE: Clement's Decision Hurts Most Vulnerable |
Title: | CN ON: PUB LTE: Clement's Decision Hurts Most Vulnerable |
Published On: | 2008-05-14 |
Source: | Huntsville Forester, The (CN ON) |
Fetched On: | 2008-05-19 14:33:04 |
CLEMENT'S DECISION HURTS MOST VULNERABLE MEMBERS OF SOCIETY
I'm writing in reference to the article by Andre Picard in
yesterday's Globe and Mail, "Scientists accuse Tories of 'despicable'
interference."
The scientists' charges land squarely in the office of Muskoka-Parry
Sound MP Tony Clement.
I must agree with Picard's assessment of the actions of Clement's
ministry as regards the continued support for Insite (the safe
injection site) in Vancouver. His position, to place a moratorium on
research, is driven entirely by ideology.
The rigorous scientific research into the effectiveness of Insite in
reducing the spread of HIV/AIDS doesn't tell him what he wants to
hear, so he ends the research. Then he offers funds for research, but
only if the research results are released after Insite is closed.
Unfortunately for Clement and his neo-con colleagues, the research
demonstrates that Insite has had a significant positive impact on
both the spread of HIV/AIDS and in addict rehabilitation.
In other words, there is a reduction of harm to the entire community,
and fewer people using needles as they are rehabilitated.
One would think a minister of health would find this very positive.
Instead, he does everything he can to shut Insite down, thereby
ensuring that dirty needles will continue to be used, HIV/AIDS will
continue to spread (and not just among drug users) and rehabilitation
resources will be less available to addicts.
He must be very proud.
The only other group on the fringes of this issue supporting
Clement's position are the police. Health-care workers support
Insite. Social workers support Insite. Rigorous scientific research
proves Insite's positive impact on the health of everybody in the community.
His response is to shut the scientists up?
But that would be like cutting funding for special education in
Ontario schools, wouldn't it?
Ensuring that the most vulnerable members of our society are placed
in an even more precarious position?
Who would do that?
Oh, that's right. He was in the Harris government, wasn't he?
We all should have seen this coming.
Peter Giaschi
Picton
I'm writing in reference to the article by Andre Picard in
yesterday's Globe and Mail, "Scientists accuse Tories of 'despicable'
interference."
The scientists' charges land squarely in the office of Muskoka-Parry
Sound MP Tony Clement.
I must agree with Picard's assessment of the actions of Clement's
ministry as regards the continued support for Insite (the safe
injection site) in Vancouver. His position, to place a moratorium on
research, is driven entirely by ideology.
The rigorous scientific research into the effectiveness of Insite in
reducing the spread of HIV/AIDS doesn't tell him what he wants to
hear, so he ends the research. Then he offers funds for research, but
only if the research results are released after Insite is closed.
Unfortunately for Clement and his neo-con colleagues, the research
demonstrates that Insite has had a significant positive impact on
both the spread of HIV/AIDS and in addict rehabilitation.
In other words, there is a reduction of harm to the entire community,
and fewer people using needles as they are rehabilitated.
One would think a minister of health would find this very positive.
Instead, he does everything he can to shut Insite down, thereby
ensuring that dirty needles will continue to be used, HIV/AIDS will
continue to spread (and not just among drug users) and rehabilitation
resources will be less available to addicts.
He must be very proud.
The only other group on the fringes of this issue supporting
Clement's position are the police. Health-care workers support
Insite. Social workers support Insite. Rigorous scientific research
proves Insite's positive impact on the health of everybody in the community.
His response is to shut the scientists up?
But that would be like cutting funding for special education in
Ontario schools, wouldn't it?
Ensuring that the most vulnerable members of our society are placed
in an even more precarious position?
Who would do that?
Oh, that's right. He was in the Harris government, wasn't he?
We all should have seen this coming.
Peter Giaschi
Picton
Member Comments |
No member comments available...