A BETTER WAY TO FIGHT THE DRUG WAR

It's not often I find myself at odds with the police, particularly on
law and order issues. But on the Conservative government's new
anti-drug strategy, expected out this week, I'm afraid I cannot share
the official sunny assessment of the Canadian Police Association (CPA).

On Sunday, following a Parliament Hill ceremony honouring fallen
officers, Tony Cannavino, the CPA president, called the government's
plan -- many aspects of which have already been widely leaked -- "a
cornerstone" that should help curb the violence that has accompanied
Canada's expanding drug trade. I hope he's right, but instead, I
suspect he is guilty of wishful thinking.

There is every indication that the Tories' plan will lead to an
obsession with arresting individual users, and rely too heavily on
persuading addicts to kick their habit. In other words, it will focus
on winning the war on drugs by attacking the demand side. Reduce the
number of users, the theory goes, and the drug kingpins, smugglers
and pushers will have no one to sell to. The drug trade will become
unprofitable and they will quit it.

Such an approach is destined to fail.

There is no doubt we need to attack the underground drug trade. Drugs
and drug dealing are behind much of Canada's high-profile crime --
including most street shootings. Still, unless the Tories' scheme is
substantially smarter than the Americans' war on drugs, it cannot
expect to be any more effective.

While U.S. drug enforcement efforts initially concentrated on
large-scale producers and dealers, police forces soon found it easier
to generate impressive arrest statistics by rounding up casual users
and individual addicts, which has done little to curb demand or quell violence.

There are already some discouraging signs in the leaked details of
our new federal plan that hint we will end up on the same path. For
instance, the $64-million in new annual funding is far too small a
sum, and it is directed mostly to the wrong priorities. Last spring's
budget suggested it would be split 15% for prevention, 50% for
treatment of drug addicts and 35% for police resources to arrest
dealers and drug producers.

Since nearly all the violence associated with the drug trade stems
from turf wars between syndicates and gangs over who may make or sell
drugs in which neighbourhoods, too little of this new money would
appear to be earmarked to help police. All of it probably would not
be enough to counter the well-armed, highly organized criminal
networks that control much of our nation's drug trade. And since the
hundreds of millions already spent by Canadian governments has done
little to stem user demand for drugs, the 65% aimed at individuals
may well be wasted.

Rather than declare that there are "no safe drugs," as Health
Minister Tony Clement is expected to do when the anti-drug campaign
is launched, the government should consider accepting that -- for
good or bad -- drug use is a personal choice. As such, there is
little it can do to prevent it. But given that it is a personal
choice, society has little obligation to pay for the consequences of
misuse. Legalize most drugs, but also declare no welfare for addicts.
Let private charities supply relief and health care for those who
abuse drugs. That would at least compel some users to confront the
economic costs of their choices and might -- might -- discourage more
Canadians from taking drugs than any preachy government advertising
campaign or assault on casual drug use.