COMMUNITY DESERVES MORE

The Vancouver Island Health Authority's response to the serious street
problems around the Cormorant Street needle exchange is discouraging,
partly because it is part of such a tiresome pattern.

More than eight months after public concern about the mounting crime,
noise and disruptive behaviour by addicts boiled over, VIHA has
responded. The authority announced a study on "best practices" to see
if more can be done to address the problem.

It's a lame response to a serious problem, especially as obvious
improvements could be made now.

VIHA has been asked to deal with the problems since January. That's
when health officials, police, city council, the business community,
AIDS Vancouver Island and others came together and agreed the needle
exchange location was unsuitable and something had to be done.

But VIHA was not part of that group. It has refused to respond
publicly to community concerns, saying it was in negotiations with
AIDS Vancouver Island, which operates the needle exchange.

The health authority board also refused to allow community members and
a city councillor to make a 10-minute presentation on the issue at its
last meeting.

And now it proposes a study.

The needle exchange is a successful public health resource. It saves
lives and reduces health-care costs by preventing the spread of
serious infections. The exchange also means fewer needles are
discarded. And for those reasons, it is funded by the VIHA.

That funding has been frozen since 2001. VIHA has served notice that
it wants to cut the AIDS Vancouver Island budget by 37.5 per cent, a
move certain to make the problems worse.

A study might be useful. But action on obvious solutions is more
important. A small amount of money would provide an extra staffer on
duty during the most problematic hours. A larger commitment would
allow a satellite facility to reduce the pressure on Cormorant Street,
or a relocated exchange.

Instead, frustrated neighbours -- who have been remarkably patient in
waiting for solutions, but now are seeking an injunction to close the
centre -- are told to wait longer for the results of a study.

After eight months of delay, that's an entirely inadequate response.