DRUG TREATMENT THE SOLUTION TO MUCH CRIME

It's heartening to hear our political leaders talking about
innovative crime-fighting strategies as well as Housing Minister Rich
Coleman's vow to address the homelessness problems that seem to
plague this province.

There are lessons to be learned from the U.K. crime approach, which
has had significant impact there and is starting to make an impact
here in pilot projects such as that Surrey is undertaking in
conjunction with the RCMP. The British approach is not perfect, as
the ASBOs (anti-social behaviour orders) implemented there are
proving a frustration and unworkable, in the words of some police
beat officers.

But the ideas of using technology such as surveillance cameras to
identify and catch chronic repeat offenders in the act, then force
them to submit to drug tests and, most importantly, mandatory drug
treatment programs if they test positive are really the only way to
make a dent in the crime statistics.

Almost invariably, it's drug addiction that's driving the repeat
offenders -- as RCMP assistant commissioner Gary Bass said, 70% of
the crime is committed by 10% of the criminals.

It logically follows that if this minority of crooks is promptly
released into the public, usually to their old haunts and the company
of their cronies, they will very soon be back in the business of
criminal activity.

If, instead, they are placed in drug rehabilitation programs, there
is a chance they will gain the personal strength to break that
vicious cycle on their release and, possibly, become contributing
members of society.

The big question is: Does the government have the funding to provide
drug treatment programs? Judging by history, the funding has not
matched the will of the government as there have been horrendous
waiting lists for people seeking treatment. Often, by the time a
space has opened up, the addict is back on the streets and back in
the arms of drug dealers.

This is also where the homeless problem meshes with the crime
problem. Many street people are also drug addicts -- up to 80%
according to a recent report funded by the government.

Some street people also have mental health problems -- a minority,
but a significant number, I'm sure -- although it's hard to figure
out where the mental health problems end and simple drug-induced
psychosis begins for a good number of them.

Premier Gordon Campbell recently said we have failed in the
experiment of closing mental institutions and the attempt to
integrate former patients into society at large. In many cases, he's
right but the answer isn't to go back to institutionalization.

On the other hand, dropping off former institution patients on the
east side of Vancouver, where the rent is, or was, cheaper, was a
huge mistake, too. That was like delivering lambs to the slaughter.

It's a complicated mess we face today but the solutions are also more
complicated than simply building more social housing.

Coleman said local governments and residents have to be more
accommodating to new approaches to social housing, and we must avoid
the NIMBY syndrome.

That's a fair comment but, by the same token, if local politicians,
who must respond to the demands of their resident voters, can't be
convinced the province is going to be serious about funding drug
treatment programs and getting the addicts into the programs, who can
blame them for not wanting the addicts moving into their neighbourhoods?

Ordinary taxpayers need some proof the government will put its money
where its mouth is.