REPORT ALONE CAN'T SOLVE THE DRUG PROBLEM

Where is the beef? This is the question critics of a new city report
on drugs have every right to ask.

The report, released last week with much fanfare, recommends the city
step up efforts to educate the public about drugs, spend more money
on enforcement and build more treatment facilities with the help of
other agencies such as the Regional District of Okanagan-Similkameen
and the Penticton Indian Band.

We commend the commitment of every member who served on the drug task
force which developed this three-pillar policy and we predict that it
will spark much-needed awareness about drugs in the community.

But we fear that this will be the maximum impact of the report for
some time to come.

While the report brims with well-intentioned rhetoric, it does not
force council to adopt any of its recommendations. Some can be
achieved readily. Others -- especially those which carry a large
price tag but are likely to make the biggest difference -- are less
likely to be realized.

Additional RCMP officers and a new detoxification-treatment centre
are expensive additions to any municipal wish list.

Granted, Mayor Jake Kimberley promised that the report would get a
full and fair hearing during pending budget discussions. We hope
council will fulfill this commitment. But we also fear that the city
has set itself up for failure by outlining an ambitious plan without
the financial resources to back it up.

While this approach is better than no plan at all, it is likely to
create unreasonable expectations among the public only to dash them
later, leaving behind criticism and cynicism.

We are not suggesting that the city should have lowered expectations,
then exceed them. Nobody wins by pursuing goals which are met too
easily. Ambition is a trait we should nourish, not discourage.

But the public can spot the difference between style and substance
and the city would have done the public a greater service if it had
rolled out its strategy in separate stages, each one endowed with
resources to meet its intended mandate.

Is this criticism justified? We shall reserve final judgment. The
measures which will eventually receive financial support may well
make a difference. But they may not.

Many of the factors behind the spread of drugs are outside the
control and jurisdiction of the city.

So we actually foresee the possibility that city officials will get
the blame for failing to solve a problem that was not theirs to start with.