YOUR MONEY ON DRUGS

Imagine that the federal and provincial governments spend about $1 billion
a year on a program, but the auditor general discovers no one really knows
where the money went, or if the money is doing any good at all. Surely the
program would be a prime candidate to be axed. But it's not, and most
politicians don't even want to talk about it.

If this description of Canada's drug policy seems extreme, consider what
Auditor General Sheila Fraser wrote in December, 2001: "The federal
government could not provide complete information on resources spent to
address illicit drugs." Still, Ms. Fraser and her staff cobbled together
their own rough estimate of total spending: $500 million a year. Of that,
they estimated 95 per cent went to law enforcement.

But provinces and cities also pay for drug prosecutions and punishments, so
a Senate committee attempted to calculate and add in those costs. It
concluded total spending on drug enforcement alone may be as much as $1
billion a year.

What benefit Canadian taxpayers get for this lavish spending is a mystery.
The auditor general noted that the government does not have clear
expectations for its spending and that even if it did, there is no way to
measure whether those goals are being met because there are no national
data on drug use, convictions or sentences. In other words, the government
doesn't know what it's spending, why it's spending it, or whether its
efforts are working.

All of which makes the gun registry look like a model of sound public
policy. But it gets worse.

Independent studies have consistently concluded that drug enforcement
produces few, if any, real benefits. Last week, a study published in the
Canadian Medical Association Journal found that a major police crackdown in
Vancouver's downtown eastside ghetto didn't reduce drug use, but only
served to drive drug dealers and addicts into new neighbourhoods.

An earlier Vancouver study similarly found that the largest heroin seizure
in Canadian history had no effect on the price of drugs, the amount of drug
use or the rate of overdoses.

With such poor results from Canada's drug policies, it's no wonder that
politicians won't label this the boondoggle it is. If they did, they would
have to talk about alternatives, and that's politically explosive. It's a
lot easier to just pretend not to see the fiasco.

Understandable as that is, it's also dishonourable. A billion dollars a
year could do a lot of good in health, education or many other areas.
Parliamentarians have a duty to demand proof that this money is being spent
wisely. If they don't have the courage to do so during the upcoming
election campaign, they should make it a priority when they take up their
seats in the next Parliament.