POOR PRESCRIPTION FOR DRUGS IN JAILS

It's beyond dispute that inmates and guards in Alberta jails need to be
better protected against intimidation, assault and blood-borne diseases
like HIV.

So it's a shame that's unlikely to happen in any meaningful way under the
Corrections Amendment Act proposed by Solicitor General Heather Forsyth.

No doubt, the law will give some Albertans the impression that government
is "getting tough" on troublemaking inmates.

But it will do little to stop the flow of drugs into jails. It will do
little to stop drug use by addicted offenders.

And it will do little to reduce exposure of inmates and staff to health
hazards created by needle sharing and second-hand tobacco smoke.

"Problem offenders need to know they will be held fully accountable for
their disruptive behaviour," Forsyth has said.

No argument there. Zero tolerance for threats or violence aimed at other
offenders or staff is overdue. Forsyth's bill quite rightly requires
internal disciplinary boards to look more closely at inmates' actual
behaviour when deciding whether they have earned the right to early release.

Furthermore, there can be little objection to introducing random drug
testing and searches of inmates -- things that only happen now when there
are grounds for suspicion.

But will any of this do much to reduce the amount of drug possession and
use in jails?

Perhaps random tests, and the fear of longer time behind bars, will deter a
few casual drug users. But chronic users are the greater problem.

On average, inmates of provincial jails are held for only 36 days. Those
who arrive with chronic drug habits won't change their ways that fast.

Ravi Prithipaul, president of the Criminal Trial Lawyers Association of
Edmonton, points out that many inmates are in jail specifically because of
drug problems.

Rather than losing their chance at early release when a test simply
reconfirms their known drug habits, they need better programs to help them
combat their dependency, he says.

Maureen Collins, executive director of the Edmonton John Howard Society,
agrees. "Just keeping them in jail longer does not address the problem that
caused them to be there in the first place." Indeed, given the harsh
reality of life in jail, more time inside "may increase the chance that
they will return after getting out."

Ideally, drugs should be stopped at the front gate. But there is little in
Forsyth's bill to achieve that, and few believe it is a practical solution.

"Drugs arrive in myriad ways," a spokeswoman says. "Offenders go out on
work crews and make arrangements to pick up a stash. Sometimes visitors
bring drugs."

If that is the case, Forsyth should at least support a needle-exchange
program to minimize the impact.

But no: "Drugs should not be used in these facilities and we are not going
to facilitate them," her spokesman says.

This is unhealthy moralism. If the minister could keep drugs out, then
there would be no needles to exchange. But if inmates have drugs, then her
insistence that they be denied access to clean needles is bad public-health
practice.

To begin with, the policy is irresponsible to other inmates, jail employees
and relatives, who could be infected by HIV, hepatitis C or other
blood-borne diseases, through subsequent contact.

The health of inmates and staff also could be protected by halting tobacco
use, as urged by a committee chaired by Red Deer MLA Mary Anne Jablonski.

When it comes to this particular drug, however, the minister apparently
likes the idea of a ban -- but "wants to be sure that we are fully prepared
. (with) programs in place to help people kick the habit," according to
her aide.

Forsyth's confused and inconsistent Corrections Amendment Act appeals to an
understandable popular enthusiasm for getting tough with offenders. And its
clampdown on physical aggression is entirely appropriate.

But its approach to drug use appears unlikely to change inmate behaviour,
or to make provincial jails significantly safer.