DRUG TREATMENT IS THE SOLUTION

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

There are lessons to be learned from the UK crime approach, which has
had significant impact there and is starting to make an impact here
in pilot projects such as that which 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 -- and as RCMP assistant commissioner Gary Bass said, 70
per cent of the crime is committed by 10 per cent of the criminals.

It logically follows that if this minority of crooks are 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 that they will gain the personal strength to break that
vicious cycle on their release and possibly become contributing
members of society.

But the big question is, will the government provide funding for the
drug treatment programs? Judging by past history the funding has not
matched the will of the government, as there have been horrendous
wait lists for persons seeking such 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 of the street people are also drug addicts -- up to 80
per cent according to a recent report funded by the government.

Some of the 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 the institutionalization program.

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 that we have today, but the solutions are
also more complicated than simply building more social housing.

Coleman said that 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 that the government 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 drug addicts moving into their
neighbourhoods? Ordinary taxpayers need proof that the government
will put its money where its mouth is.