INSITE CRITICS INJECT IGNORANCE

To the editor:

Re: "Street smart cop gets the boot," Aug. 8.

Mark Hasiuk suggests that Dave Dickson was released because of his
outspoken opposition to Vancouver's harm-reduction strategies.

One hopes that political considerations don't determine such
decisions, but it is not uncommon for employers to expect employees
to go along with policies they disagree with, so who knows.

But that is not the part of Hasiuk's opinion piece that caught my
attention. He refers to the harm reduction strategy as "largely
untested." He claims it is a "failed policy which promotes
destructive behaviour in Canada's most troubled neighbourhood."

I wonder what possible evidence Hasiuk has that justifies him to make
such claims (other than the opinion of Mr. Dickson)?

The reason Dr. John Hepburn scolded the federal Conservatives is
surely not because they questioned Insite's effectiveness (university
professors welcome and expect dissent), but because Mr. Harper
ignores the significant number of academic studies which show Insite
to be effective. It appears that Hasiuk is guilty of the same wilful ignorance.

Peter MacKinnon,

Vancouver