HARPER SHOULD ANSWER QUESTIONS

Prime Minister Stephen Harper dropped by the provincial legislature
last week for a feel-good speech about B.C. and the Winter Olympics,
but he didn't stop to take any questions from anyone.

That's too bad, as his aversion to having anything to do with the
media (other than an occasional wave to the television cameras) means
he's able to duck some pressing issues.

I certainly had a question or two of my own. I wasn't planning to
spend gobs of time talking about the irony (or, some say, hypocrisy)
of him addressing a provincial legislature after he prorogued his own
federal house.

And I wasn't particularly interested in grilling him over his
government's economic plan, its problems in Afghanistan or even
potential election timing.

But I did have a question or two about one of his government's
dumbest moves in recent days that have a direct bearing on this
province. That would be the Conservative government's decision to
appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada a B.C. Court of Appeal ruling
that Vancouver's Downtown Eastside safe injection site (Insite) is a
legal operation and should be allowed to remain open.

Harper has already lost two key court challenges on this. In trying
yet again to get the courts to follow his ideologically based
prejudice, critics say he has abandoned common sense, strong legal
analysis and sound public policy.

There is no question Insite is a controversial facility. The idea
that governments and the health-care system implicitly inject
themselves into an illegal activity - consumption of banned drugs -
strikes many as wrong.

But those who oppose the existence of Insite - where addicts are
given a secure place to take drugs, such as heroin, with sterile
needles - conveniently ignore a larger truth that underscores the
need for places such as Insite. That would be the fact that our whole
approach to illegal drugs - the so-called "war on drugs" - has been a
complete, abject failure.

To stick to the conventional method of dealing with drug addiction
(i.e. prosecute addicts and do everything possible to deny them
access to drugs) is a head-in-the-sand approach that is not only
wrong but also dangerous. Addicts are sick people. Simply telling
them to stop taking drugs is a useless approach. Some will engage in
criminal activity, such as robbery, to find ways to pay for their drugs.

As well, drug addiction is an illness and a medical condition. Not
treating it as such - at the very least, ensuring addicts access to
safe conditions when it comes to consuming the drugs their bodies now
need - invites compounding the threat of an already potentially
dangerous situation.

Serious diseases such as HIV and hepatitis C can result from dirty
needle use, and that threatens non-addicts (to say nothing of the
fact that it adds even more costs to our already too-expensive
health-care system).

Renowned medical experts such as Dr. Gabor Mate (a staff physician at
Insite), the province's chief medical health officer, Dr. Perry
Kendall, and many others all agree that, from a medical and health
standpoint, Insite makes complete sense.

Even the B.C. Liberal government, a supposedly right-wing regime,
supports Insite's continued existence.

These positions are all rooted in evidence-based analysis. For
example, the number of drug overdose deaths has declined remarkably,
and so has drug-related crime in Insite's neighbourhood.

Yet the Harper government continues to cling to the out-dated and
unworkable notion that simply cracking down on addicts and "forcing"
them to drop their habits is the best approach.

This is an example of the occasional ideological extremism that
critics of his government fear will come with increased regularity
should it ever hold a majority position in government.

Holding power in a minority Parliament provides significant checks on
Harper's power to go too far in any particular position. He must pick
his way carefully.

Will we see other ideology-based changes to health policy should the
Tories ever win a majority? Why cling to the failed policies of the
past? Why not shed your ideological blinkers and embrace a proven
success story such as Insite?

All good questions, and all ones I would love to have posed to him
when he was in Victoria.

But he simply wasn't interested in talking to anyone.