PLAN FLOATED TO IGNORE SOME PRISON DRUG USE

The Correctional Service of Canada has put together a proposal to turn a
blind eye to some positive tests for marijuana and hashish use among
prisoners and offenders released in the community, The Globe and Mail has
learned.

The correctional service, which has a zero-tolerance policy on drugs and
alcohol, would continue to test for tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the active
ingredient in marijuana. But it would act on positive tests only when the
drug use is considered to be a problem for an offender and there is concern
about increased criminal risk. The proposal might, for example, lead to
fewer people returned in prison for using marijuana after their release,
and fewer disciplinary measures against prisoners who test positive.

The paper describes THC as a soft drug that sedates prisoners, reduces
their propensity for violence and does not impair cognitive function and
perception as other drugs and alcohol do. It says THC use does not lead to
dependence, has few side effects, even with heavy use, and is not a gateway
to more serious drugs such as cocaine and heroin. It also says there is
only a weak relationship between THC and criminal activity.

But the discussion paper also notes that THC is still illegal in Canada,
that the correctional service might be perceived as condoning the use of an
illegal substance, and that ending THC testing entirely might be political
untenable for the service and the federal government. And it says offenders
have to come into contact with other criminals to get marijuana and hashish
and not testing for it might increase its use in prisons and enhance the
illicit drug trade inside the institutions, which often includes violence
and strong-arm tactics.

The proposal is among a number of ideas circulated in a recent discussion
paper aimed at overhauling drug testing of prisoners and offenders on release.

The union representing prison guards says the proposals are a blatant
attempt to hide the rampant drug problem in federal penitentiaries.

The discussion paper notes that removing THC from drug tests would cut the
rate of positive tests by half.

And it says drug use by offenders has been rising -- the rate of positive
tests increased by about 20 per cent over the past five years, and more
offenders refused to be tested, meaning illegal drug use is even greater
than urine testing suggests.

The document, called Proposed Modifications to Urinalysis Program, was sent
to wardens, deputy wardens and district directors for comment by Jan. 18 of
this year. "A non-response by the end of the 18th will be regarded as
agreement with the proposed changes," says an internal correctional service
e-mail dated Dec. 28.

Sylvain Martel, national president of the Canadian Union of Correctional
Officers, said the correctional service is trying to hide the drug problem
and save money by not doing tests.

"This is a manipulation of the statistics and one way to make the situation
look good is to drop testing for marijuana and hashish," he said. "We have
a serious drug-abuse problem in the penitentiaries, a big-time problem, and
the union is totally against this."

The union leader said the proposal makes a mockery of the CSC's stated
zero-tolerance policy and brings into question the rehabilitation process
for inmates.

"If an inmate tests positive, then he's not following his rehabilitation
plan and that whole process just goes out the window if the CSC says we're
not testing for THC any more."

During 2000-2001, the corrections service spent about $600,000 on
urinalysis of prisoners and another $1.55-million testing offenders on
release in the community.

The corrections-service document criticizes outside testing because
parolees know in advance when they are to be tested. It says there are no
surprise tests because of "practical reasons" such as the availability and
schedule of the contractor who collects samples.

"Clearly this is a serious problem given that offenders are aware of when
they will be tested and is a poor usage of urinalysis resources in the
community. Hence, the approach does little, if anything, to monitor and
deter offender drug use in the community and requires major revision."

The proposals suggests dropping fixed-interval testing on the outside in
favour of letting parole officers decide when to have an offender tested.

This approach would lead to a 60- to 70-per-cent decrease in the number of
urine samples collected.