Donate

Author: Donald MacPherson

  • insite vigil poem by the late Bud Osborn

    insite vigil poem by the late Bud Osborn

    Last week, for the National Day of Action for the Overdose Crisis, we marched with 922 feathers, one for every life lost in BC in 2016. Our Executive Director, Donald MacPherson, vividly recalls being in the same place 20 years before for the same reason at Oppenheimer park with 1,000 crosses and his friend Bud Osborn.

    Two weeks ago, we hosted an event, convening those from across Canada actively working on establishing supervised consumption services in their communities. The event was opened with a poem. When the poem was read, it stirred a committed sense of determination in the room, fuelled by the shared and extended duration of suffering from the loss of so many lives to accidental drug overdoses.

    The poem was written by the late Bud Osborn, who passed away in 2014.

    the fight for insite

    began in a political/rhetorical atmosphere

    of depraved indifference

    regarding overdose deaths and pandemic emergency

    horrifying ghosts of human beings

    calling radio talk shows and actually telling me:

    “why don’t they just string barbed-wire

    around the downtown eastside

    and let them infect each other to death?”

    or

    “the only good junkie is a dead junkie”

    comments like those heard in nazi germany

    I remember one welfare week

    eleven years ago

    sirens screamed lights flashed red and white

    all day all night

    one hot afternoon that same week

    I met a friend of mine

    on the corner of cordova and main

    she’s a first nations woman and activist

    who told me when i asked

    how she was

    that her family was gathering

    to make another crucial decision

    her cousin had fixed alone Wednesday evening

    in a sro room

    and when her husband returned

    found her dead on the floor

    he made a noose

    with a long piece of cloth   hanged himself

    and soon was dead

    and because the couple had an infant son

    the family was gathering

    to determine the best disposition

    for the suddenly orphaned child

    and this entire unjust and tragic situation

    might well never have happened

    if insite was open

    but as my friend and I were saying goodbye

    a flame burst inside me

    fuelled by grief and rage

    like a fierce spontaneous combustion

    flashing up through my nervous system

    and roared in my head like a psychic explosion

    because of another

    because of too many

    because of an unnecessary

    overdose death

    yelled

    two words repetitively in my head

    no more! no more! no more!

    of this heart-breaking family-shattering community-diminishing

    pain     of overdose deaths

    I immediately ran from that conversation

    to see mark and liz and kirsten at the old portland hotel

    and with dave diewert ann livingston

    and several others

    planned a day of action

    we pounded 1,000 crosses into oppenheimer park

    blocked main and hastings with a heavy chain

    and distributed statistics of misery

    to commuters unable to get to work

    1,000 crosses memorializing just three years of overdose deaths

    a cross is a symbol of political execution

    a cross is a symbol for social revolution

    and form that afternoon

    the battle to save lives was declared

    the battle to save the lives of those

    so many other wanted to die

    and from that afternoon

    to insite’s opening

    we’ve never ceased in our efforts

    to save lives and bring peace

    because everyone     suffers

    when compassion is undone

    insite vigil poem by the late Bud Osborn
    an excerpt from the book Raise Shit! Social Action Saving Lives
    co-authored by Donald MacPherson, Susan Boyd and Bud Osborn

    Bus Osborn Portrait
  • In Memory of Raffi Balian

    In Memory of Raffi Balian

    Raffi Balian passed away on February 16, 2017

    Raffi was one of the founding members of the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition (CDPC). He was very excited that the founding group was starting an organization that was national in scope and was prepared to advocate strongly for harm reduction, decriminalization of drugs and ultimately regulation.

    Raffi always brought such a depth of knowledge to our discussions gained from his own experience and his work over the years with people who used drugs. He clearly understood what it was like to live in the shadows, in a world where the substances that one was using were criminalized and stigmatized. He was always one of the first to identify what the unintended consequences and harms of drug policies would be on the people on the ground. He was a member of the CDPC policy committee and was so appreciative of a place where people came together to talk about drug policies and their impact on people who used drugs. Raffi brought his deep knowledge and commitment to many consultations over the years, often articulating perspectives that opened up new ideas for health authorities to consider when designing harm reduction programs.

    Raffi was a significant figure in the landscape of Canadian drug policy and he will be sorely missed by all of us.

    -Donald MacPherson

    The family has requested that any donations be made in Raffi’s memory to the Raffi Balian Fund, to further the work he began in Harm Reduction. The donation website via Canada Help’s can be accessed here or in-person/by mail c/o Rose Shang 955 Queen St E Toronto, ON M4M3P3.

     

    Raffi Balian Memorial February 2017

  • We’ve Been Here Before – Overdose Deaths in BC, 1994

    We’ve Been Here Before – Overdose Deaths in BC, 1994

    Former BC Chief Coroner Vince Cain, in his report on British Colombia’s opioid overdose catastrophe in the nineties, conducted a thorough analysis of the problem we were facing then. Among other things he was very clear that the overdose problem needed public health and social responses, not criminal justice responses and that drug policies needed to be reviewed. He even called for a commission to do the work. Twenty-two years later we are still waiting for that review. Read his report and weep. Weep for the lives lost to the continuing failure to radically change our approach to drugs in this country. We must stop criminalizing people who use drugs and work towards regulating all psychoactive substances in the name of consumer protection. To do otherwise is clearly to repeat the disasters of the past.

    Here is his prescient report released in 1994 that called for decriminalization and clinical prescribing of heroin so help stem the overdose crisis.

    Excerpt:

    “By far the most controversial part of the report will be Chapter VIII, on Legalization and Decriminalization. Legalization is a huge issue which, while the drug problem is largely here, does not have a unique British Columbian solution. It is bigger than Canada, indeed bigger than North America. It is international in scope and in law. Canadian laws and United Nations conventions control this matter, but that ought not detract from the reality of the situation in British Columbia. We have the problem, and we must do what we can about it, now. Consequently, I am recommending the establishment of a commission to examine and challenge those legal aspects of the problem, amongst so many other things. The problem must be looked at with regard to not only the aspect of deaths form heroin and cocaine, but rather the entire smorgasbord of available illicit narcotics, both so-called “soft” and “hard” drugs.

    Simultaneously, I am recommending the decriminalization of simple possession of specific “soft and “hard” drugs, the specificity to be left to the experts on that commission. We have a serious problem and I submit that those directly affected ought to be dealt with through a medical model, not a criminal model, even to the point where I am suggesting the possibility of providing heroin to seriously addicted people, in a para-medical model. One material reason for this would be to reduce the demand from the street trafficker, replacing it through the clinic, not unlike the current situation with methadone.”
    Page VI – Report of the Task Force into Illicit and Narcotic Overdose Deaths in British Columbia – Office of the Chief of Coroner

    Download Cain’s Report, 1994

    (seulement en anglais)

    Cain, 1994 Report Submission

  • In The Lead Up to UNGASS, Canada is Charting a New Path

    In The Lead Up to UNGASS, Canada is Charting a New Path

    It feels like we can breathe again.

    In mid-March, I attended the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) in Vienna, the annual drug policy meeting where delegations from over 50 countries and numerous Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) come to review progress being made towards reducing the harms from drugs globally. It’s a fractious affair with the majority of the countries still wedded to a war on drugs approach. Resistance to change is in the air and god forbid anyone raises the issue that there may be better ways to address drug related issues in their countries. But the list of countries calling for reform is growing, and in the longer term we think the status quo will give way to new approaches. The next three to five years are pivotal for reforming outdated global drug policies.

    Much of the time at the meeting was focused on preparing for the upcoming UN General Assembly Special Session on Drugs (UNGASS) in New York – the most important global drug policy meeting at the UN since 1998. It provides an opportunity for countries to move in one of two different directions: either call for much needed change in the global approach to drugs or to keep their head firmly in the sand and deny that the whole UN drug control apparatus needs a thorough review. Thus far the negotiations have been tough and little progress has been made in moving countries resistant to reviewing the effectiveness of the drug treaties. Civil society organizations released a statement [link] on the first day of the meeting signed by 200 NGOs around the world calling for member states to speak out on the closed state of the negotiations.

    The document agreed upon by the end of the CND meeting is a poor reflection of the many progressive and change oriented ideas that were put into the process from UN Member States, civil society and UN agencies.

    Canada’s statement at the CND was one of the highlights of the week and literally had people in tears as the Canadian head of delegation made it clear that Canada was back as a progressive force. A huge relief for many attending.

    (photo from the conference) (Caption – Canadian civil society contingent at the CND)

    In years past, the government of Canada had been something of a pariah on the world stage, siding with countries such as Russia and blocking the addition of harm reduction in any UN wording. A year ago Canada was completely out of step with the rest of the world, (link) and lacked a clear vision on how to handle the so-called world drug problem.

    This time things were different.

    Before the conference, we worked with our National UNGASS Working Group to create a ten-point policy brief that we have given to federal government officials to consider for the meeting in New York next month. To our delight, the statement made by our government at the CND reaffirmed Canada’s commitment to harm reduction, legalization of cannabis, support for better access to essential medicines, a public health approach, new metrics with which to measure the success of drug strategies and the end of the death penalty for drug related offenses, many of the points we outlined in our policy brief.

    The timing of this statement proves that we have a government that is not only listening, but also beginning to act.

    Then two weeks ago, a number of civil society organizations met with Canada’s Minister of Health, Jane Philpott in Ottawa and presented her with a wide range of issues that need addressing. The meeting was a good beginning and we look forward to working with Minister Philpott as Canada considers developing a new national drug strategy that could, if the will is there, lead the world in applying evidence to the development of a national approach to drugs.

    We also received a letter from the Minister inviting CDPC to be a part of the official delegation to the UNGASS meeting along with two other civil society representatives, Canadian Students for Sensible Drug Policy (CSSDP) and the Thunderbird Partnership Foundation. The Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse and the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police are the other two organizations on the delegation.

    We are delighted that our call to further engage civil society organizations in the international delegation was taken up by the Minister and look forward to working with our delegation partners at the upcoming UNGASS meeting.

    Last month we had more good news – Health Canada finally de-scheduled naloxone, making it easily available as a non-prescription drug (link). They also announced a four-year extension to the exemption for Insite to remain open, and recently Toronto Public Health announced that it will be applying for federal permits to open 3 supervised injection sites in the near future!

    I’ve been away for a couple of weeks and it feels like I’ve returned to a whole different Canada.

    These next weeks are going to be crucial for Canada’s drug policy. We still need to advocate for stronger legislation around responses to overdoses that have reached pandemic levels in our community. Please read our op-ed written with coalition member, Pivot Legal Society by clicking here on what the government can do right now to end this ongoing tragedy. Most overdoses are preventable with awareness and a quick response. (link)

    So much has changed in what feels like so little time, but we must remember that true reform won’t happen until the war on drugs is over. This is just the beginning.

    Thank you for all your support. We’ll be keeping you updated on the UNGASS activities in the days ahead.

  • Drug policy should focus on harm reduction

    Drug policy should focus on harm reduction

    Katrina Pacey is the executive director of the Pivot Legal Society. Donald MacPherson is the executive director of the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition.

    The flurry of new initiatives introduced by the federal government signals a major philosophical shift on drug policy issues.

    First, Health Minister Jane Philpott approved the Dr. Peter Centre’s application to continue operating a supervised injection site in Vancouver, giving hope that similar sites in other parts of the country might also be welcomed by the government. Then, Minister Philpott visited Insite, Vancouver’s other supervised injection facility, which she described as “having a huge impact on people” and “incredibly moving.” That was closely followed by news that Health Canada would fast-track the process of changing the status of naloxone to a non-prescription drug, making it easier to access this life-saving medication that’s administered during overdoses.

    Together, these measures not only provide a desperately needed expansion of this country’s harm-reduction initiatives that are needed to address the drug overdoses plaguing our communities, they also represent a shift toward a drug policy that puts people’s lives first.

    The Harper government viewed illicit drug use as a criminal justice matter, a perspective that consistently led to punitive and stigmatizing measures being taken against people who use illegal drugs. The new government, on the other hand, has started to shift Canada’s drug policy towards a public health and harm reduction approach, which is grounded in scientific evidence and human rights. This shift was further reinforced when, this week, the Canadian delegation to the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs in Vienna articulated the government’s commitment to advance evidence-based policies in considering all drug policy initiatives.

    We should celebrate this stated commitment to evidence-informed policy development and the tentative but important first steps. But we should also recognize that much more needs to be done.

    Alberta, Ontario and British Columbia have all reported staggering increases in the number of overdoses and overdose-related deaths over the past two years. These increases can be linked directly to a steady rise in the availability of fentanyl, an opiate drug regularly passed off as heroin by street dealers, but dangerously more potent.

    The statistics lay bare what public health officials have known for some time: we are in the midst of an epidemic. Instead of ignoring this national health crisis as the previous government did, however, the federal Liberals appear to be open to solutions, including ending the proliferation of new laws that punish drug users and create barriers to health services meant to support them.

    Another promising initiative is a Liberal MP’s private member’s bill that would grant amnesty to those reporting an overdose. Fear of prosecution has proven to be a barrier for people to call for help when they are with someone who’s having an overdose. Only 46 per cent of respondents to a Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council survey said they would call 911 during an overdose situation. Seconds matter in these cases and saving a life shouldn’t be weighed against facing a potential drug possession charge. Granting amnesty to Good Samaritans is a simple answer. The Liberals should move to pass this bill as quickly as possible.

    Measures like the ones the federal government has introduced to date have their limits, however. They don’t stem the tide of dangerous, unregulated drugs that are readily available on our streets, nor do they address the myriad of reasons why people consume drugs in the first place.

    Larger — and, importantly, more impactful — solutions are still necessary, including reversing dozens of mandatory minimum sentence laws related to drug use and repealing The Respect for Communities Act, which was introduced by the Conservatives as a means of creating barriers to opening supervised drug consumption facilities.

    Innovative, scientifically proven substitution therapies to address the harms caused by addiction to illicit substances should also be encouraged. This includes clearing the way for physicians to offer heroin-assisted treatment in cases where methadone maintenance treatment has failed.

    When we recognize that all substance use is a public health issue, not a law enforcement issue, the blueprint for the way forward is to ensure that Canada’s drug policies are based on the best available evidence and aligned with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

  • Why Canada is no longer a leader in global drug policy

    Why Canada is no longer a leader in global drug policy

    Co-authored with Jenna Valleriani, director of Canadian Students for Sensible Drug Policy.

    This op-ed first appeared in the Globe and Mail, Feb. 27, 2015

    Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s statement about the failures of our existing drug policy is mostly on point. It’s just the last bit he gets wrong: “I think what everyone believes and agrees with, and to be frank myself, is that the current approach is not working, but it is not clear what we should do.”

    He’s wrong, because we know what we should do: Supervised injection sites; prescription heroin; medical cannabis dispensaries; crack pipe distribution; drug testing kits; Naloxone for reversing opioid overdose.

    We know these innovative health services reduce the harms of drugs and save lives, and we all agree “the current approach is not working.” And yet, access to these important innovations is unequal across Canada because of a lack of leadership at the federal level, and a failure to collaborate across all jurisdictions – local, provincial, national and international.

    We don’t need to look far to start. Vancouver is known internationally for its innovation in drug policy reform – it houses North America’s first supervised injection site and prescription heroin program, and has recently seen a proliferation of medical cannabis dispensaries. The city’s drug policy is based on an evidence-based four pillar approach: harm reduction, prevention, treatment and enforcement. This approach has been adopted around the world, but also here in Canada, officially forming the basis for the Toronto’s drug strategy.

    Unfortunately, the federal government is out of step with international dialogue and doesn’t believe in the four pillars – it dropped harm reduction in 2007 when it changed the National Drug Strategy to the National Anti-Drug Strategy. While countries like Portugal have moved towards decriminalization and a more health-focussed approach, Canada has instead pursued a more punitive, conventional “war on drugs” approach – epitomized by the introduction of mandatory minimum sentencing for low level drug offenses. Recently Health Canada spent $7-million of our precious tax dollars on a fear-based anti-cannabis ad blitz that the country’s top physician groups suggested was politically motivated.

    The lack of vision at the top means that in a country known internationally for its innovation in harm reduction, many of our best public health interventions only exist in isolated local cases. This is not entirely unexpected. The story of drug policy reform is often one of grassroots change lead by users, local authorities, politicians, drug policy experts, service workers, and organizations. In Europe, for example, cannabis social clubs are driving much of the pressure for cannabis reform. Harm reduction services in countries like Germany, Switzerland, and the Netherlands started as trials in innovative cities before being scaled up nationally.

    In Canada, this bottom-up drive for change is exemplified by the current explosion of medical cannabis dispensaries in Vancouver. Dispensaries have always operated outside the federal access program, in a type of quasi-legal status, or as an act of ‘civil disobedience.’ But the city’s recent explosion of these storefronts has underscored the disconnect between local and national. Although the federal government projects a $1-billion free market medical cannabis industry in the future, currently it’s a notoriously slow, selective, bureaucratic process with little approvals and many rejections.

    The result is a void that “unofficial” dispensaries have been happy to fill. One Vancouver city councillor recently pegged the number of dispensaries at 61. Because of shifting of cultural norms around the acceptance of cannabis – polling shows that Canadian attitudes on cannabis are well ahead of the laws – the city and the police aren’t entirely sure what to do. But they are on record saying they will not bother dispensaries that follow best practice dispensing.

    This is fine for Vancouver, but we need a comprehensive national drug policy, so that essential healthcare innovations like medical cannabis – and prescription heroin, harm reduction kits, and product testing – are available consistently, throughout the country.

    Instead, Canada heads backwards, no longer an international drug policy leader, and our reputation on the international stage suffers for it. Innovation at the municipal level is essential, but it needs to be backed by federal support. Canada needs to stop criminalizing people and instead address the health needs of Canadians. The current approach is not working.

  • Les politiciens d’un bout à l’autre du Canada souffrent d’un Abus de politique en matière de drogues

    Les politiciens d’un bout à l’autre du Canada souffrent d’un Abus de politique en matière de drogues

    Une nouvelle affection psychiatrique invalidante a été reconnue aujourd’hui par la Coalition canadienne des politiques sur les drogues. Malheureusement, plusieurs politiciens sont atteints de ce mal, que l’on a baptisé l’« Abus de politique en matière de drogues ».

    Vous avez sans aucun doute observé les symptômes. Ces politiciens qui résistent au changement et écartent les données probantes. Qui persistent à se montrer « sévères » et à envoyer un message répressif. Qui refusent d’examiner les différentes approches envisageables en ce qui concerne les politiques sur les drogues, malgré l’abondance de preuves démontrant les retombées physiques, psychologiques et sociales défavorables de notre approche actuelle envers les drogues, qui perdure depuis des décennies.

    Tels sont les symptômes de l’Abus de politique en matière de drogues. Et la CCPD a lancé une campagne pour sensibiliser les citoyens à cette maladie invalidante.

    Consultez le site Web de la campagne ici.

    La bonne nouvelle, c’est qu’il existe un traitement efficace pour ceux qui reconnaissent avoir un problème en ce sens. Il suffit de garder l’esprit ouvert et de reconnaitre que l’élaboration de politiques bien orientées, peu importe l’enjeu, nécessite un dialogue franc et ouvert, éclairé par des données probantes. Comme le fait que les services de réduction des risques et les interventions réglementaires améliorent l’espérance de vie et augmentent la probabilité que les consommateurs problématiques de drogues suivront un traitement. Et que le taux de consommation de drogue n’augmente pas dans les juridictions où les drogues ont été décriminalisées ou légalisées.

    Heureusement, certains individus de diverses allégeances politiques sont prêts à entamer le dialogue. Les parlementaires fédéraux en faveur de la légalisation du cannabis incluent non seulement le chef libéral Justin Trudeau, mais également le député conservateur Scott Reid et la leader adjointe du NPD, Libby Davies. Le NDP soutient la décriminalisation du cannabis depuis 40 ans, une politique officielle qui a été réaffirmée par le leader actuel du parti, Thomas Mulcair. Le Parti Vert d’Elizabeth May appuie la légalisation de la marijuana et désire engager une consultation publique au sujet de la décriminalisation de toutes les drogues illicites. De même, le député libéral de l’Ile du Prince Edouard, Wayne Easter, soutient que les sites d’injection supervisés sont nécessaires et appuie la mise en place d’un cadre réglementaire en ce qui concerne les drogues illicites, puisque « les lois actuelles en matière de drogues ne fonctionnent pas. »

    Au niveau provincial, la chef du parti Wildrose Alliance de l’Alberta, Danielle Smith, est en faveur de la décriminalisation du cannabis. En Colombie-Britannique, le succès d’Insite, le site d’injection supervisé de Vancouver, dans la prévention de la transmission du VIH et autres infections à diffusion hématogène, la réduction des risques de surdose et la mise en rapport des consommateurs de drogues avec les services appropriés.  Et les anciens procureurs généraux Kash Heed et Geoff Plant parlent ouvertement du besoin de réglementation en ce qui concerne le cannabis en Colombie-Britannique et au Canada.

    Au plan municipal, l’ancien maire de Vancouver Larry Campbell a fait campagne en préconisant la mise en place de sites d’injection supervisés et certains conseillers municipaux de Toronto ont exercé des pressions pour que de tels sites soient implantés dans leur ville. Huit maires de Colombie-Britannique, y compris celui de Vancouver, Gregor Robertson, ont réclamé l’élaboration de nouveaux règlements portant sur le cannabis au Canada. Le maire de Thunder Bay (et ancien officier de police), Keith Hobbs, en a fait de même.  Les conseillers et les maires ayant assisté à la convention de 2012 de l’Union des municipalités de la Colombie-Britannique ont adopté une résolution exigeant que les niveaux appropriés de gouvernement « décriminalisent la marijuana et établissent une politique de recherche, de fiscalité et de réglementation de la marijuana.

    À l’internationale, les politiciens européens appuient activement les efforts de réduction des risques et les dirigeants latino-américains exigent des alternatives à la criminalisation et aux actions strictement punitives ayant été mises en oeuvre au cours des 40 dernières années. L’Uruguay projette de légaliser la consommation adulte du cannabis. Plus près de chez nous, deux états américains (le Colorado et l’état de Washington) ont fait de même, par l’entremise de votes au scrutin adoptés grâce en partie à l’appui de certains hauts fonctionnaires. Il est certain que d’autres états en feront de même.

    L’idée est que les politiciens n’ont pas à souffrir d’Abus de politique en matière de drogues. Certaines juridictions explorent des solutions de rechange à la lutte contre la drogue. Le dialogue a été entamé.  Malheureusement, plusieurs politiciens canadiens craignent ce dialogue et ont du mal à envisager des approches différentes.

    Alors pour ceux qui s’en remettent à des théories dépassées, le temps est venu de discuter! Consultez le site Web de la campagne et signez l’engagement à communiquer avec vos représentants élus, s’ils souffrent d’un problème d’Abus de politique en matière de drogues. Le site de la campagne met à votre disposition des outils vous permettant de diffuser des messages Twitter aux chefs des partis politiques nationaux, dans le cadre d’un plus vaste dialogue visant à guérir ce mal dont souffre notre pays.

    Nous vous invitons donc à consulter les détails de la campagne, à visionner les vidéos et à passer le mot à vos amis.

  • Canada is ignoring easy, ways to prevent overdose deaths…

    Canada is ignoring easy, ways to prevent overdose deaths…

    This article first appeared as an op-ed in the National Post, October 22, 2014

    A particularly potent batch of heroin recently resulted in 31 overdoses at Vancouver’s Insite safe injection clinic. The facility proved its value yet again, as staff applied immediate treatment and ensured none of the victims died. But what about those who can’t access Insite? In 2013, 308 people died in British Columbia due to illicit drug overdoses, the majority of which were opioid-related.

    Canada-wide, we can only speculate about the total numbers because there is no national database tracking overdose deaths. But the numbers we do have, from a patchwork of provincial data and news reports, tell us that far too many Canadians are dying from an entirely preventable phenomenon. And not preventable in the sense of “well, if people didn’t use drugs, there wouldn’t be overdoses.” While that’s essentially true, we know people will use drugs. One hundred years of prohibition hasn’t stopped that.

    No, these deaths are preventable thanks to easy-to-implement, non-controversial policy changes at our disposal.

    The most pragmatic and immediately effective remedy would be to improve access to naloxone, a 40-year old medication that, when administered during an opioid overdose, reverses the effects of the drug. It has no narcotic effect and people cannot become dependent on it.

    Currently, naloxone is used predominantly by ambulance and medical staff — like those at Insite — but we could save countless more lives if it were available to those most likely to be with someone experiencing an overdose. Eighty-five percent overdoses occur in the presence of others, often in the home. For this reason, naloxone should be included in provincial drug plans and made available over the counter.

    In addition, we should scale up existing “take-away naloxone programs” to increase the distribution of overdose response kits among people trained to prevent, recognize and respond to overdoses. Streetworks in Edmonton pioneered this programming in Canada, and similar initiatives have spread throughout the country. The most robust program — Take-Home Naloxone (THN) — was established at the B.C. Centre for Disease Control in 2012. THN operates in 51 sites, from large urban hubs like Vancouver and Surrey, to smaller rural centres such as Cranbrook, Campbell River and Fort St. John. More than 2,200 people have been trained, including staff and volunteers at health and social service agencies, as well as friends and family members of people who use drugs. THN has dispensed more than 1,200 kits, and 125 overdoses have been reversed.

    Clearly naloxone is a life-saver, but reducing barriers to its access and providing training are just part of a comprehensive overdose response. We also need to immediately implement appropriate guidelines for opioid prescriptions, improve national data collection on overdose events, and reduce barriers to calling 911 during a drug overdose. Again, most overdoses occur in the presence of other people. Though witnesses to heart attacks rarely hesitate to call 911, witnesses to an overdose often lose precious minutes wavering over whether to call for help — if they make the call at all. They may fear arrest, the loss of custody of children, or judgment from friends and family.

    This would be resolved by the passage of Canadian 911 Good Samaritan legislation — so called because it provides protection from arrest and prosecution for drug possession if the evidence is obtained as a result of the person calling 911. In the last four years, 11 U.S. states have passed some form of this legislation, often with bipartisan and near-unanimous support.

    Such legislation recognizes that accidental drug overdose is a health issue that doesn’t merit attention from the criminal justice system. Indeed, public health imperatives should drive all policy relating to overdose response.

    While much of the responsibility for this issue rests at the local and provincial level, ultimately the federal government plays an important leadership role in setting the overall tone and guiding any national strategy. At the 2012 annual meetings of the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs, delegates passed a resolution recommending that member states include effective elements for the prevention and treatment of overdose in national drug policies, including the use of naloxone. Although the Canadian delegation supported this resolution, and despite the simplicity of implementing such programs and policies, to date the government has not acted on this matter. It’s time for that to change.

  • Prendre le contrôle : sur la voie de politiques efficaces en matière de drogues

    Prendre le contrôle : sur la voie de politiques efficaces en matière de drogues

    Aujourd’hui, la Commission globale de politique en matière de drogues a publié le rapport Prendre le contrôle : sur la voie de politiques efficaces en matière de drogues. Le rapport demande aux gouvernements de réorienter les politiques mondiales sur les drogues, de prendre certaines mesures immédiates pour résoudre les problèmes liés aux drogues, et de ne pas reculer devant le potentiel de transformation d’une réglementation responsable comme solution à plus long terme. Les recommandations surviennent au moment où de plus en plus de gouvernements reconnaissent que l’approche traditionnelle de la « guerre aux drogues » a échoué, et que de nouvelles approches sont nécessaires. Reconnaissant ces faits, l’Assemblée générale des Nations Unies a convoqué une session extraordinaire (SEAGNU) sur les drogues en 2016 afin de discuter de solutions au problème mondial des drogues. Lors de la SEAGNU et à d’autres assemblées diplomatiques, le rapport invite les délégués de l’ONU à garder à l’esprit le mandat des Nations Unies, assurer la sécurité, les droits de l’homme et le développement.

    Les membres de la Commission sont notamment l’ancien président du Brésil, Fernando Henrique Cardoso, l’ancien président du Mexique, Ernesto Zedillo, l’ancien président de la Colombie, César Gaviria, l’ancienne présidente de la Suisse, Ruth Dreifuss, Richard Branson et d’autres. Dans le cadre du lancement, les commissaires vont rencontrer le secrétaire général des Nations Unies, Ban Ki-Moon, et le secrétaire général adjoint des Nations Unies, Jan Eliasson, pour présenter les recommandations du rapport.

    Leurs recommandations sont les suivantes :

    – Assurer avant tout la santé et la sécurité des collectivités requiert une réorientation fondamentale des priorités et des ressources en matière de politiques, qui permettrait d’abandonner les mesures punitives inefficaces au profit d’interventions sanitaires et sociales éprouvées.

    – Assurer un accès équitable aux médicaments essentiels, en particulier les analgésiques à base d’opiacés.

    – Cesser de criminaliser l’usage et la possession de drogues – et cesser de « traiter » de force des personnes dont la seule infraction est l’usage ou la possession de drogues

    – Appliquer d’autres options que l’incarcération pour les acteurs non violents du bas de l’échelle du trafic de drogue, tels les fermiers et les passeurs, entre autres personnes engagées dans la production, le transport et la vente de substances illégales.

    – Viser en priorité une réduction du pouvoir des organisations criminelles et de la violence et l’insécurité engendrées par la concurrence entre elles ainsi qu’avec l’État.

    – Permettre et appuyer les essais dans des marchés légalement réglementés de drogues actuellement interdites, en commençant, sans s’y limiter, par le cannabis, la feuille de coca et certaines nouvelles substances psychoactives.

    – Profiter de l’occasion offerte par la SEAGNU de 2016, qui approche à grands pas, pour réformer le régime mondial des politiques en matière de drogues.

    Vous pouvez consulter le rapport intégral ici.