Pubdate: Wed, 04 Jun 2008
Source: Bracebridge Examiner (CN ON)
Copyright: 2008 The Bracebridge Examiner Ltd.
Contact:  http://www.bracebridgeexaminer.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2354
Author: Laura MacLean
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?142 (Supervised Injection Sites)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topic/insite (Insite)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/hr.htm (Harm Reduction)

GOVERNMENT APPEALS INSITE'S EXEMPTION

Minister of Health Tony Clement has appealed a judge's ruling giving 
Vancouver's Insite facility a permanent constitutional exemption from 
federal drug laws.

Open 18 hours a day and the only facility of its kind in North 
America, Insite is a place where public health workers provide drug 
addicts with clean needles as well as counselling and support in case 
of an overdose.

"I spoke to the standing committee on health at Parliament and 
announced that we would be appealing the ruling," Clement told this 
newspaper on Thursday. "It will go on to the justice minister in 
order to launch the appeal. While the science is mixed, the public 
policy is clear.

It's better to treat addicts - it's better to prevent people from 
becoming drug addicts - rather than to allow them to continue 
injecting drugs into their veins."

Last week, it was announced that Justice Ian Pitfield of the British 
Columbia Supreme Court granted users and staff at Insite the 
permanent exemption.

Pitfield ruled that sections of Canada's drug laws against possession 
and trafficking in illegal narcotics are unconstitutional and that 
the federal Conservative government has until the end of June next 
year to redraft them in accordance with the Canadian Charter of 
Rights and Freedoms. Furthermore, the judge ruled that allowing 
addicts to inject their illegal drugs in a safe, medically supervised 
environment is a matter of sensible health care and they should not 
be under threat of being busted by police.

"The judge gave one extra year for the exemption and the law impact 
is that we have to change the laws affecting trafficking and 
possessions to permanently exempt that site," noted Clement. "We 
think this completely throws into chaos our laws against trafficking 
and possession. Obviously, we're going to be fighting on behalf of 
Canadians that it not be the law to throw out trafficking and 
possession clauses to allow these injection sites to exist."

The injection site was established in the fall of 2003 by Vancouver 
Coastal Health (VCH) in partnership with the PHS Community Services 
Society (PHS) as a pilot project.

The site is an attempt to address the increasingly risky and open 
drug scene in Vancouver's downtown east side. The goal of the project 
was to collect information on whether such a facility could be an 
effective way to bring people off the streets and into a place where 
they could access clean supplies and general support.

To operate legally, Health Canada granted VCH a three-year operating 
exemption under Section 56 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances 
Act, and has since provided $500,000 every year to support it. The 
exemption has previously been temporarily extended twice.

When asked if appealing the ruling is something he feels strongly 
about, Clement responded, "very much so. I believe we're on the side 
of compassion and keeping people alive rather than warehousing them 
until they shoot themselves up to death.

If it was my son or daughter, I would want public health officials to 
do whatever they can to help them and (would want) my government to 
be on my side in order to help them."

While scientific data collected indicates that Insite is meeting 
certain objectives, including reducing public injections, reducing 
overdose fatalities, reducing the transmission of bloodborne 
infections like HIV and hepatitis C and reducing injection-related 
infections as well as improving public order, the controversy 
surrounding the facility is that some believe it permits drug use by 
providing a safe environment for addicts to shoot up in.

According to Mark Townsend, a worker for the PHS, Insite is 
fulfilling its duty of saving lives.

"The judge concluded it's basically a health-care issue.

Unfortunately, Tony was in Parliament to appeal the decision.

He still wants to keep fighting us, and it's very depressing. The 
judge deemed them to be unconstitutional and the government has one 
year to make those laws constitutional. If they don't fix it, the 
whole law is brought down."

Townsend went on to say that Health Canada established a 
comprehensive approach to health-care policy that recognized four key 
items, including prevention, harm reduction, treatment and 
enforcement. He said Health Canada spent only $1.4 million for harm 
reduction in the country in 2006-07.

"In the last budget, they deleted that item," stated Townsend. "They 
suffocated it without anyone noticing and without even consulting the public.

By cutting the funding and deleting the program, (Health Canada) is 
saying we're against harm reduction.

If you don't have it, you basically deny it. AIDS will spread rapidly 
and then you have to deal with an epidemic.

We've been lucky in Canada because of a deployment of harm reduction. 
But because (Insite) involves junkies it doesn't really matter.

What they've done is refocused their priories, cancelled the funding 
and now there's no new funding for this. Harm reduction needs to be a 
part of a comprehensive drug policy . . . it's standard practice."

According to a press release issued by the Ontario Federation of 
Community Mental Health and Addiction Programs (OFCMHAP), the 
organization is in support of the decision made by the Supreme Court 
that recognizes addiction as a health issue that must be treated.

"It is time for addiction to come out of the shadows and be addressed 
like other health issues," said David Kelly, executive director of 
OFCMHAP. "Canada's drug trafficking and possession laws are 
unconstitutional when they are applied to addicts using a supervised 
injection site."

As explained by Judge Pitfield, noted Kelly, those laws, when applied 
to Insite, threaten a person's constitutional right to life and 
security "denying the addict access to a healthcare facility where 
the risk of morbidity associated with infectious disease is 
diminished, if not eliminated."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom