Pubdate: Tue, 17 Apr 2012
Source: National Post (Canada)
Copyright: 2012 Canwest Publishing Inc.
Contact: http://drugsense.org/url/wEtbT4yU
Website: http://www.nationalpost.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/286
Author: Chris Selley

CANADA'S INCOHERENT DRUG POLICY

Did Stephen Harper experience some kind of drugs-related epiphany at 
the Summit of the Americas? It seems unlikely. Nevertheless, at a 
Sunday news conference, he somehow managed to make Canada's drug 
policies look even less coherent. In the long run, that might be good news.

On Thursday, Andrew MacDougall, Mr. Harper's press secretary, had 
vowed the Prime Minister "would be a strong voice" in any 
drugs-related debate - against liberalization, that is. "The 
government's strategy is, in fact, completely in the opposite 
direction," said Mr. MacDougall, and he was absolutely right.

To take one example, the government's recently passed omnibus crime 
bill mandates a six-month mandatory minimum sentence for anyone who 
grows six or more marijuana plants and shares a joint with (or even 
offers it to) a friend. Crazy, but that's how it goes.

And yet there was Mr. Harper in Cartagena on Sunday, pretty much 
declaring the War on Drugs a failure: "I think what everyone believes 
and agrees with, and to be frank myself, is that the current approach 
is not working," he said.

He didn't just say that the war against the drug cartels isn't 
succeeding. Theoretically, that could be addressed by sending more 
money to Central and South American governments to buy guns and bombs 
and soldiers. He said the whole "approach" isn't working. Short of, 
say, invading Bolivia, it is difficult to imagine where the War on 
Drugs could migrate except away from militaristic outright prohibition.

"It is not clear what we should do," said Mr. Harper. But with 
respect to drug use in Canada, he conceded "a willingness to look at 
the various measures that can be taken to combat [it]."

Don't get too excited. "In terms of simple answers like legalization 
or criminalization, let me remind you of why these drugs are 
illegal," the Prime Minister warned. "They're illegal because they 
quickly and totally, with many of the drugs, destroy people's lives 
and people are willing to make lots of money out of selling those products."

So, there's the same old lunacy. Ending alcohol prohibition was a 
pretty "simple answer," wasn't it? One doesn't hear many regrets 
about it nowadays. It is amazing that it still needs to be said, but 
one more time: Prohibition ensures the overall supply of any given 
drug will be far more dangerous, if not more addictive, than it would 
be otherwise. Criminals have only made as much money trafficking 
drugs, only killed as many scores of thousands of people as they 
have, because those drugs are illegal. And in light of this, cracking 
down on otherwise law-abiding people for growing and distributing 
small amounts of marijuana is patently insane.

Still, if we parse Mr. Harper's words closely - perhaps too closely - 
we find him arguing that "many" drugs "destroy people's lives," which 
implies that some don't. If the "current approach is not working," as 
Mr. Harper says, and if "there is a willingness" to consider other 
approaches ... well, what else can we possibly be talking about 
except, at the very least, lightening up on pot?

Most likely, of course, this was just situational rhetoric. If Mr. 
Harper was going to go temporarily squishy on drugs, it would be 
among presidents and prime ministers whose constituents are 
slaughtered to feed Mr. Harper's constituents' habits. Central and 
South American leaders grow weary of this, as you might imagine.

"Guatemala will not fail to honour any of its international 
commitments to fighting drug trafficking," President Otto Perez 
Molina - who advocates a global shift towards regulation - wrote 
recently in The Observer. "But nor are we willing to continue as dumb 
witnesses to a global self-deceit."

There are incentives, as always, for Ottawa and Washington to face 
facts. Mr. Harper has made economic relations within the Americas a 
priority. And while such considerations can hardly compete with a 
glowering U.S. President, the United States happens to be bankrupt. 
Washington could certainly put to better use the billions it spends 
chasing drug production from one country to another, to no 
discernible effect on its own streets. When politicians occasionally 
let the self-evident truth slip out, we ought to take note and hold 
them to their words. We can't - won't - go on like this forever.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom