Conservatives avoid putting a clear position on supervised consumption sites

OTTAWA — While debate over the Liberals’ drug policy dominated parts of the spring session of the House of Commons, the Conservatives are offering little insight into the approach they would take when it comes to supervised consumption sites.

When asked earlier this month whether a future Conservative government would seek to change the application process for opening such centres, the party’s addictions critic said he could not speculate.

“But I think this has been politicized into a space that pits one perspective against another and that’s not helpful,” Laila Goodridge said.

In places of supervised consumption, users can inject or inhale drugs under the supervision of staff who can intervene in the event of an overdose. The centers also often offer drug testing, clean supplies to prevent the spread of disease, and referrals to detox or treatment facilities.

Poilievre has been clear about his opposition to other harm reduction strategies that aim to alleviate the opioid overdose crisis.

These include decriminalization efforts to help keep users out of prison and “safer supply” programs that provide pharmaceutical alternatives to toxic street drugs.

Instead, he wants to give people “a path to a drug-free life” with an emphasis on treatment and recovery. In a 2022 op-ed, Poilievre also promised to create a national distribution program for nasal naloxone to help reverse overdoses.

But what about supervised consumption sites?

Asked about the party’s position, Goodridge pointed out that the Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled on the matter.

“I recommend you read this,” she said.

In a landmark 2011 decision, the court unanimously ruled that closing the doors to Canada’s first supervised drug injection site would deprive users of their Charter rights.

The decision kept Insite operating despite opposition from the then Conservative government, and the health minister was forced to grant an exemption from federal drug laws.

Poilievre’s office declined to say whether he supports supervised consumption sites or would include them as part of his approach to dealing with the toxic drug crisis.

He also would not answer a question about a reported statement by Poilievre at a town hall in northern Ontario in January. The Sault Star reported that he told the crowd that he would not be prepared to fund supervised consumption sites.

And Poilievre’s office has not said whether it will review current operations or change requirements for operators.

“It seems like he’s trying to have it both ways, which you can’t do,” said University of British Columbia law professor Benjamin Perrin, once an adviser to Harper.

– Either you support them or you don’t.

Four years after the Supreme Court decision that prevented it from closing Insite, the Harper government passed the Respect for Communities Act.

Potential supervised consumption sites were required to meet a suite of criteria to operate, such as tracking crime rates and consulting local residents and the police.

After they were elected, the Liberals passed their own law that allowed facilities to open more easily. There are now 39 supervised consumption sites, according to Health Canada, and another 10 open applications.

Goodridge, an Alberta MP, noted that there are facilities in her home province.

“We continued to have supervised consumption sites, recognizing that they are part of the continuum of care in a recovery-oriented system,” she said.

But they “must be done in a way that takes all factors into account.”

Alberta’s United Conservative Party government says it is shifting its focus away from what it calls “acute interventions” in favor of devoting more resources to long-term addiction recovery — an approach Poilievre applauds.

In Ontario, Premier Doug Ford pulled funding from some supervised consumption sites and in 2018 said he was “dead against them.”

Critics say both provinces are launching an attack on harm reduction as an increasingly toxic drug supply leads to staggering death tolls. More than 40,000 people have died since the federal prosecution began in 2016.

Poilievre noted his opposition to a few specific supervised consumption sites.

A few weeks ago, he asked the federal health minister to deny an exemption requested by a Montreal site, citing residents’ concerns about its proximity to a school and kindergarten.

Goodridge said that, “as a mother,” she doesn’t think the location of the center is aware of “what’s best for the community and the well-being of the community.”

Earlier this year, Poilievre asked supporters to oppose a proposal to open a “new drug site” in Richmond, BC. He accused the Liberals and New Democrats of “pushing drugs on the Chinese community” as some members of the community protested the location. of the center.

When it comes to the question of whether any supervised consumption sites should operate, other Tory MPs have sent mixed messages, critics point out.

Alberta MP Glen Motz told the House of Commons in April that “there is no such thing as a safe place to consume,” while B.C.’s Todd Doherty suggested more recently at a committee that his party has not settled on a position.

“There’s not one person speaking from the Tories, whether it’s our leader or ourselves, not one of us has said anything about safe consumer sites in any policy, any conversation,” Doherty said, adding that he believed ” there are many tools in the tool. box.”

New Democrat addictions critic Gord Johns said: “We can’t get an answer from the Tories.”

He added: “Good luck.”

Perrin said one way a future government could get around the Supreme Court’s ruling would be to use the waiver clause.

This allows a government to make laws that override parts of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms for up to five years.

Poilievre said he would be prepared to use the clause to keep convicted murderers ineligible for parole for a longer period of time. His office clarified that any use of this tool would be limited to criminal justice matters.

“This is a criminal justice issue,” Perrin said of the supervised drug sites.

Poilievre’s office declined to say whether they agreed.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published on June 22, 2024.

Stephanie Taylor, Canadian Press