Tories facing unintended consequences

Opinion

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 13/12/2022 (696 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

“This has nothing to do with ideology to me. In fact, people who look at supervised consumption sites as the panacea to end addictions issues, it’s just not right, it’s not true, and I would argue that perhaps some of those people are taking an ideological approach.”

— Manitoba Premier Heather Stefanson, November 2022

“The evidence for supervised consumption, overall, is very good. It certainly reduces risks of overdose, connects people to the system, gives them a space where they can feel safe to connect with their peers as well as with the system.”

— Dr. Joss Reimer, then medical officer of health in Winnipeg, April 2019

“We’ve tried nothing and we’re all out of ideas!”

— “The Simpsons”

It’s no secret that Manitoba’s Progressive Conservatives are far more conservative than progressive when it comes to the matter of safe consumption sites for drug users. Whether it be under the direction of former premier Brian Pallister or current Premier Heather Stefanson, our Tory government has been firmly against even attempting the idea in Manitoba.

Pallister warned of the “unintended consequences” of setting up safe consumption sites, dismissing the idea of setting up multiple sites in Winnipeg as potentially worsening that city’s already problematic drug habit. His government, he told Winnipeg media in 2019, would rather focus on establishing treatment beds, rapid access to addictions medicine clinics and sharing preventive education.

In an interview with the Sun three years later, Heather Stefanson would echo the words “unintended consequences” when she suggested that setting up safe injection sites in Manitoba would potentially increase crime and drug activity around the sites.

As we reported at the time, “unintended consequences” is the same wording that California Gov. Gavin Newsom used last August when he vetoed a bill that would have legalized drug injection sites there: “The unlimited number of safe injection sites that this bill would authorize — facilities which could exist well into the later part of this decade — could induce a world of unintended consequences.”

Of course, there are no safe injection sites in California, even though Stefanson has pointed to that state’s experiences as evidence of the problem.

The reality here is that conservative-minded politicians do not want to be seen aiding drug users by giving them clean narcotics — even if it could potentially save their lives. Thus far, no one has died at a safe injection site in Canada.

More than likely, they believe that it wouldn’t play well to their base of voters. Yet when asked by the Sun whether ideology was guiding her choices in this regard, she rejected the question outright.

“I am taking a very practical and evidence-based approach when it comes to these very, very serious challenges,” she said.

Stefanson’s statements to the Sun were made shortly after her government issued a press release announcing that Manitoba Community Wellness Minister Sarah Guillemard had decided against the use of safe injection sites following her walk through the Vancouver neighbourhood of East Hastings, where an Insite-supervised consumption facility is located.

In the press release, the minister seemed to suggest that she visited the Insite facility, and noted “people using drugs on sidewalks” in front if it.

In a tweet dated Nov. 8 — the day before the press release was issued — Guillemard had already painted the safe injection site in a poor light.

“Everywhere we walked, people were consuming drugs. Many were in catatonic states or passed out,” she said in the tweet.

Yet on Friday, we learned that the minister misled Manitobans into thinking that she had actually visited the site to see how it operated — you know, to find facts about the situation for an evidence-based approach.

As the Winnipeg Free Press reported, the B.C. government said Guillemard was actually invited on a tour “with some of the foremost experts on drug policy in North America” of a centre that supports young people with mental health and substance use issues and a Rapid Access Additions Clinic at St. Paul’s Hospital.

“Instead, Minister Guillemard opted to walk around Vancouver’s downtown eastside with her Alberta colleagues independently of the formally organized FPT [federal, provincial and territorial] tours,” the B.C. government said.

More damning is the fact that she never actually went inside the Insite facility. Manitobans deserve an explanation from Guillemard about her conduct, for she can no longer pretend that she has done her job properly.

If there is evidence that safe consumption sites are hurting people, then this government should show that evidence. But they can’t, as all the evidence points to the fact that safe injection sites work. They won’t solve society’s drug problem, but they keep people alive and give them access to help.

Stefanson should refrain from suggesting her government is making evidence-based decisions, when they are clearly not.