Vancouver's safe-injection site was the subject of controversy even before its doors opened three years ago in the city's troubled Downtown Eastside.
Supporters of the site, known as Insite, argue that its presence has significantly reduced the number of users sharing needles and shooting up in public. It provides a safe place for addicts to inject drugs, with clean needles, and provides counselling on-site.
Scientific, peer-reviewed studies of Insite users have found that the rate of addicts seeking to quit their habit has gone up, while there is no evidence that the facility has increased drug use.
But that hasn't stopped the controversy surrounding Insite, where roughly 600 addicts shoot up daily. Those who oppose it argue that the site simply condones drug use without offering any tangible solutions to the city's problems.
Insite faces its largest challenge yet when its exemption from the country's drug laws expires next month.
If the Conservative government does not renew that exemption before Sept. 12, Insite's doors will close. So far, Stephen Harper's government has been non-committal on the issue.
So the question remains, has Insite been a success?
Senator Larry Campbell, the former mayor of Vancouver, and Randy White, the former Reform-Alliance-Conservative MP and founder of the Drug Prevention Network of Canada, were o n-line earlier today to discuss that issue today and took questions from readers of globeandmail.com
The questions and answers are at the bottom of this page.
Senator Campbell was the city's chief coroner before being elected mayor in 2002. He championed the safe-injection site and points to scientific evidence that shows less public disorder, lower HIV infection rates, and more people going into treatment because of the site. He also says that the more than 400 overdoses at the site with no loss of life is further evidence of its success.
Randy White is the founder of the Drug Prevention Network of Canada, which works to advance abstinence-based drug and alcohol treatment and recovery programs. It also opposes the legalization of drugs. Mr. White served as a Reform and Canadian Alliance MP for 12 years before deciding not to run for re-election in 2006. Mr. White was also vice-chairman of the parliamentary committee studying the non-medical use of drugs.
Editor's Note: globeandmail.com editors will read and allow or reject each question/comment. Comments/questions may be edited for length or clarity. HTML is not allowed. We will not publish questions/comments that include personal attacks on participants in these discussions, that make false or unsubstantiated allegations, that purport to quote people or reports where the purported quote or fact cannot be easily verified, or questions/comments that include vulgar language or libellous statements. Preference will be given to readers who submit questions/comments using their full name and home town, rather than a pseudonym.
Jim Sheppard, Executive Editor, globeandmail.com: Welcome, Sen. Campbell, and welcome, Mr. White. Thanks for taking questions today from readers of globeandmail.com on this important questions. May I ask you to start by offering an opening statement or remarks?
Sen. Campbell: The "four pillars" concept is a proven success in addressing the harms of drug addiction. While much of the media attention focuses on the supervised injections site, in fact it is only one component of the strategy. Enforcement, treatment and prevention are all as important as harm reduction.
Randy White: The injection site needs two things to stay open — a certificate from the government and money. In my opinion, the federal government should give neither for the following reasons:
1. The objective must be prevention and treatment. An injection site does neither, as treatment must have the objective of abstinence.
2. Vancouver has become even more problematic with crime and addiction. HIV is not going down and more addicts are gathering in the east side. The injection site has contributed to the problem.
3. Injection sites are the exception, not the rule, in most countries worldwide.
4. The federal government should be the role model for dealing with problems. It has not done well over the last decade as far as drug strategy is concerned. Rehabilitation is inconsistent and prevention is almost non-existent. Before injection sites are explored, the other strategies should be running well.
5. Those who have evaluated the program are normally in favour of legalization and/or harm-reduction. Real evaluation must first take place without bias.
