Supervised-injection vote a rare credit to Toronto council

Share

Toronto City Council voted 36-3 on Thursday in favour of setting up three supervised-injection sites for drug users. That in itself was remarkable, an overwhelming mandate for a program that often runs into heavy community and political opposition.

What was even more remarkable was how it happened. In a city with a recent history of divisive quarrels, in which evidence is the first casualty, this was a civilized, deliberate, rational debate that ended with a sensible, fact-based decision. In Toronto, that is something worth applauding.

The campaign for injection sites was led by David McKeown, the city's medical officer of health. Known for his careful, just-the-facts presentations at city hall, he is about to retire from his post. This was his last battle. He argues that the evidence from about 90 sites in other cities shows that giving users a safe place to inject with clean needles tends to prevent overdoses, reduce the transmission of disease and keep needles and other drug paraphernalia from ending up in parks and backyards when users inject there.

Persuaded by what he read and heard, first-term city councillor Joe Cressy took up the campaign, though one of the sites would affect his downtown ward. The mayor, John Tory, looked at the research, listened to the arguments, overcame his initial discomfort and signed on. So did the chief of police, Mark Saunders.

Officials consulted the public through public meetings and online surveys. They found that while many residents worried about issues such as increased crime and falling property values around the sites, even more saw upsides . In his neighbourhood, Mr. Cressy said, "People have come out and said, 'Yes in my backyard.'"

When the issue finally came to city council for a vote on Thursday, the debate was marked by calm and compassion. One councillor, Paula Fletcher, spoke about a young woman, Brooklyn McNeil, 22, who was found dead of a drug overdose in an alley last month.

The daughter of an addicted father, she started using drugs at 12 and intravenous drugs at 18, said Ms. Fletcher. She became an advocate for drug addicts and told a board of health meeting in March that Toronto should help them out by opening injection sites. "This one's for Brooklyn," Ms. Fletcher said. "No more deaths in alleyways."

Another councillor, Justin Di Ciano, said that addiction is an illness, not a crime. We wouldn't let someone suffering from cancer die in an alleyway. Yet another, Paul Ainslie, said the harm-reduction approach the injection sites represent is well established. The Seaton House shelter used to take flack for handing out liquor and cigarettes to the addicts who visited.

Even council's resident blowhard, Giorgio Mammoliti, was – for him – restrained as he warned that injection sites could attract drug pushers and other criminals. Norm Kelly, the former deputy mayor , politely thanked Mr. Mammoliti for his remarks but said he would be supporting the injection sites. "These sites work," he said.

As Mr. Cressy is the first to admit, injection sites are not a silver bullet. Not all dangerous drugs are injected. Illegal drug use and drug addiction is a complex problem. Treatment, prevention, education and law enforcement all have a part in addressing it. The injection sites may indeed cause some problems in the neighbourhoods where they open.

But the evidence indicates that this realistic and charitable approach is worth trying. People are going to keep on using dangerous, illegal drugs, like it or not. We can try to discourage them, but in the meantime, we should try to mitigate the effects of their drug use, both on themselves and on others.

Mr. Cressy said that if someone in his family were using drugs he would want them to stop, but he also would want them to stay alive long enough to have the chance. Good on him for taking a political risk and backing the sites. Good on Toronto for responding with such humanity and good sense.