Short sighted municipal politics
I’ve started reading Al Gore’s “the Assault on Reason” (Gore for Prime Minister!) and its reminded me of the importance of peer to peer discussion on matters of politics. Thus in breaking with my usual music/ergonomics/technology/zombies themes, I felt it my duty to comment on a recent municipal council decision.
Last week Ottawa city council decided to stop the funding of a crack pipe exchange program. It wasn’t the cost, at a trivial $7,500 per year to the city. They said they didn’t want to give the impression that they were condoning the use of the drug and encouraging its use.
Eh?!
They clearly don’t understand addiction. If you’re addicted to anything, be it crack or something else, the availability of apparatus to consume your drug is not going to encourage its use, nor the lack discourage. You’ll always find a way of using, such is the nature of addiction, making itself a priority over everything else. “Hmm, I was going to smoke crack today but dang I can’t find my pipe so instead I think I’ll just go for a stroll along the river”. No, you’ll just find unhealthier ways of using.
Mayor O’Brian didn’t feel the program was working. This, despite our chief medical officer of health, Dr. David Salisbury, repeatedly telling council that it was. Apparently Larry O’Brian knows best and our chief public health doctor isn’t qualified to determine whether a public health program is working.
Perhaps the most infuriating comment came from councillor Rick Chiarelli who was quoted as saying that “it doesn’t even pass the laugh test”. I don’t even understand that statement nor know where to start with it.
I suppose its unrealistic to expect that our politicians will behave in any way other than politically, and this issue is not a terribly sexy one. Who amongst us high bread-winning and influential people really care about crack users? Surely they’re just a scourge.
I live in the market and I can tell you that yes addiction is everywhere and a large number of people pan handling for money for food in fact don’t want it for food. However, even if you feel no pity towards these poor people because you believe they are weak or have chosen to be where they are, you still have to look at the numbers around prevention v.s. the tremendous cost of treatment, not to mention the risk of wider spread of disease to the “general public”, to recognize that facing the reality of addiction is as they say the first step in conquering it.
And I recognize for residents here and in Sandy Hill that the increased and more open use of the drug is deteriorating the quality of life for the neighbourhoods. But what I think people are confusing is correlation v.s. causation: yes there’s more drug use but the pipe program isn’t causing it, its a response to the same underlying illness.
To their credit council said they instead think we should be focusing our efforts on getting better rehab/recovery centers in Ottawa. That is definitely true, and in my mini-med course I was quite surprised to learn that we essentially have no long term treatment facility in Ottawa, that people must go out of town to find such care. However, both are needed. In fact one benefit of needle and pipe programs is that it puts addicts in direct contact with health professionals who are dispensing, providing a critical path to treatment.
I’m just so dismayed that we have as representatives people who can be so ignorant (in the “not knowing and not wishing to know” sense).
July 21st, 2007 at 1:51 pm
Hey Mock, what’s up?
You bring up some good points, and ultimatly I disagree with the pulling of the plug.
- S/W (or JChicken)
August 9th, 2007 at 6:39 am
I have to disagree Kev,
The crackpipe program has upset the commercial rate payers in the City like nothing else. Small business owners have had their garbage removal cancelled, while they are still paying a line item in their tax bills for waste removal, and then sit and watch while council buys crack pipes for addicts…Crack usage is ILLEGAL and more than anything it is the small business owners who are having to deal with the problems associated with its usage. The ByWard Market for instance is being panned as a tourist destination by many travel blogs due to the overt usage of crack ,and obvious ability to purchase it anywhere in the Market. Where crack goes, prostitution and petty criminal activity follow. Are you aware that the drug dealers have dropped the price of crack to $2 a hit, to enable users to get their fix…what this results in is petty crime, such as breaking windows in cars to get the change out of the ashtray for that next hit…
You are right in saying that we don’t have a rehab centre in the area, and we must actively campaign with our MPP’s to build one. In the Preston Street area, crack houses go hand in hand with prostitution…These prostitutes are already hiv positive, but the police do not have laws at their disposal to compel these prostitutes to go into rehab, even if it were available here. Right now, there is a seven month wait to get into the nearest rehab centre… It’s not tenable.
August 9th, 2007 at 7:26 am
While I agree with all your points I disagree with the argument
Cost: Cost was not cited as a reason for them discontinuing the program. In fact, if the argument had been made on cost, with a cost benefit comparison vis-a-vis other programs and the reality of a limited budget, then I would’ve been fine with that. Because that’s a rational discussion. That’s not however the reason the decision was made.
Crack is bad and brings with it other crimes: Yup, definitely. What we need to do though is to separate the notion of it being bad and illegal from that of the health impact to the overall system. The facts are well documented:
1) Addicts will do it anyway
2) Giving away pipes doesn’t increase usage
3) Not giving them away does not decrease usage
4) Addicts by their nature will “use” in an unsafe manner if that is all that’s available to them.
Our chief medical officer pleaded with council to keep the program because it reduces the overall health impact, and costs, by reducing the probability of transfer of AIDS and Hepatitis. It also forces addicts to be in contact with health and social professionals who can guide them to recovery. These are facts.
What we should’ve seen was a discussion based on a preventative approach to disease transmission, with short term costs weighed against long term health management costs both in disease reduction and as a conduit for people to find help.
It is definitely true that this drug is a scourge, and people have every right to be upset by the widespread open use and downstream crime it creates. But in my opinion, council made the politically correct move of creating the illusion of a positive response to the crisis while really solving nothing and according to our chief medical officer, removing a preventative mechanism that was working. I don’t see how that’s benefited us and it shows poor vision and leadership.
August 9th, 2007 at 10:22 am
Perception is everything Kev. If the City of Ottawa is being seen as facilitating an illegal act, for whatever reason, it sends out the wrong signals. We are already seeing a general moral decay, and lack of respect for authority… How hypocritical it is for us to be providing tools to allow people to do illegal drugs.
What kind of message does this send to our children and the citizens at large.
The Police are most frustrated with this, as they are asked to fight drug use, then the City facilitates it. And let’s face it, these people are not being infected with HIV, Hepatitis, etc., soley because they are sharing needles… They are participating in all kinds of other risky behaviour that exposes them to these horrible diseases. Our focus must be on first getting a rehab facility for our region, then giving police laws that allow them to compel these addicts to go into rehab. The Prostitutes in our area are not even going to jail at this point. If they had the option once convicted (if our courts would actually prosecute them,) of jail for a significant period of time, or rehab, I think they would choose rehab. That’s the best way we can helpo them. By facilitating their drug uuse we are putting them back out onto the dangerous streets, and exposing them to all kinds of other hazards.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:36 am
Man, I agree with you, The Crack Exchange Program should of been kept to reduce costs, but I don’t understand why they would give crack\herion addicts a place to get baked, and not pot heads, and the less harmful drugs. Why doesn’t Canada just legalize drugs, the crime rate would DROP exteremely, and then people couldn’t complain about the crack heads in the parks because they could just go in their house were it’s safer for us not to get mugged or a pitifull 2$.