Tories should consider updating policy

This much can be said, at least, about the Manitoba Progressive Conservative Party’s position regarding the establishment of supervised consumption sites as a harm-reduction strategy in the battle against drug abuse and its associated risks: It’s consistent.

One might even say entrenched, or intransigent, as the current incarnation of the PCs under the leadership of Obby Khan continues its steadfast opposition to supervised consumption sites, echoing the arguments offered during the premiership of Brian Pallister.

Most recently, Khan and the official Opposition joined a group of concerned community members in asking Health Canada to reject the provincial NDP’s application for an urgent public health need site at 366 Henry Ave.

The argument, as outlined in a letter sent to the federal government, is that the province has failed to demonstrate a clear, evidence-based public need for such a facility. According to Khan, who appeared last Thursday alongside PC addictions critic Jeff Bereza and a group of local residents and business owners at the site located two blocks west of Princess Street, the government is trying to “force a drug injection site onto Point Douglas residents, North Logan residents and business owners.”

The NDP government is seeking to first establish an urgent public health need site, a temporary measure that can be set up more quickly than a long-term supervised consumption site, but requires a federal exemption under the Canadian Drugs and Substances Act.

The application to Health Canada was submitted by the Aboriginal Health and Wellness Centre, which was selected by the province to operate the site. A Health Canada spokesperson said last week the application is still under review.

While the residents’ and business owners’ concerns seem focused on the precise location of the facility (“This is not just a core area; this is a place where kids grow, go to school,” said one local property owner) rather than the concept of supervised consumption as a harm-reduction tactic, the Tories appear committed to continuing their opposition to consumptions sites regardless of where they might be located.

The PCs’ letter to the federal government objects to the application’s lack of staffing details, operating budgets and funding information, and details regarding oversight and public safety, but while speaking at the proposed site last week, Khan reverted to more familiar and oft-repeated Tory talking points.

“The answer isn’t giving someone a place to do drugs,” he insisted, adding “The answer is helping someone when they are in need, and that is through wraparound supports and recovery.”

Wraparound supports are, of course, an integral part of helping addicts get into and, hopefully, through the recovery process. But history and years of accumulated data have shown that escaping the grips of addiction is a lot more complicated than the Tory approach, which leans toward, “In order to get off drugs, you need to stop taking drugs.”

And while drug users who genuinely want to break the cycle of addiction are finding their way to the PC-preferred “stop taking drugs” part, supervised consumption sites have been shown in other jurisdictions to be a safe place in which drugs can be screened for toxic substances, the use of clean paraphernalia can limit the spread of infectious diseases, the risk of overdose can be reduced and access to supports can be made available.

Supervised consumption sites have a role in reducing harm and saving lives. While there will always be necessary consultations and discussions regarding where they are located, remaining mired in an antiquated attitude that makes stopping drug use a precondition of accessing support is neither useful nor justified.

It’s time for the PCs, under new leadership, to embrace a new and more enlightened approach.