Sweden, the U.K., and Canada all experimented with providing opioids to addicts. The results were disastrous.
By Adam ZIVO
[This article was originally published in City Journal, a public policy magazine and website published by the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. We encourage our readers to subscribe to them for high-quality analysis on urban issues]
CAA Comment
Although we cannot locate a source, the saying, ‘A Drug addict is made by the age of six’ has resonance.
It does not suggest children are addicted at that age, although sadly, some are. It points to the environment and upbringing that will influence later behavioural traits. These factors are neither social class nor ethnic based; every child is vulnerable.
It is this vulnerability that must drive us to a solution that at least minimises the adverse addictive behaviour. Drug addiction and even experimentation are learnt traits, so the vulnerability can be unlearned or at least mitigated.
Providing drugs under the ‘Harm Minimisation’ or ‘Safer Supply’ is not the answer as it perpetuates the drug problem, as overseas experiences have shown.
The difficulty in controlling the Drug plague by the time a person is addicted is too late and generally ineffective, so to invoke policies of ‘Harm Minimisation’ and or ‘Safer Supply’ is a recipe for disaster.
Encouraging those who are addicts to become clean has all sorts of barriers apart from the drug addiction itself; most are addicted to the drug lifestyle without responsibility or accountability, so even if they are supplied with safer drugs, their behaviour will be unlikely to change.
We need to focus on the young and provide coping strategies and resilience, the ability to say ‘no’ would be a good starting point.
In these difficult fiscal times governments face, they will have to be pragmatic and withdraw funding from ‘Harm Minimisation projects’ and ‘Safer supply approaches and instead develop a uniform strategy across the entire education system and support parents in their efforts to develop coping skills for their children as they grow physically and mentally.
This effort will take time to have an impact, but it will not only help prevent children from experimenting with drugs but also create a better learning environment, improving the academic standards of all children and leading to more constructive lives.
***************************
Last August, Denver’s city council passed a proclamation endorsing radical “harm reduction” strategies to address the drug crisis. Among these was “safer supply,” the idea that the government should give drug users their drug of choice, for free. Safer supply is a popular idea among drug-reform activists. But other countries have already tested this experiment and seen disastrous results, including more addiction, crime, and overdose deaths. It would be foolish to follow their example.
The safer-supply movement maintains that drug-related overdoses, infections, and deaths are driven by the unpredictability of the black market, where drugs are inconsistently dosed and often adulterated with other toxic substances. With ultra-potent opioids like fentanyl, even minor dosing errors can prove fatal. Drug contaminants, which dealers use to provide a stronger high at a lower cost, can be just as deadly and potentially disfiguring.
Because of this, harm-reduction activists sometimes argue that governments should provide a free supply of unadulterated, “safe” drugs to get users to abandon the dangerous street supply. Or they say that such drugs should be sold in a controlled manner, like alcohol or cannabis—an endorsement of partial or total drug legalization.
But “safe” is a relative term: the drugs championed by these activists include pharmaceutical-grade fentanyl, hydromorphone (an opioid as potent as heroin), and prescription meth. Though less risky than their illicit alternatives, these drugs are still profoundly dangerous.
The theory behind safer supply is not entirely unreasonable, but in every country that has tried it, implementation has led to increased suffering and addiction. In Europe, only Sweden and the U.K. have tested safer supply, both in the 1960s. The Swedish model gave more than 100 addicts nearly unlimited access through their doctors to prescriptions for morphine and amphetamines, with no expectations of supervised consumption. Recipients mostly sold their free drugs on the black market, often through a network of “satellite patients” (addicts who purchased prescribed drugs). This led to an explosion of addiction and public disorder.
Most doctors quickly abandoned the experiment, and it was shut down after just two years and several high-profile overdose deaths, including that of a 17-year-old girl. Media coverage portrayed safer supply as a generational medical scandal and noted that the British, after experiencing similar problems, also abandoned their experiment.
While the U.S. has never formally adopted a safer-supply policy, it experienced something functionally similar during the OxyContin crisis of the 2000s. At the time, access to the powerful opioid was virtually unrestricted in many parts of North America. Addicts turned to pharmacies for an easy fix and often sold or traded their extra pills for a quick buck. Unscrupulous “pill mills” handed out prescriptions like candy, flooding communities with OxyContin and similar narcotics. The result was a devastating opioid epidemic—one that rages to this day, at a cumulative cost of hundreds of thousands of American lives. Canada was similarly affected.
The OxyContin crisis explains why many experienced addiction experts were aghast when Canada greatly expanded access to safer supply in 2020, following a four-year pilot project. They worried that the mistakes of the recent past were being made all over again, and that the recently vanquished pill mills had returned under the cloak of “harm reduction.”
Most Canadian safer-supply prescribers dispense large quantities of hydromorphone with little to no supervised consumption. Patients can receive up to 40 eight-milligram pills per day—despite the fact that just two or three are enough to cause an overdose in someone without opioid tolerance. Some prescribers also provide supplementary fentanyl, oxycodone, or stimulants.
Unfortunately, many safer-supply patients sell or trade a significant portion of these drugs—primarily hydromorphone—in order to purchase more potent illicit substances, such as street fentanyl.
The problems with safer supply entered Canada’s consciousness in mid-2023, through an investigative report I wrote for the National Post. I interviewed 14 addiction physicians from across the country, who testified that safer-supply diversion is ubiquitous; that the street price of hydromorphone collapsed by up to 95 percent in communities where safer supply is available; that youth are consuming and becoming addicted to diverted safer-supply drugs; and that organized crime traffics these drugs.
Facing pushback, I interviewed former drug users, who estimated that roughly 80 percent of the safer-supply drugs flowing through their social circles was getting diverted. I documented dozens of examples of safer-supply trafficking online, representing tens of thousands of pills. I spoke with youth who had developed addictions from diverted safer supply and adults who had purchased thousands of such pills.
After months of public queries, the police department of London, Ontario—where safer supply was first piloted—revealed last summer that annual hydromorphone seizures rose over 3,000 percent between 2019 and 2023. The department later held a press conference warning that gangs clearly traffic safer supply. The police departments of two nearby midsize cities also saw their post-2019 hydromorphone seizures increase more than 1,000 percent.
The Canadian government quietly dropped its support for safer supply last year, cutting funding for many of its pilot programs. The province of British Columbia (the nexus of the harm-reduction movement) finally pulled back support last month, after a leaked presentation confirmed that safer-supply drugs are getting sold internationally and that the government is investigating 60 pharmacies for paying kickbacks to safer-supply patients. For now, all safer-supply drugs dispensed within the province must be consumed under supervision.
Harm-reduction activists have insisted that no hard evidence exists of widespread diversion of safer-supply drugs, but this is only because they refuse to study the issue. Most “studies” supporting safer supply are produced by ideologically driven activist-scholars, who tend to interview a small number of program enrollees. These activists also reject attempts to track diversion as “stigmatizing.”
The experiences of Sweden, the United Kingdom, and Canada offer a clear warning: safer supply is a reliably harmful policy. The outcomes speak for themselves—rising addiction, diversion, and little evidence of long-term benefit.
As the debate unfolds in the United States, policymakers would do well to learn from these failures. Americans should not be made to endure the consequences of a policy already discredited abroad simply because progressive leaders choose to ignore the record. The question now is whether we will repeat others’ mistakes—or chart a more responsible course.
Police are charging more drug dealers with manslaughter in fentanyl overdose deaths. But the shift is not satisfying everyone.
CAA Comment
This article raises very interesting concepts in relation to the management of criminals involved in the drug trade more broadly.
Canada is leading the world in making players in the drug scene accountable for their actions by charging dealers with manslaughter who sell drugs that ultimately cause a person’s death. We are unaware of any investigations of that nature into drug overdose deaths in this country; perhaps there should be.
Notably, there is a counterargument inferring that targeting low-level dealers but not charging those higher up the pecking order is not the right way to go. However, the higher you go, the more difficult it is and the greater chance of no success.
Again, the Canadians have used existing laws and some lateral applications rather than creating mayhem trying to enact new specific laws to deal with the problem.
We have seen here a lack of enthusiasm to use existing laws in creative ways to deal with a number of issues putting pressure on the Courts to deal with.
An ingrained attitude toward the Law, or more precisely, the legislation, by Law enforcement is very negative when it comes to its application. A can’t-do attitude prevails over can-do, a sign of law enforcement’s poor leadership.
Of course, arguing against targeting low-level dealers means that any impact on the drug market will be minimised, but targeting the low-level dealers will not only force those up the chain to slurry their hands to keep their trade alive as low-level dealers are removed, but their identity will be more exposed.
As we have argued before, the only way to deal with the Drug epidemic is to target the marketing model, damaging that deters the trade better than any prosecution, although targeted prosecutions must be part of that strategy.
Deterring customers is the primary objective of any disruption.
*****************
Four years ago, Tyler Ginn died of a fentanyl overdose at the age of 18. Tyler’s father found his son unresponsive in the bedroom of their Brooklin, Ont., home.
For Tyler’s mother, Gayle Fowlie, the pain of his loss remains raw.
“He was my kid that rode his bike to the store to buy me a chocolate bar on my birthday, you know?” she told Canadian Affairs in an interview.
Police charged Jacob Norn, the drug dealer who sold Tyler his final, fatal dose, with manslaughter. More than three years after Tyler’s death, Norn was convicted and sentenced to six years in prison.
“I don’t think you can grasp how difficult going through a trial is,” Fowlie said. “On TV, it’s a less than an hour process. But the pain of it, and going over every detail and then going over every detail again … it provides details you wish you didn’t know.”
But Fowlie is glad Norn was convicted. If anything, she would have liked him to serve a longer sentence. Lawyers have told her Norn is likely to serve only two to four years of his sentence in prison.
“My son’s never coming back [and] his whole family has a life sentence of missing him the rest of our lives,” she said. “So do I think four years is fair? No.”
Norn’s case reflects a growing trend of drug dealers being charged with manslaughter when their drug sales lead to fatal overdoses.
But this shift has not satisfied everyone. Some would like to see drug dealers face harsher or different penalties.
“If we say that it was 50 per cent Tyler’s fault for buying it and 50 per cent Jacob’s fault for selling it … then I think he should have a half-a-life sentence,” said Fowlie.
Others say the legal system’s focus on prosecuting low-level drug dealers misses the broader issues at play.
“[Police] decided, in the Jacob Norn case, they were going to go one stage back,” said Peter Thorning, who was Norn’s defence lawyer.
“What about the person who gave Jacob that substance? What about the person who supplied the substance to [that person]? There was no investigation into where it came from and who was ultimately responsible for the death of that young man.”
Manslaughter charge
At least 50,000 Canadians have died from drug overdoses since 2016. Last year, an average of 21 individuals died each day, with fentanyl accounting for nearly 80 per cent of those deaths.
Fentanyl, a synthetic opioid, is up to 50 times stronger than heroin and 100 times stronger than morphine. A dose as small as a few grains of salt can be lethal.
Given its potency, police and prosecutors have increasingly turned to manslaughter charges when a dealer’s product results in a fatal overdose.
A recent study in the Canadian Journal of Law and Society found that the number of manslaughter charges laid for drug-related deaths in Canada surged from three cases in 2016 to 135 in 2021.
Individuals can be convicted of manslaughter for committing unlawful, reckless or negligent acts that result in death but where there was no intention to kill. Sentences can range from probation (in rare cases) to life.
Murder charges, by contrast, require an intent to kill or cause fatal harm. Drug dealers typically face manslaughter charges in overdose cases, as their intent is to distribute drugs, not to kill those who purchase them.
Joanne Bortoluss, a spokesperson for the Durham Regional Police, which charged Norn, said that each of their investigations follows the same fundamental process.
“Investigators consider the strength of the evidence, the dealer’s level of involvement, and applicable laws when determining whether to pursue charges like manslaughter,” she said.
The Canadian Journal of Law and Society study also found that prosecutions often target low-level dealers, many of whom are drug users themselves and have personal connections to the deceased.
Norn’s case fits this pattern. He struggled with substance abuse, including addiction to fentanyl, Xanax and Percocet. Tyler and Norn were friends, the judge said in the court ruling, although Fowlie disputes this claim.
“[Those words] are repulsive to me,” she said.
The Crown argued Norn demonstrated “a high degree of moral blameworthiness” by warning Ginn of the fentanyl’s potency while still selling it to him. In a call to Ginn, he warned him “not to do a lot of the stuff” because he “didn’t want to be responsible for anything that happened.”
Fowlie’s outrage over Norn’s lenient sentencing is compounded by the fact that Norn was found trafficking fentanyl again after her son’s death.
“So we’ve killed somebody, and we’re still … trafficking? We’re not worried who else we kill?” Fowlie said.
Trafficking
Some legal sources noted that manslaughter charges do not necessarily lead to harsh sentences or deterrence.
“If you look at how diverse and … lenient some sentences are for manslaughter, I don’t think it really pushes things in the direction that [victims’ families] want,” said Kevin Westell, a Vancouver-based trial lawyer and former chair of the Canadian Bar Association.
Westell noted that the term “manslaughter” is misleading. “Manslaughter is a brutal-sounding title, but it encapsulates a very broad span of criminal offences,” he said.
In Westell’s view, consistently charging dealers with drug trafficking could be more effective for deterring the practice.
“What really matters is how long the sentence is, and you’re better off saying, ‘We know fentanyl is dangerous, so we’re setting the sentence quite high,’ rather than making it harder to prove with a manslaughter charge,” he said.
Trafficking is a distinct charge from manslaughter that involves the distribution, sale or delivery of illicit drugs. The sentencing range for fentanyl trafficking is eight to 15 years, Kwame Bonsu, a media relations representative for the Department of Justice, told Canadian Affairs.
“Courts must impose sentences that are proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender,” Bonsu said, referencing a 2021 Supreme Court of Canada decision. Bonsu noted that aggravating factors such as lack of remorse or trafficking large quantities can lead to harsher sentences.
‘Head of the snake’
Some legal experts noted the justice system often fails to target those higher up in the drug supply chain.
“We don’t know how many hands that drug goes through,” said Thorning, the defence lawyer.
“Are the police going to prosecute every single person who provides fentanyl to another person? Jacob [Norn] was himself an addict trafficker — what about the person who supplied the substance to him?”
Thorning also questioned whether government agencies bear some responsibility. “Is some government agency’s failure to investigate how that drug came into the country partly responsible for the young man’s death?”
Westell, who has served as both a Crown prosecutor and criminal defence lawyer, acknowledged the difficulty of targeting higher-level traffickers.
“Cutting off the head of the snake does not align very well with the limitations of the international borders,” he said.
“Yes, there are transnational justice measures, but a lot gets lost, and as soon as you cross an international border of any kind, it becomes incredibly difficult to follow the chain in a linear way.”
Bortoluss, of the Durham police, said even prosecuting what appear to be obvious fentanyl-related deaths — such as Tyler Ginn’s — can be challenging. Witnesses can be reluctant to cooperate, fearing legal consequences. It can also be difficult to identify the source of drugs, as “transactions often involve multiple intermediaries and anonymous online sales.”
Another challenge in deterring fentanyl trafficking is the strong financial incentives of the trade.
“Even if [Norn] serves two to four years for killing somebody, but he could make a hundred thousand off of selling drugs, is it worth it?” Fowlie said.
Thorning agreed that the profit incentive can be incredibly powerful, outweighing the risk of a potential sentence.
“The more risky you make the behaviour, the greater the profit for a person who’s willing to break our laws, and the profit is the thing that generates the conduct,” he said.
A blunt instrument
Legal experts also noted the criminal justice system alone cannot solve the fentanyl crisis.
“Most people who have [lost] a loved one [to drug overdose] want to see a direct consequence to the person that’s responsible,” said Westell. “But I think they would also like to see something on a more macro level that helps eliminate the problem more holistically, and that can’t be [achieved through] crime and punishment alone.”
Thorning agrees.
“These are mental health .. [and] medical issues,” he said. “Criminal law is a blunt instrument [that is] not going to deal with these things effectively.”
Even Fowlie sees the problem as bigger than sentencing. Her son struggled with the stigma associated with therapy and medication, which made it difficult for him to seek help.
“We need to normalize seeing a therapist, like we normalize getting your eyes checked every year,” she said.
The risk of adopting paths to address the drug epidemic without proper scientific evaluation of strategies and not considering the impact of unintended consequences has bitten Canada big time. The hydromorphone experiment has caused greater harm than what the drug was intended to resolve.
We must be alert to these risks and not follow their lead.
A poorly researched strategy using hydromorphone as part of a drug treatment plan implemented in Canada has spawned a new market with addicts securing their hydromorphone treatments and selling them to purchase more potent drugs.
An addict can earn thousands of dollars by selling their prescription hydromorphone at a current street price of $2.00.
The $2.00 drug is the gateway for young people to enter the drug scene and risk addiction.
Australian drug issues are about to deteriorate further with a warning from the Border Force of Nitazenes, or Zombie drugs entering Australia.
If you thought that the behaviour of the current batch of drugs regularly used on the street was a risk the Zombie Drug will pale the current favoured drugs in potency and impact.
Our current Death rate from drug overdoses in Victoria is over 600 a year, already over twice the number of lives lost on our roads, which will skyrocket with Nitazenes entering the illicit market.
Dr. Michael Lester, a Toronto-based addiction physician with 30 years of experience, says Canada’s “safer supply” programs are “inherently dangerous” and causing “dystopian” community harms due to widespread fraud.
These programs claim to reduce overdoses and deaths by distributing free addictive drugs—typically 8-milligram tablets of hydromorphone, an opioid as potent as heroin—to dissuade addicts from consuming riskier street substances. Yet experts across Canada say recipients regularly divert (sell or trade) their safer supply on the black market to acquire stronger illicit drugs, which then fuels addiction and organized crime.
“I have a couple dozen patients in my practice who were drug-free prior to the advent of safe supply, and they’ve gone back to using opioids in a destructive way because of the availability of diverted hydromorphone,” said Lester. “Every single day that I go to work, people tell me they’re struggling with the temptation not to take diverted safe supply. They don’t want to take it, but they take it anyway just because it’s cheap and available.”
After safer supply programs became widely accessible across Canada in 2020, Lester’s patients reported an influx of 8-milligram hydromorphone tablets on the black market, coinciding with a crash in the drug’s street price from $15–$20 per pill to just $2. He now estimates that 80 percent of his patients struggling with opioid addiction have relapsed due to diverted safer supply, leading some to abandon treatment entirely.
“Even if it’s sold at the rock-bottom price of $2 or $3 a pill, a person would make tens of thousands of dollars a year, which would have a tremendous impact on their ability to buy other drugs,” he explained. “Selling hydromorphone is too tempting not to do it, which keeps them entrenched in the whole world of dealing with opioid users and having opioids in their premises.”
Lester said safer supply is evidently “fueling organized crime” because drug seizures in Ontario now commonly include hydromorphone, “which wasn’t happening before.” He added that some individuals who try these diverted drugs later transition to stronger opioids, such as fentanyl.
In July, for example, the London Police Service announced that seizures of hydromorphone had increased by more than 3,000 percent in the city since 2020. According to London Police Chief Thai Truong, “Diverted safer supply is being resold into our community. There’s organized drug trafficking at the highest levels of organized crime, and there’s drug trafficking at the street level. We’re seeing all of it.”
While Lester acknowledges that safer supply can be useful as a “treatment of last resort, after traditional treatments have been tried and failed,” he said it is now being offered immediately to a wide variety of patients, which has “decimated” uptake of traditional addiction therapies, such as methadone and Suboxone.
As a result, conventional addiction clinics are now at risk of shutting down, meaning some communities could lose access to gold-standard treatments (i.e., methadone and Suboxone) while highly profitable, but unscientific, safer supply programs take over instead.
Lester said the evidence supporting safer supply is biased and “misleading” because, generally speaking, these studies simply interview enrolled patients and ask them to self-report whether they benefit from the programs. He noted that many safer supply researchers are public health academics, not doctors, meaning they lack clinical experience with the communities they study.
“It seems to be motivated by a very small, vocal, and well-connected group of advocates that has completely changed the landscape in addiction medicine treatment in a very short time,” he said.
Lester argues that some safer supply researchers seem to purposefully design their study methodologies to favor the programs and disregard systemic harms. He said this flawed science is then propagated by credulous journalists who fail to adequately scrutinize agenda-driven research.
While he personally knows “a couple dozen” colleagues in addiction medicine who regularly express skepticism about safer supply, many have been reluctant to speak out, fearing backlash from activist groups that “terrorize” critics.
“The stories are common of people being harassed and insulted on social media. We’ve heard of doctors being threatened [and] dropped from committees because they spoke out.”
For example, after Lester and his colleagues published two open letters criticizing safer supply in late 2023, they were targeted by a series of articles by Drug Data Decoded, a popular Canadian harm reduction Substack, which compared the doctors to Nazis and eugenicists. The articles were then widely shared on social media by safer supply activists.
Lester recalled an incident in which harm reduction activists targeted a doctor’s daughter at her high school in retaliation for her parent’s public criticism of safer supply.
“It’s just something that seems so unscientific and so bizarre in medicine,” he said. “Physicians just aren’t used to a powerful political lobby changing a treatment protocol.”
After Lester and more than a dozen of his colleagues wrote several public letters calling for reform and requested a meeting with Ya’ara Saks, the federal Minister of Mental Health and Addictions, they found themselves “sidelined and ignored.”
After months of delays, they were able to present their clinical observations to Saks, only to have her disregard them and incorrectly claim, weeks later, that criticism of safer supply is rooted in “fear and stigma.”
“The insults aren’t a big enough consequence to keep me from speaking my mind,” he declared.
After a short reflection, he then added, “If anyone doesn’t have a stigma against this population, it’s me. I’ve dedicated my life to helping them.”
Health Canada launches two new drug detection units to fight fentanyl trafficking—but will they be enough?
CAA Comment
The insightful series of articles by Break the Needle gives an evolutionary overview of illicit drug use in Australia as we follow the patterns experienced in Canada.
Fortunately, the Canadian reality is, in our estimation, five years ahead of where Australia is now.
Unfortunately, our civic leaders tend to have their heads in the sand. They are blissfully hoping that the drug strategies that have been allowed to develop will somehow work in Australia, where they have failed miserably in Canada.
Whether it is the misuse of Harm Minimisation practices, allowing pressure groups to drive a pro-drug agenda or whether there is insidious pressure from the criminal element.
On the point of pressure on civic leaders from the criminal elements, we have no evidence to suggest that is happening, but we must be alert to the possibility, as the Illicit Drug industry is milking Billions of dollars from this illicit trade, so it is reasonable to presume that if the opportunity arises, the drug industry will exploit leaders for their own benefit.
Australia is not immune from clandestine laboratories manufacturing illegal drugs. Recently 178 charges were laid against 41 people after a Police raid on Labs in Biloela, Gladstone and Gracemere in Queensland. Herald Sun
Sophisticated Labs are here, generally used to manufacture Methamphetamine. But that may only be a step towards Fentanyl. The Crime Intelligence Commission (Aus) National Wastewater Drug Monitoring makes for an interesting read.
Of course, Governments will cry poor, but they must privately realise that fighting the war now and hard will have positive fiscal benefits in the future and may also save many wasted lives.
In October 2024, the RCMP dismantled the largest known fentanyl operation in Canada’s history. The fentanyl superlab was located on a remote, 66-hectare property in the forests of interior B.C.
In its raid, the police discovered black-market chemists were mixing massive quantities of precursor chemicals — some imported from China and others synthesized domestically. These chemicals had been used to produce some 54 kg of fentanyl.
Canadian authorities are now intensifying their efforts to stop the flow of precursor chemicals into Canada for illegal purposes.
On Dec. 17, Ottawa launched two new initiatives — the Canadian Drug Profiling Centre and the Chemical Precursor Risk Management Unit — as part of a broader $1.3-billion border security plan.
These new units represent an important step in addressing Canada’s growing drug crisis, sources say. However, it remains uncertain how effective they will be in confronting the rapidly evolving drug trade.
Flow of drugs
In the late 1990s and early 2010s, opioids like OxyContin were widely prescribed in North America, leading to widespread addiction and misuse.
In the early 2010s, Canada and the U.S. introduced stricter regulations to limit opioid prescriptions, making pharmaceutical opioids harder to obtain.
As access declined, many individuals with opioid dependencies turned to heroin as a substitute, fuelling a heroin epidemic in the early to mid-2010s.
By 2016-2017, fentanyl had largely replaced heroin in the illegal drug supply due to its lower cost, higher potency and the ease of smuggling it. Chinese manufacturers played a key role in supplying synthetic opioids like fentanyl to North America.
In 2019, under pressure from the U.S. and Canada, China imposed strict controls on fentanyl exports, disrupting the supply of ready-made fentanyl to both countries.
Yet the drug market adapted quickly.
A 2021 Canada Border Services Agency briefing document revealed a growing trend in Canada’s importation of precursor chemicals, fueling the rise of homegrown fentanyl production.
That same year, authorities in Australia busted their largest-ever illicit fentanyl shipment hidden in industrial equipment sent from Canada — proving Canadian fentanyl production was not limited to serving a domestic market.
By 2023, the RCMP had publicly confirmed Canada had become a producer and exporter of fentanyl.
“Sadly, Canada is a producing country of fentanyl and synthetic opioids,” Mathieu Bertrand, chief superintendent of the RCMP’s Serious and Organized Crime & Border Integrity Unit, told reporters in November 2023. “Not only are we a producing country, but we’re also an export country.”
Bertrand suggested this shift indicated either a surplus of fentanyl in Canada, or that organized crime groups operating in Canada had identified more lucrative markets abroad.
During the October 2024 lab bust in B.C., RCMP said production levels far exceeded demand from local consumers, suggesting it was being manufactured to meet foreign demand.
A June 2024 briefing by Global Affairs Canada to the House of Commons revealed that U.S. authorities were seizing Canada-produced fentanyl in the U.S.
Inside the drug superlab in Falkland, B.C., after being discovered by RCMP on October 31, 2024. (RCMP)
Smuggling methods
In response to a request for comment, the Canada Border Services Agency acknowledged the rise in imports of precursor chemicals.
“Over the last few years, the [Canada Border Services Agency] has seen an increase in the importation of precursor chemicals for the domestic production of illegal drugs,” agency spokesperson Jacqueline Roby told Canadian Affairs in an emailed statement.
Roby said the agency already uses tools such as handheld devices, X-ray machines and detector dogs to intercept shipments at the border.
Marie-Eve Breton, an RCMP media relations officer, said the task of finding precursor chemicals becomes very difficult if they are not intercepted at the border.
“Once the regulated chemicals have entered the country, it becomes more difficult to investigate as no legislative tools exist to address the illegal possession,” Breton told Canadian Affairs in an emailed statement.
But she also noted the difficulty of intercepting products at the border.
“Precursor and essential chemicals can be easily mislabelled and smuggled into the country,” she said. “Often, these chemicals enter Canada legally to support industry in the production of legal goods and products available for domestic use and international trade.”
Precursor chemicals such as ephedrine and pseudoephedrine, for example, have legitimate uses — such as to produce pharmaceuticals and fertilizers — but are also used to produce methamphetamine.
Similarly, acetic anhydride is used to produce products like perfumes and aspirin, but is also essential in fentanyl production.
New drug units
The recently launched Canadian Drug Profiling Centre and Chemical Precursor Risk Management Unit will strengthen government efforts to intercept and respond to precursor chemicals. The RCMP and the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police are working with Health Canada to set up both units.
The Canadian Drug Profiling Centre will focus on analyzing synthetic drug samples seized by law enforcement. The centre will use chemical markers to trace substances back to their production source, identify manufacturing methods and potentially locate criminal networks.
“The analysis will help to identify trends and patterns to inform on the origin, distribution, and manufacture patterns of the drugs [and] profiling analyses will help better understand how distributors and drug dealers are changing or modifying the drugs,” said Tammy Jarbeau, a media relations advisor for Health Canada.
According to Jarbeau, the centre will support up to 2,000 investigations annually.
The Chemical Precursor Risk Management Unit will monitor and assess precursor chemicals seized at the border and through law enforcement operations.
If evidence shows that a “precursor is being detected at the border or used in clandestine laboratories,” it will trigger a scientific assessment by Health Canada to determine whether the substance should be classified as an emerging precursor chemical, said Jarbeau.
Drugs that are classified as chemical precursors under federal drug regulations can be regulated, monitored and restricted to help law enforcement better address illicit drug production.
Health Canada is proposing legal amendments to list equipment that are used in the production of illegal drugs, such as tablet presses and capsule filling machines.
Jarbeau says the proposed amendments would also require companies such as pharmacies and veterinary clinics to report suspicious transactions, conduct background checks for personnel handling precursor chemicals and limit sales of certain precursors.
But the illicit drug trade is mercurial, especially for fentanyl.
“The potency of fentanyl means that many fewer clandestine laboratories are required to produce a given supply … As a result, there are many less fentanyl labs, which makes them easier to conceal and harder to identify for police,” said Wright of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police.
“Sophisticated organized crime groups are well versed in police tactics and investigative methods.”
“The Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission will move from its Richmond office as fears grow for staff after a rise in anti-Semitic messages, and assaults and verbal abuse from users of the nearby injecting room.” Anthony Templeton Herald Sun Feb 27, 2025.
‘Oh diddums, how terrible what the poor employees of VGCCC must put up with during their working day, but hang on, their working days are predominately at home, aren’t they?
Unlike the residents of Richmond, they only need to expose themselves to the reality of drugs spasmodically. The rest of the Richmond residents deal with this issue 24/7 without respite.
Located right next door, within 15 meters of the Richmond North Primary School, things are so bad locals have advised the CAA that children at this Primary School are exposed to addicts engaged in sex acts from their classroom window at the back of the MSIR and Prostitutes are a common site plying their wares in the vicinity of the MSIR.
Moreover, the children are exposed to experiences no child should endure because the Medically Supervised Injecting Room MSIR, or more correctly, the Safe Drug Injecting Room, ‘safe’, meaning beyond the Law, not the illicit product drug users inject, so close to the school the children cannot avoid interaction with drug users.
The absolute hypocrisy of Government is laid bare, with the residents and traders of Richmond left holding the bag and suffering the impact of the Richmond Injecting room without respite. At the same time, the Government packs up the bags of the VGCCC to relocate it to a more salubrious area away from the disgusting behaviours and lawlessness of Richmond.
Moving the VGCCC because of the Injecting room nearby, some 500 meters or ½ mile away, and the environment in the vicinity of the MSIR, which is overrun with addicts and anti-social behaviour, threatening the safety of VGCCC staff, is an outright admission that the Government has failed the community.
500 meters from the VGCCC compared to 15 meters for a Primary school and 20 meters from residents’ homes. It would be much more practical to repurpose or move the injecting room. It would also be substantially cheaper than moving a Government Department.
The move will be costly and disrupt the operations of the Department. With the State under financial pressure, it would be a whole lot smarter to save an expensive move and use those funds to repurpose the injecting room into an outreach drug treatment facility or a drug triage centre to manage addicts.
The government has already spent $14m on upgrading security, which is not good enough for the VGCCC. They would instead be relocated to the CBD.
VGCCC chief executive Annette Kimmitt, as reported in the HS, said,
“Feedback from staff (including our most recent People Matter survey) reflects growing fear for personal safety while at work and when travelling to and from the office,” she said in the letter.
“We continue to witness and experience other anti-social and criminal activity, including drug and alcohol-related violence, drug dealing and other intimidating behaviour.
“Colleagues have witnessed the brazen exchange of cash for drugs, people injecting drugs near the building and subsequently large numbers of dangerously discarded syringes.”
Ms Kimmitt said increasing anti-Semitic material – such as graffiti, posters and stickers – was also creating an unsafe environment.”
To ‘add insult to injury’, Ms Kimmitt was also reported as saying.
..“Our relocation will impact the many hardworking small businesses, particularly the food outlets that rely on our foot traffic,” she said.
To rub salt into the wound the condescending sympathy expressed by Kimmitt is well ‘beyond the pale’.
In a State ‘crying poor’, to spend the money on relocating an entire Government Department simply because the vicinity of their offices is not to their liking is an absolute disgrace.
We guestimate that this move will cost the taxpayers $100’s of Millions of dollars by the time the new digs have a bespoke fit-out, all the VGCCC technology hardware is relocated or replaced, and all the other costs incurred, including the properties to be vacated or occupied.
We note that Ms. Kimmitt was not forthcoming about a budget for the exercise.
Yarra Mayor Stephen Jolly also weighed into the debate, claiming a dedicated plan to revitalise the area was needed, with more police, financial support for existing businesses and a plan to attract new traders.
“What we are seeing is a ghetto in the making, and we have to stop it; a Disneyland for drug users has been created,” he said.
Unfortunately, the good Mayor is promoting the relocation of the MSIR; however, relocating, an easy option, will not contribute to the lowering of the number of users who die and the disquiet that the community suffers. It will be suffered elsewhere with another community.
There is no good place to have an MSIR. However, there are plenty of places for a Drug user’s resource where the primary function is to ensure their addiction is addressed, not just facilitate their continued addiction, the function of the MSIR.
It is inevitable that wherever it is relocated, the problems will only follow.
Closing this MSIR and re-allocating the MSIR operating costs to bespoke drug management centres should be the strategy to clean up Richmond. A zero-tolerance approach by saturation Policing will encourage users to vacate the area and, without the magnate of an MSIR elsewhere, will move back to their normal local. Dispersing the addicts will damage the Dealers who are the major and only beneficiary of attracting users to one location.
Although there is a myth that surrounds the MSIR that it reduces deaths from overdoses, the Coroners Annual Reports paints a different picture.
The latest Coroners figures reveal that in Victoria, there were 601 deaths in 2024, the highest recorded spike in deaths since the 550 recorded in 2022, two years after the MSIR was opened.
So, the MSIR has had no appreciable impact on reducing deaths – it is a failed strategy.
To rely on MSIR figures is problematic as it uses figures for the Local Government Area, which is disingenuous because the majority of the drug users frequenting the MSIR and its surrounds are not locals but from other areas. Many of the people overdosing at the MSIR or vicinity are transported to hospital, where they are declared dead. Therefore, the place of death is registered outside the Yarra LGA, fudging the figures.
Victoria spends Millions of dollars annually to reduce road deaths with some success. However, the educational approach cannot succeed without parallel initiatives to ensure that our road infrastructure and vehicles are safe and road laws are enforced.
During 2023 in this State, the road toll was 282, and with 601 Drug overdose deaths in the same period, over twice as many lives were lost to drugs. Yet expenditure on addressing the drug problem is so minimal as to be close to non-existent.
Governments are ignoring the drug problem, hoping it will go away, influenced by those who promote illicit drug use as a recreational activity and any intervention as a breach of the freedom of choice. That same twisted logic would remove all speed restrictions and leave vehicle speeds to the driver’s freedom of choice.
The most disturbing part of the death comparisons is the value our governments put on a life.
A drug user’s life is worthless compared to a road user.
It is well past time that the government takes some responsibility for the drug epidemic and invokes strategies that have an impact, not just indulge in occasional talkfests.
The current cost of the drug epidemic, and history shows it will continue to spiral downward, should be motivation enough to take serious action, but not, as governments continue to be swayed by the failed Harm Minimization strategies without the supporting fragments of the Three Pillars strategies.
It is past time that involuntary treatment was introduced as a cornerstone of the approach to drug use, and while the opponents to such a move scream, ‘What about the person’s rights?’.
Their right to life should transcend their other rights; they can have them back when they are well.
The US has had a drug czar for decades. Experts share how this position has shaped US drug policy—and what it could mean for Canada
CAA Comment-
While the concept of a Drug czar has some merit, we are loath to promote and create another arm of government unless there are compelling justifications. The cost of establishing an effective Czar concept would outweigh the benefits, and the money would be better spent on new initiatives on the demand side of the drug trade.
The risk of the czar concept is that it can be too easily manipulated for political gain rather than effectively addressing the problem. We have already seen in Australia how the pro-drug lobby and sympathisers have hijacked and promoted Harm Minimisation that has not contributed to a reduction in drug use. There is, however, an argument that Harm minimisation has had the opposite effect by providing quasi-support for drug use and providing users with justification for their behaviour.
The CAA strongly believes in a two-pronged strategy: the users, or the demand side, are subjected to strict law enforcement backed up by non-voluntary intervention to address the users’ health issues.
While not turning a blind eye to the supply side, the most effective method to damage the supply trade is to reduce the demand, and in Austria, the Demand side is driving the unfettered expansion of the drug trade.
The present settings ensure the end users are treated like expendable fodder, feeding the drug lords’ insatiable appetite for wealth and power.
Every step to reduce demand adversely impacts the drug trade, driving down drug prices.
The drug scourge can only be managed by the principle of market forces.
The current strategies have not worked and never will. The sooner they are dumped the better for the community and drug users alike.
Last week, Canada announced it would appoint a “fentanyl czar” to crack down on organised crime and border security.
The move is part of a suite of security measures designed to address US President Donald Trump’s concerns about fentanyl trafficking and forestall the imposition of 25 per cent tariffs on Canadian goods.
David Hammond, a health sciences professor and research chair at the University of Waterloo, says, “There is no question that Canada would benefit from greater leadership and coordination in substance use policy.”
But whether Canada’s fentanyl czar “meets these needs will depend entirely on the scope of their mandate,” he told Canadian Affairs in an email.
Canadian authorities have so far provided few details about the fentanyl czar’s powers and mandate.
A Feb. 4 government news release says the czar will focus on intelligence sharing and collaborating with US counterparts. Canada’s Public Safety Minister, David McGuinty, said in a Feb. 4 CNN interview that the position “will transcend any one part of the government … [It] will pull together a full Canadian national response — between our provinces, our police of local jurisdiction, and work with our American authorities.”
Canada’s approach to the position may take cues from the US, which has long had its own drug czar. Canadian Affairs spoke to several US historians of drug policy to better understand the nature and focus of this role in the US.
The first drug czar
The term “czar” refers to high-level officials who oversee specific policy areas and have broad authority across agencies.
Today, the US drug czar’s official title is director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. The director is appointed by the president and responsible for advising the president and coordinating a national drug strategy.
Taleed El-Sabawi, a legal scholar and public health policy expert at Wayne State University in Detroit, Mich., said the Office of National Drug Control Policy has two branches: a law enforcement branch focused on drug supply, and a public health branch focused on demand for drugs.
“Traditionally, the supply side has been the focus and the demand side has taken a side seat,” El-Sabawi said.
David Herzberg, a historian at University at Buffalo in Buffalo, N.Y., made a similar observation.
“US drug policy has historically been dominated by moral crusading — eliminating immoral use of drugs, and policing [or] punishing the immoral people (poor, minority, and foreign/traffickers) responsible for it,” Herzberg told Canadian Affairs in an email.
Harry Anslinger, who was appointed in 1930 as the first commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, is considered the earliest iteration of the US drug czar. The bureau later merged into the Drug Enforcement Administration, the lead federal agency responsible for enforcing US drug laws.
Anslinger prioritized enforcement, and his impact was complex.
“He was part of a movement to characterize addicts as depraved and inferior individuals and he supported punitive responses not just to drug dealing but also to drug use,” said Caroline Acker, professor emerita of history at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pa.
But Anslinger also cracked down on the pharmaceutical industry. He restricted opioid production, effectively making it a low-profit, tightly controlled industry, and countered pharmaceutical public relations campaigns with his own.
“The Federal Bureau of Narcotics [at the time could] in fact be seen as the most robust national consumer protection agency, with powers to regulate and constrain major corporations that the [Food and Drug Administration] could only dream of,” said Herzberg.
The punitive approach to drugs put in place by Anslinger was the dominant model until the Nixon administration. In 1971, President Richard Nixon created an office dedicated to drug abuse prevention and appointed Jerome Jaffe as drug czar.
Jaffe established a network of methadone treatment facilities across the US. Nixon initially combined public health and law enforcement to combat rising heroin use among Vietnam War soldiers, calling addiction the nation’s top health issue.
However, Nixon later reverted back to an enforcement approach when he used drug policy to target Black communities and anti-war activists.
“We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or Black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and Blacks with heroin, and then criminalising both heavily, we could disrupt those communities,” Nixon’s top domestic policy aide, John Ehrlichman, said in a 1994 interview.
Michael Botticelli, Acting Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy March 7, 2014 – Jan. 20, 2017 under President Barack Obama. [Photo Credit: Executive Office of the President of the United States]
Back and forth
More recently, in 2009, President Barack Obama appointed Michael Botticelli as drug czar. Botticelli was the first person in active recovery to hold the role.
The Obama administration recognised addiction as a chronic brain disease, a view already accepted in scientific circles but newly integrated into national drug policy. It reduced drug possession sentences and emphasised prevention and treatment.
Trump, who succeeded Obama in 2016, prioritised law enforcement while rolling back harm reduction. In 2018, his administration called for the death penalty for drug traffickers, and in 2019, he sued to block a supervised consumption site in Philadelphia, Pa.
Trump appointed James Carroll as drug czar in 2017. But in 2018 Trump proposed slashing the office’s budget by more than 90 per cent and transferring authority for key drug programs to other agencies. Lawmakers blocked the plan, however, and the Office of National Drug Control Policy remained intact.
In 2022, President Joe Biden appointed Dr. Rahul Gupta, the first medical doctor to serve as drug czar. Herzberg says Gupta also prioritised treatment, by, for example, expanding access to naloxone and addiction medications. But he also cracked down on drug trafficking.
In December 2024, Gupta outlined America’s international efforts to combat fentanyl trafficking, naming China, Mexico, Colombia and India as key players — but not Canada.
Gupta’s last day was Jan. 19. Trump has yet to appoint someone to the role.
Canada’s fentanyl czar
El-Sabawi says she views Canada’s appointment of a drug czar as a signal that the government will be focused on supply-side law enforcement initiatives.
Hammond, the University of Waterloo professor, says he hopes efforts to address Canada’s drug problems focus on both the supply and demand sides of the equation.
“Supply-side measures are an important component of substance use policy, but limited in their effectiveness when they are not accompanied by demand-side policies,” he said.
The Canada Border Services Agency and Health Canada redirected Canadian Affairs’ inquiries about the new fentanyl czar role to Public Safety Canada. Public Safety Canada did not respond to multiple requests for comment before publication.
El-Sabawi suggests the entire drug czar role needs rethinking.
“I think the role needs to be re-envisioned as one that is more of a coordinator [across] the administrative branch on addiction and overdose issues … as opposed to what it is now, which is really a mouthpiece — symbolic,” she said.
This is an important article by Break the Needle and is particularly insightful in exposing our risk factors about illicit Drugs.
It highlights the folly of looking at risk factors on imports from other countries and how they may be used as a drug conduit.
Canada would be seen as a friendly neighbour to the US, which shares much in common with its northern neighbour. It is not unlike the relationship between New Zealand and Australia, so it is very possible that our border security takes less notice of imports from across the ditch than those from other Asian and friendly European countries.
Trump has cleverly used Tariffs as a weapon to have US neighbours take appropriate action against Drug and people smuggling operations.
We do not doubt that Trump would accept any adverse retaliatory action with his tariff strategy to prove that he is not bluffing.
Depending on how this strategy plays out, Australia could become the epicentre of drug use as criminal gangs unable to access or with reduced access to the US market, look further afield for a suitable market and, given the high retail price of drugs in Australia that will be where they first look.
We can only hope that our legislators are a wake-up and prepared for any onslaught because if the cat gets out of the bag, trying to rein in any influx will be extremely difficult, if not impossible.
Make our borders drug proof or we all suffer.
Trump’s tariff threat has ignited debate over Canada’s role in fentanyl trafficking. Sources say Canada is a key player.
On Wednesday, US President Donald Trump’s nominee for commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, caused a stir when he said Canada and Mexico could avoid 25 per cent tariffs if they stop fentanyl and illegal migrants from coming into the US.
“As far as I know, they are acting swiftly, and if they execute it, there will be no tariff,” Lutnick said at a US Senate Commerce Committee hearing.
Ottawa and several provinces have launched border security initiatives to respond to the threat of tariffs. However, there is disagreement over whether fentanyl trafficking is a legitimate issue in Canada.
Data and sources paint a complex picture. While the volume of fentanyl seizures is low, some sources indicate Canada is a hub in the global fentanyl trade.
‘Massive’
In his comments about drug trafficking at the Canadian border, Trump has focused on fentanyl specifically.
“The fentanyl coming through Canada is massive,” Trump said at a Jan. 21 press conference, where he reiterated his threat to impose 25 per cent tariffs on Canadian goods.
Fentanyl claims tens of thousands of American lives each year.
In 2023, fentanyl and related drugs such as carfentanyl were responsible for an estimated 74,702 overdose deaths in the US, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Fentanyl is a synthetic opioid up to 50 times more potent than heroin and 100 times stronger than morphine, making even minor border seizures significant. A potentially lethal dose is just two milligrams — roughly the size of a few grains of salt.
The U.S. Border Patrol and the Office of Field Operations recorded the seizure of 19.5 kg of fentanyl along the entire US-Canada border in 2024. This is a tiny fraction of the nearly 10,000 kilograms of fentanyl seized across all US borders last year.
Of this haul, 9,600 kg was confiscated at the southern border with Mexico, where Mexican cartels are known for mass-producing the drug.
The Canada Border Services Agency seized just 4.9 kg of fentanyl between Jan. 1 and Oct. 31, 2024. Of this number, 4.1 kg was intercepted before it could be smuggled overseas, specifically toward the Netherlands, agency spokesperson Jacqueline Roby told Canadian Affairs in an emailed statement.
However, during this period, the agency seized about 21,500 kg of “other drugs, narcotics and precursor chemicals,” Roby said. Precursor chemicals refer to substances that are not explicitly identified as fentanyl but may include drugs and chemicals used in the production of fentanyl.
‘Limited to no evidence’
A spokesperson for the Ontario RCMP said Canada-produced fentanyl trafficking at the US-Canada border is not a significant issue.
“There is limited to no evidence or data from law enforcement agencies in the U.S. or Canada to support the claim that Canadian-produced fentanyl is an increasing threat to the U.S.,” the spokesperson said.
“Reports state fentanyl produced in Canada is being exported in micro shipments, most often through the mail. Micro traffickers are most often found on the dark web,” the spokesperson added.
David Asher, a former senior investigator with the US State Department, CIA and Drug Enforcement Administration’s Special Operations Division, shared a different perspective during an August 2024 interview with Canadian investigative journalist Sam Cooper.
Asher cited evidence suggesting fentanyl trafficking operations in Canada are highly organised.
“When we looked at the telephonic communications of Chinese organised criminals that DEA arrested in the US [for drug trafficking and money laundering] … there was an extraordinary amount of communication with Canada,” Asher said in the interview.
“It seemed like they were being controlled out of Canada, and I’m happy to say that on the record. We seized these people’s cell phones, ran them, and saw who they called in Canada.”
Asher also cited a lack of cooperation between Canadian authorities and US agencies in verifying the scale and operations of fentanyl trafficking networks.
“There’s very good reason to suspect that Canadian command and control continues, at least for money laundering and a fair extent of fentanyl precursor exports from Hong Kong and other parts of China,” he said.
“We’ve just not had adequate cooperation from the Canadian government.”
In 2022, the Criminal Intelligence Service Canada reported that organised crime groups had shifted from importing fentanyl-related products to sourcing chemical precursors from both international and domestic suppliers to manufacture the drug within Canada. The service is an inter-agency organisation that shares criminal intelligence between police forces in Canada.
In a 2024 report on organised crime in Canada, the intelligence service confirmed the extent of organised crime’s involvement in drug trafficking.
“Serious and organised crime remains a prominent threat to Canada’s security, contributing to thousands of deaths annually from overdoses due to illicit drugs, as well as firearms and gang violence,” the report said.
The intelligence service reported that international organised crime groups are leveraging Canada’s geographic location and borders to facilitate the illicit movement of goods — including drugs like fentanyl — between North America, Asia, Europe and Latin America.
The agency also reported an increase in dark web trafficking, which may explain the increased use of micro shipments and the role of online markets in the fentanyl trade.
Reports from the Canada Border Services Agency show a ninefold increase in fentanyl precursor chemical seizures in Canada between 2020 and 2021. In the first half of 2021 alone, the agency seized more than 5,000 kg of precursor chemicals used to produce fentanyl and other synthetic opioids, up from just 512 kg in 2020.
This transnational reach was further underscored in 2021 when Australian authorities intercepted their largest-ever illicit fentanyl shipment — more than 11 kg of fentanyl hidden in industrial equipment sent from Canada.
Nicholas Boyce, policy director at the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition, which advocates for drug policies focused on harm reduction and decriminalisation, is sceptical that border crackdowns will be effective in stopping the flow of illegal drugs and their precursors.
He pointed to the low inspection rate of sea containers at Canadian ports, often used to ship stolen cars.
A 2022 Canada Border Services Agency internal audit revealed that the agency’s target inspection rate is between just 1.5 per cent and 2 per cent. However, the agency has not met even this target in recent years. In 2021-22, the inspection rate was 1.1 per cent; in 2020-2021, it was 0.9 per cent.
“We cannot even stop stolen cars leaving the country — how can we expect to detect small packages of powders and chemicals?” Boyce said.
Editor’s note: This piece was updated to reference the 2022 report by the Criminal Intelligence Service Canada, the reports from the Canada Border Services Agencythat show a ninefold increase in precursor chemical seizures, and the information about the Australian authorities’ fentanyl seizure in 2021.
Opponents to the concept of involuntary care trot out the ‘hoary old chestnut’ of a patient’s rights, but when it comes to rights, we argue every person has a right to care appropriate to their health issue. If that means involuntary care, then we support that approach.
When a person’s acuity is so manipulated by deleterious health, then in the name of humanity, we must take care of them until they are well enough to look after themselves.
Our view is tempered in that there needs to be clear medical oversight as there must be legal oversight to ensure the patient’s rights are protected and the community, one does not outrank the other.
A mechanism to have any person taken into temporary care to be assessed and the necessary information placed before a Court to determine whether the person’s involuntary care should continue and for the accountability intervals to the Court for their continued involuntary care is the mechanism that we should aspire to develop.
Police and Ambulance first responders must be given the power to place people whose acuity is compromised into temporary care to be medically assessed.
Temporary Health Orders would be the most logical authority mechanism. They were thrown around with ‘gay abandon’ during the COVID-19 pandemic, so it should be well accepted by the community.
The imminent closure of one a Victorian jail provides an opportunity for the facility to be converted to accommodate involuntary patients, and in tight fiscal times the cost to the government in paying out on contracted services to operate the prison for many years may provide some financial benefit to the State – at least we will be getting something back including saving some lives currently wasted.
Some politicians, police and community groups argue involuntary care is key to addressing severe addiction and mental health issues
The brutal stabbing last month of a 58-year-old city employee in Nanaimo, B.C., made national headlines. The man was stabbed multiple times with a syringe after he asked two men who were using drugs in a public park washroom to leave.
The worker sustained multiple injuries to his face and abdomen and was hospitalised. As of Jan. 7, the RCMP were still investigating the suspects.
The incident comes on the heels of other violent attacks in the province that have been linked to mental health and substance use disorders.
On Dec. 4, Vancouver police fatally shot a man armed with a knife inside a 7-Eleven after he attacked two staff members while attempting to steal cigarettes. Earlier that day, the man had allegedly stolen alcohol from a nearby restaurant.
Three months earlier, on Sept. 4, a 34-year-old man with a history of assault and mental health problems randomly attacked two men in downtown Vancouver, leaving one dead and another with a severed hand.
These incidents have sparked growing calls from politicians, police and residents for governments to expand involuntary care and strengthen healthcare interventions and law enforcement strategies.
“What is Premier Eby, the provincial and federal government going to do?” the volunteer community group Nanaimo Area Public Safety Association said in a Dec. 11 public statement.
“British Columbians are well past being fed-up with lip service.”
‘Extremely complex needs’
On Jan. 5, B.C.’s newly re-elected premier, David Eby, announced the province will open two involuntary care sites this spring. One will be located at the Surrey Pretrial Centre in Surrey and the other at the Alouette Correctional Facility in Maple Ridge, a city northeast of Vancouver.
Eby said his aim is to address the cases of severe addiction, brain injury and mental illness that have contributed to violent incidents and public safety concerns.
Involuntary care allows authorities to mandate treatment for individuals with severe mental health or substance use disorders without their consent.
Amy Rosa, a BC Ministry of Health public affairs officer, confirmed to Canadian Affairs that the NDP government remains committed to expanding both voluntary and involuntary care as a solution to the rise in violent attacks.
“We’re grappling with a growing group of people with extremely complex needs — people with severe mental health and addictions issues, coupled with brain injuries from repeated overdoses,” Rosa said.
As part of its commitment to expanding involuntary care, the province plans to establish more secure facilities and mental health units within correctional centres and create 400 new mental health beds.
In response to follow-up questions, Rosa told Canadian Affairs that the province plans to introduce legal changes in the next legislative session “to provide clarity and ensure that people can receive care when they are unable to seek it themselves.” She noted these changes will be made in consultation with First Nations to ensure culturally safe treatment programs.
“The care provided at these facilities will be dignified, safe and respectful,” she said.
‘Health-led approach’
Nanaimo Mayor Leonard Krog says involuntary care is necessary to prevent violent incidents such as the syringe stabbing in the city’s park.
“Without secure involuntary care, supportive housing, and a full continuum of care from detox to housing, treatment and follow-up, little will change,” he said.
Elenore Sturko, BC Conservative MLA for Surrey-Cloverdale, agrees that early intervention for mental health and substance use disorders is important. She supports laws that facilitate interventions outside of the criminal justice system.
“Psychosis and brain damage are things that need to be diagnosed by medical professionals,” said Sturko, who served as an officer in the RCMP for 13 years.
Sturko says that although these diagnoses need to be made by medical professionals, first responders are trained to recognise signs.
“Police can be trained, and first responders are trained, to recognise the signs of those conditions. But whether or not these are regular parts of the assessment that are given to people who are arrested, I actually do not know that,” she said.
Staff Sergeant Kris Clark, a RCMP media relations officer, told Canadian Affairs in an emailed statement that officers receive crisis intervention and de-escalation training but are not mental health professionals.
“All police officers in BC are mandated to undergo crisis intervention and de-escalation training and must recertify every three years,” he said. Additional online courses help officers recognise signs of “mental, emotional or psychological crisis, as well as other altered states of consciousness,” he said.
“It’s important to understand, however, that police officers are not medical/mental health professionals.”
Clark also referred Canadian Affairs to the BC Association of Chiefs of Police’s Nov. 28 statement. The statement says the association has changed its stance on decriminalization, which refers to policies that remove criminal penalties for illicit drug use.
“Based on evidence and ongoing evaluation, we no longer view decriminalization as a primary mechanism for addressing the systemic challenges associated with substance use,” says the statement. The association represents senior police leaders across the province.
‘Life or limb’
Police services are not the only agencies grappling with mental health and substance use disorders.
The City of Vancouver told Canadian Affairs it has expanded programs like the Indigenous Crisis Response Team, which offers non-police crisis services for Indigenous adults, and Car 87/88, which pairs a police officer with a psychiatric nurse to respond to mental health crises.
Vancouver Coastal Health, the city’s health authority, adjusted its hiring plan in 2023 to recruit 55 mental health workers, up from 35. And the city has funded 175 new officers in the Vancouver Police Department, a seven per cent increase in the force’s size.
The city has also indicated it supports involuntary care.
In September, Vancouver Mayor Ken Sim was one of 11 B.C. mayors who issued a statement calling on the federal government to provide legal and financial support for provinces to implement involuntary care.
On Oct. 10, Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre said a Conservative government would support mandatory involuntary treatment for minors and prisoners deemed incapable of making decisions.
The following day, Federal Minister of Mental Health and Addictions Ya’ara Saks said in a news conference that provinces must first ensure they have adequate addiction and mental health services in place before discussions about involuntary care can proceed.
“Before we contemplate voluntary or involuntary treatment, I would like to see provinces and territories ensuring that they actually have treatment access scaled to need,” she said.
Some health-care providers have also expressed reservations about involuntary care.
In September, the Canadian Mental Health Association, a national organization that advocates for mental health awareness, issued a news release expressing concerns about involuntary care.
The association highlighted gaps in the current involuntary care system, including challenges in accessing voluntary care, reports of inadequate treatment for those undergoing involuntary care and an increased risk of death from drug poisoning upon release.
“Involuntary care must be a last resort, not a sweeping solution,” its release says.
“We must focus on prevention and early intervention, addressing the root causes of mental health and addiction crises before they escalate into violent incidents.”
Sturko agrees with focusing on early intervention but emphasises the need for such interventions to be timely.
“We should not have to wait for someone to commit a criminal act in order for them to have court-imposed interventions … We need to be able to act before somebody loses their life or limb.”
This is another insightful article in this important series, dealing with the inevitable pushback from the pro-drug injecting room lobby.
What is not addressed is the weight that should be given to this group and do they have a vested interest.
The argument is over establishing Homelessness and Addiction Recovery Treatment (HART) Hubs in lieu of safe injecting rooms.
A very similar concept to the position of the CAA.
As a society, we would not tolerate accepting that a person with any sort of health issue was not treated, but rather, their affliction or disease was just managed, and the causes were actively facilitated when cures were available.
We will be closely watching the legal ramifications of the options to close and modify Injecting Rooms and convert them to Hart Hubs. Altogether a sound strategy from which addicts may recover from their illness rather than the addiction being fed.
The operator of a Toronto overdose prevention site is challenging Ontario’s decision to prohibit 10 supervised consumption sites from offering their services.
In December, Neighbourhood Group Community Services and two individuals launched a constitutional challenge to Ontario legislation that imposes 200-metre buffer zones between supervised consumption sites and schools and daycares. The Neighbourhood Group will be forced to close its site in Toronto’s Kensington Market as a result.
In its court challenge, the organization is arguing site closures discriminate against individuals with “substance use disabilities” and increase drug users’ risk of death and disease.
The challenge is the latest sign of growing opposition to Ontario’s decision to either shutter supervised consumption sites or transition them into Homelessness and Addiction Recovery Treatment (HART) Hubs. The hubs will offer drug users a range of primary care and housing solutions, but not supervised consumption, needle exchanges or the “safe supply” of prescription drugs.
Critics say the decision to suspend supervised consumption services will harm drug users and the health-care system.
“We’re very happy that the HART Hubs are being funded,” said Bill Sinclair, CEO of Neighbourhood Group Community Services. “They’re a great asset to the community.”
“[But] we want HART Hubs and we want supervised consumption sites.”
‘Come under fire’
On Thursday, the Ontario government announced that nine of the 10 supervised consumption sites located near centres with children would transition into HART Hubs. The Neighbourhood Group’s site is the only one not offered the opportunity to transition, because it is not provincially funded.
Laila Bellony, a harm reduction manager at a supervised consumption site at the Parkdale Queen West Community Health Centre in Toronto, says she is worried that drug users may avoid using HART Hubs altogether if they do not facilitate the use of drugs under the supervision of trained staff.
Data show this oversight can prevent deaths by facilitating immediate intervention in the event of an overdose.
Bellony is also concerned the site closures will increase the strain on other health-care services. She predicts longer wait times and bed shortages in hospital emergency rooms, as well as increased paramedic response times.
“I think the next thing that will happen is the medical or health-care system is going to come under fire for being sub-par. But it’s really all starting here from this decision,” she said.
She questions how the HART Hubs will meet demand for detox and recovery services or housing solutions.
Parkdale Queen West Community Health Centre and its sister site, the Queen West Site, serve hundreds of clients, Bellony says. By contrast, Ontario’s HART Hub rollout plan indicates all 19 hubs will together provide 375 new housing units across the province.
“The HART Hub model is not a horrible model,” said Bellony. “It’s the way that it’s being implemented that’s ill-informed.”
In a response to requests for comment, a media spokesperson for the Ontario Ministry of Health directed Canadian Affairs to its August news release. That release lists proposals for increased safety measures at remaining sites, and a link to a HART Hub “client journey.”
On Dec. 3, the Auditor General of Ontario, Shelley Spence, released a report criticizing the health ministry’s “outdated” opioid strategy, noting it has not been updated since 2016.
National data show a 6.7 per cent drop in opioid deaths in early 2024. But experts caution it is too soon to call it a lasting trend. Opioid toxicity deaths in 2023 were up 205 per cent from 2016.
“We concluded that the Ministry does not have effective processes in place to meet the challenging and changing nature of the opioid crisis in Ontario,” the auditor general’s report says.
“The Ministry did not … provide a thorough, evidence-based business case analysis for the 2024 new model … [HART Hubs] to ensure that they are responsive to the needs of Ontarians.”
‘Ill-informed’
Ontario has cited crime and public safety concerns as reasons for blocking supervised consumption sites near centres with children from offering their services.
“In Toronto, reports of assault in 2023 are 113 per cent higher and robbery is 97 per cent higher in neighbourhoods near these sites compared to the rest of the city,” Ontario Health Minister Sylvia Jones’ office said in an Aug. 20 press release.
The province has also cited concerns about prescription drugs dispensed through safer supply programs being diverted to the black market.
Police chiefs and sergeants in the Ontario cities of London and Ottawa have confirmed safer supply diversion is occurring in their municipalities.
“We are seeing significant increases in the availability of the diverted Dilaudid eight-milligram tablets, which are often prescribed as part of the safe supply initiatives,” London Police Chief Thai Truong said at a Nov. 26 parliamentary committee meeting examining the effect of the opioid epidemic and strategies to address it.
But Bellony disputes the claim that neighbourhoods with supervised consumption sites experience higher crime rates.
“Some of the things that [the ministry is] saying in terms of crime being up in neighbourhoods with safe consumption sites — that’s not necessarily true,” she said.
In response to requests for information about the city’s crime rates, Nadine Ramadan, a senior communications advisor for the Toronto Police Service, directed Canadian Affairs to the service’s crime rate portal.
The portal shows assaults, break-and-enters and robberies in the West Queen West neighbourhood have remained relatively stable since the Queen West supervised consumption site opened in 2018.
In contrast, crime rates are higher in some nearby neighbourhoods without supervised consumption sites, such as The Junction.
“While I can’t speak to perceptions about a rise in crime specifically around supervised consumption sites, I can tell you that violent crime is increasing across the GTA,” Ramadan told Canadian Affairs. She referred questions about Jones’ statements about crime data to the health minister’s office.
Jones’ office did not respond to multiple follow-up inquiries.
Mixed feelings
In July, Canadian Affairs reported that business owners in the West Queen West neighbourhood were grappling with a surge in drug-related crime.
Rob Sysak, executive director of the West Queen West Business Improvement Association, says there are mixed feelings about their neighbourhood’s site ceasing to offer safe consumption services.
“I’m not saying [the closure] is a positive or negative decision because we won’t know until after a while,” said Sysak, whose association works to promote business in the area.
Sysak says he has heard concerns from business owners that needles previously used by individuals at the site may now end up on the street.
Bellony supports the concept of HART Hubs, offering addiction and support services. But she says she finds the province’s plan for the hubs to be unclear and unrealistic.
“It seems very much like they kind of skipped forward to the ideal situation at the end,” she said. “But all the steps that it takes to get there … are unaddressed.”
The Herald Sun of January 7, p16, quotes Canadian Government figures of 49,000 deaths from opioid abuse between January 2016 and June 2024. This is a spine-chilling message for Victoria’s Labor Government, which has enthusiastically embraced pill testing at music festivals and has demonstrated a consistent determination to continue with a “harm minimisation” strategy that is a total failure in curbing the use of illicit drugs.
The North Richmond so-called “Safe Injecting Facility” that has so devastated the lives of local residents is a further example of Labor’s disregard for the many adverse consequences of catering to drug users at the expense of the community.
Canada’s experience ought to be warning enough that Victoria is headed in the entirely wrong direction with its current illicit drug policy.
It is time for the vast silent majority to realise that they have the power to force change. If Labor won’t listen, the only remedy is at the ballot box to support any political party that will.
The amendments proposed by the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Amendment (Regulation of Personal Adult Use of Cannabis) Bill 2023 is a recipe for disaster disguised as promoting Human Rights.
Australia is a signatory to the United Nations Article 61 Single Convention of Narcotic Drugs and has an obligation to comply with that treaty. Human Rights are not an excuse for allowing any conduct that unreasonably harms anyone. That is why acts of violence and many other behaviours are prohibited by law. No society can exist in a state of anarchy.
The scientific evidence that cannabis use is harmful to people is irrefutable. A recent conversation with a person who has lived among habitual users of cannabis brought the following response, “They lose their social skills, become apathetic, their judgement is impaired, they find it difficult to concentrate and complete even simple tasks, they often are depressed, their memory is affected, and they are uninterested in anything but their next “fix”.
This lived experience is a graphic warning about the detrimental effects of cannabis use.
Authorising any household to grow up to six cannabis plants for personal use by people over eighteen years of age and expecting no adverse outcome for younger people is naivety bordering on lunacy. Where households have children under eighteen, it is certain that too many will be tempted to try what they see adults freely using. Escalation of young people using cannabis is a certainty. To deny this is stupidity.
Time, effort and money would be better spent on education programs, particularly for young people, to inform of the dangers of using cannabis and other illicit drugs.
Educating from an early age is a prerequisite to a lasting diminution in the use of illicit drugs that have become such a scourge on society. Public campaigns against drink driving and smoking tobacco have had real success.
The free use of cannabis will be reflected in the Road Toll and the proponents of this Bill will have blood on their hands.
Break The Needle article 10 is again a very interesting and innovative way the Canadians are exploring strategies to deal with their drug crisis, which is not very dissimilar to our own.
Going after the companies that have made huge profits from promoting opioids is a very smart way, if successful, to fund the rehabilitation of addicts.
It is important that the Canadian Supreme Court has paved the way for all States of Canada and the Canadian federal parliament to join together in a class action against the parasitical companies at the alleged heart of the opioid crisis.
Our governments must keep a very close eye on developments and start to formulate the necessary legislation to allow a similar action in Australia.
In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled Friday that a first-of-its-kind, nationwide class action lawsuit could proceed against 49 companies alleged to have played a role in Canada’s opioid crisis.
The lawsuit, which B.C. has already launched, seeks to recover some of the health-care costs governments have incurred since 1996 in responding to the drug crisis.
The crisis has claimed more than 47,000 lives nationwide in the last eight years alone.
“I am pleased by the Supreme Court decision affirming our right to hold pharmaceutical companies to account,” the federal Minister of Mental Health and Addictions Ya’ara Saks said in a post on social media platform X following the judgment.
“Canada intends to join this suit should it be certified,” the post said, referring to the process where a court determines whether a class-action lawsuit can proceed.
“We’ve taken action to crack down on the predatory practices of the pharmaceutical industry — and we won’t stop now,” Saks wrote.
That provision enables B.C. to file lawsuits on other governments’ behalf.
Four of the 49 companies named in the class action — Sanis Health Inc., Shoppers Drug Mart Inc., Sandoz Canada Inc., and McKesson Canada Corporation — argued the provision was an unconstitutional overreach, violating territorial limits on provinces’ legislative power and undermining the sovereignty of other governments.
In a 6-1 decision, Canada’s highest court dismissed the companies’ appeal.
“National class actions, and in particular multi-Crown class actions, ensure that justice is not blocked by provincial borders,” Justice Andromache Karakatsanis wrote for the majority.
“The opioid epidemic is a stark example of a crisis that should attract cooperation and comity,” she wrote.
The court also said B.C.’s legislation respects provinces’ sovereignty because they retain the option “to opt out and go it alone.”
However, no province has exercised this option. All 10 provinces and three territories have chosen to join B.C.’s lawsuit. In 2022, the B.C. revised its legislation to permit the federal government to join its lawsuit as well, but it has not yet done so.
The court noted in its decision that some smaller jurisdictions would be unlikely to bring lawsuits if they were required to do so alone.
“As the Attorneys General for the Northwest Territories and Prince Edward Island point out, the existence of this choice [of joining the nationwide lawsuit] may be the only way that smaller jurisdictions could achieve recovery,” Karakatsanis wrote.
In a further show of solidarity, most Canadian provinces and territories have passed their own opioid-recovery laws modelled after B.C.’s legislation. These include provisions similar to the one challenged in this case.
The court noted that B.C.’s legislation is modelled on the province’s Tobacco Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act — legislation B.C. has used to sue tobacco companies for costs associated with tobacco-related harms. However, that legislation does not contain a provision comparable to the one in dispute in this case.
Some provincial governments — including B.C., Ontario and Quebec — have brought lawsuits against tobacco companies individually, while others have not commenced any litigation.
In the US, state, federal, municipal and tribal governments have pursued a similar unification strategy against pharmaceutical companies over that country’s opioid crisis. The Multidistrict Litigation process has resulted in more than $50-billion in settlements so far.
In a new documentary, Port Coquitlam, teens describe how safer supply drugs are diverted to the streets, contributing to youth drug use.
CAA comment;
Victoria is inching towards the concept of ‘Safer Supply’ for drug users supposedly aimed at reducing the harm of the illicit drug trade, however as Canada is experiencing this strategy is a failure as it promotes drug use, particularly among teenager’s hood winked by the ‘Safer’ reference in the strategy – no drugs are safe.
There is pattern developing where governments are blind to the consequences of fashionable strategies when they are just playing into the hands of the drug cartels by promoting ‘Safe’ as a part of the illicit products.
There is little doubt that every drug pusher in the country can leverage off the Government ‘Safer supply’ mantra as a means of encouraging vulnerable young people to experiment.
The Video ‘The invisible Girls’ should be compulsory viewing for every politician in this State to ensure we do not follow any further the Canadian error that costs young people their lives and helps promote illicit drug use.
Madison was just 15 when she first encountered “dillies” — hydromorphone pills meant for safer supply, but readily available on the streets.
“Multiple people walking up the street, down the street, saying ‘dillies, dillies,’ and that’s how you get them,” Madison said, referring to dealers in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside.
Madison says she could get pills for $1.25 each, when purchased directly from someone receiving the drugs through safer supply — a provincial program that provides drug users with prescribed opioids. Madison would typically buy a whole bottle to last a week.
But as her tolerance grew, so did her addiction, leading her to try fentanyl.
“The dillies weren’t hitting me anymore … I tried [fentanyl] and instantly I just melted,” she said.
Kamilah Sword, Madison’s best friend, was just 14 when she died of an overdose on Aug. 20, 2022 after taking a hydromorphone pill dispensed through safer supply.
Madison, along with Kamilah’s father, Gregory Sword, are among the Port Coquitlam, B.C., residents featured in a documentary by journalist Adam Zivo. The film uncovers how safer supply drugs — intended as a harm reduction measure — contribute to harm among youth by being highly accessible, addictive and dangerous.
Through emotional interviews with teens and their families, the film links these drugs to overdose deaths and explores how they can act as a gateway to stronger substances like fentanyl.
‘Not a myth’
Some last names are omitted to respect the victims’ desire for privacy.
Safer supply aims to reduce overdose deaths by providing individuals with substance use disorders access to pharmaceutical-grade alternatives, such as hydromorphone.
But some policy experts, health officials and journalists are concerned these drugs are being diverted onto the streets — particularly hydromorphone, which is often sold under the brand name Dilaudid and nicknamed “dillies.”
Zivo, the film’s director, points out the disinformation surrounding safer supply diversion, highlighting that some drug legalization activists downplay the issue of diversion.
In 2023, B.C.’s then-chief coroner Lisa Lapointe dismissed claims that individuals were collecting their safer supply medications and selling them to youth, thereby creating new opioid dependencies and contributing to overdose deaths. She labeled such claims an “urban myth.”
In the film, Madison describes how teen substance users would occasionally accompany people enrolled in the safer supply program to the pharmacy, where they would fill their prescriptions and then sell the drugs to the teens.
“It’s not a myth, because my best friend died from it,” she says in the film.
Fiona Wilson, deputy chief of the Vancouver Police Department, testified on April 15 to the House of Commons health committee studying Canada’s opioid crisis that about 50 per cent of hydromorphone seizures by police are linked to safer supply.
Deputy Chief of the Vancouver Police Department, Fiona Wilson, testified on April 15 during the House of Commons ‘Opioid Epidemic and Toxic Drug Crisis in Canada’ health committee meeting.
Additionally, Ottawa Police Sergeant Paul Stam previously confirmed to Canadian Affairs that similar reports of diverted safer supply drugs have been observed in Ottawa.
“Hopefully, by giving these victims a platform and bringing their stories to life, the film can impress upon Canadians the urgent need for reform,” Zivo told Canadian Affairs.
‘Creating addicts’
The teens featured in the film share their experiences with the addictive nature of dillies.
“After doing them for like a month, it felt like I needed them everyday,” says Amelie North, one teen featured in the documentary. “I felt like I couldn’t stand being alive without being on dillies.”
Madison explains how tolerance builds quickly. “You just keep doing them until it’s not enough at all.”
Madison started using fentanyl at the age of 12, leading to a near-fatal overdose after just one hit at a SkyTrain station. “It took five Narcan kits to save my life,” she says in the film.
Many of her friends use dillies or have tried fentanyl, she says. She estimates half the students at her school do.
“Government-supplied hydromorphone is a dangerous domino in the cascade of an addict’s downward spiral to ever more risky behaviour,” said Madison’s mother, Beth, to Canadian Affairs.
“The safe drug supply is creating addicts, not helping addicts,” Denise Fenske, North’s mother, told Canadian Affairs.
“I’m not sure when politicians talk about all the beds they have opened up for youth with drug or alcohol problems, where they actually are and how do we access them?”
Sword, Kamilah’s father, expressed his concern in an email to Canadian Affairs. “I want the people [watching the film] to understand how easy this drug is to get for the kids and how many kids it is affecting, the pain it causes the loved ones, [with] no answers or help for them.”
Screenshot: Dr. Matthew Orde reviewing Kamilah Sword’s toxicology report during his interview for the filming of ‘Government Heroin 2: The Invisible Girls’ in March 2024.
Autopsy
Kamilah’s death raises further concerns.
According to Dr. Matthew Orde, a forensic pathologist featured in the film, Kamilah’s toxicology report revealed a mix of depressants and stimulants, including flualprazolam (a benzo), benzoylecgonine (a cocaine byproduct), MDMA and hydromorphone.
Orde criticizes the BC Coroners Service for not following best practices by focusing solely on cardiac arrhythmia caused by cocaine and MDMA, while overlooking the potential role of benzos and hydromorphone.
Orde notes that in complex poly-drug deaths, an autopsy is typically performed to determine the cause more accurately. He says he was shocked that Kamilah’s case did not receive this level of investigation.
B.C. has one of the lowest autopsy rates in Canada.
Zivo told Canadian Affairs he thinks a public inquiry into Kamilah’s case and other youth deaths involving hydromorphone since 2020 is needed to assess if the province is accurately reporting the harms of safer supply.
“That just angers me that our coroners did not do what most of Canada would have done,” Sword told Canadian Affairs.
“It also makes me question why they didn’t do an autopsy, what is our so-called government hiding?”
The insatiable appetite for money by governments as much as the crooks has fuelled the tobacco wars, and new taxes proposed are only going to increase criminal participation in this lucrative Black Market, a market driven by demand that will only expand.
As criminal enterprises have developed a strong network to distribute their products due to government inaction, it is inevitable that items with high tax regimes or other restrictions imposed by regulations will become the target as criminals expand their wealth creation networks.
With announcements that the taxes on cigarettes are set to rise, as will the taxes on alcohol, the expansion of the current ‘Black Market’ is guaranteed.
What has happened?
Many of the players in the Tobacco Black market are, or were, heavily involved in the Drug trade, but they have found addicts are not a reliable or secure source of finance. Drug addicts are schemers, so income is challenging to secure, and intimidation doesn’t always work for desperate addicts.
The cost of distribution with many drugs passing through multiple dealers, each taking a cut, usually in the product, can work out expensive, hitting the bottom line of the primary players or financiers.
It is much easier to intimidate small business owners to sell illegal tobacco.
The potential for severe penalties for serious drug crimes also has the principals of criminal enterprises looking for safer havens to do (illegal) business. The risks, in many respects, outweigh the advantages. However, crooks, being crooks, are addicted to money and power, so any profitable enterprise is a target.
Law enforcement has an uphill battle to try to control this crime because of a lack of will on the part of successive governments that have historically tried to ignore the problems in the hope they would go away or at least not hurt their electoral fortunes.
The first real inkling that organised crime was moving to a black-marketing model was their move into the Gymnasium sector, where they could not only reap profits but also recruit the necessary enforcement muscle and provide a ready distribution point for illicit drugs. Moreover, this area was unregulated, giving them unfettered access.
By and large, they avoided the alcohol market as it is well regulated, and generally, the nightclub scene has been spared for the same reason. Gambling, although never far from the criminal minds, has not provided fertile opportunities on a large scale.
Inevitably, other vulnerable markets will soon be exploited, given that criminal enterprises have established a ‘retail mechanism’ to market their black-market wares.
Illicit products, literally sold out of a car boot, have insufficient scale to be worthwhile; however, working under the guise of a legitimate business can scale up the market size and develop a loyal following that can be exploited further.
Some prominent and not-so-obvious enterprises will, if not now, eventually attract the criminal element running the black market.
Obvious future targets.
Pharmaceutical products- compounded knock-offs being the most obvious, but there are many more.
Petrol – although regulated, there will be effort targeting the resource to exploit any weaknesses, loyalty cards being the most obvious.
Food consumables- already legitimate retailers are hit hard by criminals stealing their goods. With the growth of the criminal’s access to customers through their black-market retail outlets (tobacco stores), shop stealing is set to rise dramatically.
Feeding into this phenomenon is the rise in the age of criminal intent to twelve years, and recruiting children under twelve will escalate because they cannot be prosecuted. Many eight- to twelve-year-olds are well capable of shoplifting quality targeted products in retail stores and supermarkets to be sold on the black-market. When they get older, they become ideal users and or dealers to service the drug trade.
Electronic devices – as the cost increases in the Mobile phone market, this will drive many to seek (latest) cheaper alternatives, and the black market is somewhere to go. This will undercut the major phone industry players and avoid taxes like GST.
There are, however, many more opportunities than listed here, but constant vigilance to control the criminal trade needs a special focus.
Much black-market trading is initially driven by financial pressure on some community sectors, while huge profits attract others.
Although there is no disputing that this is a law enforcement issue, enforcement cannot be achieved without the government’s direct intervention to ensure that law enforcement has the tools to do its job.
Although much of the focus is on Policing as the lead agency, which is fair enough, it would be foolish to assume they can do it on their own, an unrealistic expectation.
The Courts have a role to play, as do the other government agencies as well as the legislators, and to have any chance of controlling, let alone removing, this scourge of society, there must be a master plan, and all agencies held to account for it’s implementation.
Given the current fiscal pressure on their budgets, one would expect governments to be very keen, so the financial argument is compelling.
But it is not only the government budgets; these costs hit every taxpayer.
The excise and other taxes on tobacco have, without question, driven the astronomical growth of the tobacco black market.
A pack of legal Marlboro cigarettes will cost close to $60. A similar packet of illicit tobacco can cost as little as $15. With the newly flagged increase in the coming months, they will be close to $100 per pack.
Based purely on a financial rationale, it would be of more significant economic benefit to governments if they could achieve the lion’s share of taxes at a lower rate as customers move back to legitimate businesses, with a much lower tax regime rather than the profits (taxes) going to the criminals.
The loss of GST revenue alone should be justification for the government to lift its game.
To achieve the most significant impact, without fanfare, the shock to some criminals for a radical price shift at extremely short notice will be enough to destroy many of their business models. Even the cost of a container of cigarettes is a big debt if their income stream is severely damaged without time to adjust. Many criminals are importing multiple containers, so the damage of being unable to move that stock will be extreme.
To try to minimise costs, the criminal hierarchy will be forced to come out from the protection of the shadows. Forcing them to expose themselves as they reduce underlings to prop up their bottom line. This will greatly help the Police to identify them.
The argument that constant price hikes through taxes would achieve a decline in nicotine consumption, benefiting the whole community and taking pressure off the health system, has been exposed in recent media as a myth.
There has been an easily argued rationale for increasing the price of cigarettes based on the health argument that the dearer the cigarettes, so reducing the number of people who can afford to smoke automatically follows a correlation between price rises and user decline.
However, nicotine in Melbourne wastewater has remained stable for the last decade. This contradicts the claims from governments and health groups that putting the price of cigarettes beyond the reach of the masses will reduce nicotine use. That has now been shown to be a myth.
If meaningful inroads to destroy the criminal enterprises, which are undoubtedly very large, are to be achieved, a coordinated effort is required, and marketing principles should be at the fore.
Another insightful article from Break the Needle and highlights the folly of Harm Minimisation strategy again.
It does not take a visionary to conclude that Victoria is heading down the same path.
This harrowing story of the death of a fourteen-year-old girl from a drug overdose brings into stark relief the flaws that our lawmakers have allowed to permeate our society driven by flawed ideology.
The collision of the principles of harm minimisation and rights of parents over their children which destroys parental responsibility because they have none, according to the State.
This anomaly which conflicts with the age of criminal accountability must be addressed before Victorian children suffer the same fate as Kamilah Sword and the pain inflicted on her family.
By Alexandra Keeler
On Aug. 19, 2022, Kamilah Sword took a single hydromorphone pill, believing it to be safe. She overdosed and was found dead by her grandmother the next day. She was 14.
Kamilah believed the drug was safe — despite having bought it illicitly — because she was told it came from a government-run “safer supply” program, according to Kamillah’s best friend Grace Miller and her father.
“I’ll never get to see her get married, never have grandkids, never get to see her graduate,” said Kamilah’s father, Gregory Sword, lowering his chin to keep his voice steady.
“It’s a black hole in the heart that never heals.”
Sword faced significant challenges trying to get his daughter help during the year he was aware she was struggling with addiction. He blames British Columbia’s safer supply program and the province’s legal youth treatment framework for exacerbating his daughter’s challenges and ultimately contributing to her death.
“It’s a B.C. law — you cannot force a minor into rehab without their permission,” said Sword. “You cannot parent your kid between the ages of 12 and 18 without their consent.”
Sword is now pursuing legal action against the B.C. and federal governments and several health agencies, seeking accountability for what he views as systemic failures.
B.C.’s “Safe” supply program
B.C.’s prescribed safer supply program, which was first launched in 2020, is designed to reduce substance users’ reliance on dangerous street drugs. Users are prescribed hydromorphone — an opioid as potent as heroin — as an alternative to using potentially lethal street drugs.
However, participants in the program often sell their hydromorphone, in some cases to teenagers, to get money to buy stronger drugs like fentanyl.
According to Grace Miller, she and Kamilah would obtain hydromorphone — which is commonly referred to as Dilaudid or “dillies” — from a teenage friend who bought them in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside. The neighbourhood, which is the epicentre of Vancouver’s drug crisis, is a 30-minute SkyTrain ride from the teenagers’ home in Port Coquitlam.
Sword says he initially thought “dillies” referred to Dairy Queen’s Dilly Bars. “My daughter would ask me for $5, [and say], ‘Yeah, we’re going to Dairy Queen for a Dilly Bar.’ I had no idea.”
He says he only learned about hydromorphone after the coroner informed him that Kamilah had three substances in her system: cocaine, MDMA and hydromorphone.
“I had to start talking to people to figure out what [hydromorphone] was and where it was coming from.”
Sword is critical of B.C.’s safer supply program for being presented as safe and for lacking monitoring safeguards. “[Kamilah] knew where [the drugs] were coming from so she felt safe because her dealer would keep on telling her, ‘This is safe supply,’” Sword said.
In February, B.C. changed how it refers to the program from “prescribed safer supply” to “prescribed alternatives.”
CAA Comment – changing names doesn’t solve a problem but exacerbates it.
Grace says another problem with the program is the quantities of drugs being distributed.
“It would be a big difference if the prescriptions that they were giving out were dosed properly,” she said, noting addicts would typically sell bottles containing 14 pills, with pricing starting at $1 a pill.
Sword estimates his daughter struggled with addiction for about 18 to 24 months before her final, fatal overdose.
After Kamilah overdosed for the first time on Aug. 21, 2021, he tried to get her into treatment. A drug counsellor told him that, because she was over 12, she would need to verbally consent. Kamilah refused treatment.
B.C.’s Infants Act allows individuals aged 12 or older to consent to their own medical treatment if they understand the treatment and its implications. The province’s Mental Health Act requires minors aged 12 to 16 to consent to addiction or mental health treatment.
While parents can request involuntary admission for children under 16, a physician or nurse practitioner must first confirm the presence of a mental disorder that requires treatment. No law specifically addresses substance-use disorders in minors.
When Kamilah was admitted to the hospital on one occasion, she underwent a standard psychiatric evaluation and was quickly discharged — despite Sword’s protests.
Ontario also has a mental health law governing involuntary care. Similar to B.C., they permit involuntary care only where a minor has been diagnosed with a mental disorder.
By contrast, Alberta’s Protection of Children Abusing Drugs Act enables a parent or guardian to obtain a court order to place a child under 18 who is struggling with addiction into a secure facility for up to 15 days for detoxification, stabilization and assessment. Alberta is unique among the provinces and territories in permitting involuntary care of minors for substance-use issues.
CAA Comment – The CAA has advocated for a similar health-based regime to treat all illicit drug users of any age.
Grace, who also became addicted to opioids, says her recovery journey involved several failed attempts.
“I never thought I would have almost died so many times,” said Grace, who is now 16. “I never thought I would even touch drugs in my life.”
Grace’s mother Amanda (a pseudonym) faced similar struggles as Sword in trying to get help for her daughter. Amanda says she was repeatedly told nothing more could be done for Grace, because Grace would not consent to treatment.
“One time, [Grace] overdosed at home, and I had to Narcan her because she was dead in her bed,” Amanda said. “I told the paramedic, ‘Our system is broken.’ And she just said, ‘Yes, I know.’”
Yet Grace, who today has been sober for 10 months, would question whether she even had the capacity to consent to treatment when she was addicted to drugs.
Under B.C.’s Health Care (Consent) and Care Facility (Admission) Act, an adult is only considered to have consented to health care if their consent is voluntary, informed, legitimately obtained and the individual is capable of making a decision about their care.
“Mentally able to give consent?” said Grace. “No, I was never really mentally there.”
System failure
Today, Sword is one of two plaintiffs leading a class-action lawsuit against several provincial and federal health authorities and organizations, including the B.C. Ministry of Health, Health Canada, Vancouver Coastal Health and Vancouver Island Health.
All four of these agencies declined to comment for this story, citing the ongoing court proceedings.
The lawsuit was filed Aug. 15 and is currently awaiting certification to proceed. It alleges the coroner initially identified safer supply drugs as a cause of Kamilah’s death, but later changed the report to omit this reference due to pressure from the province or for other unknown reasons.
It further alleges B.C. and Ottawa were aware that drugs prescribed under safer supply programs were being diverted as early as March 2021, but failed to monitor or control the drugs’ distribution. It points to a Health Canada report and data showing increased opioid-related problems from safer supply programs.
According to Amanda, Kamilah had wanted to overcome her addiction but B.C.’s system failed her.
“I had multiple conversations with Kamilah, and I know Kamilah wanted to get clean,” she says. “But she felt so stuck, like she couldn’t do it, and she felt guilty and ashamed.”
Grace, who battled addiction for four years, is relieved to be sober.
“I’ve never, ever been happier. I’ve never been healthier. It’s the best thing I’ve done for myself,” she said. “It’s just hard when you don’t have your best friend to do it with.”
CAA Comment. – When will illicit drug apologists ever learn?
Another insightful article from Break the Needle in Canada. It is becoming uncanny as these articles relate to the identical issues and fallout from drug use and abuse in this state.
We can easily transpose Nelson for Richmond as the issues are not similar but identical.
They have both gone down the path of harm minimisation and are paying a very high community social price.
The power of these articles is they allow the obverse argument to be published, giving a balanced account of the situation, and allowing readers to form their own views, something the pro-drug lobby will not tolerate.
The tired old chestnut of “Drug addiction is a health issue, not a crime” was again trotted out, and its use is disingenuous.
Addiction per se is a health issue, and on that, there is no argument, but the behaviour of the addicts while under the influence is more often than not criminal, as is the sourcing of their drugs of choice. As are the behaviours that the addicts and all users indulge in facilitating their access to illegal products.
The problem with the Health argument is that it implies that all the other criminal and anti-social behaviours of users and addicts are somehow acceptable or excusable, arrant rubbish.
By Alexandra Keeler
“Just the other night, we had an intruder in our yard,” Kirsten Stolee recounted, her voice unsteady. Her two daughters often watch television with their windows open. “He easily could have gotten inside,” she said.
Stolee lives in Nelson, a picturesque, mountain-rimmed town in BC’s Southern Interior that is struggling with rising public disorder. Some residents, herself included, say that local harm reduction initiatives – which appear to be operating without adequate accountability and safety measures – are responsible for the decay.
Near Stolee’s house, one can find the Stepping Stones emergency shelter alongside the former Nelson Friendship Outreach Clubhouse, which used to provide support services for individuals struggling with mental health issues before being abandoned late last year.
When the clubhouse still operated, supporters claimed that it provided clients with a space to socialize and partake in “art, gardening, cooking and summer camp” – but critics countered that it was a drop-in centre for drug users. After the provincial government announced plans to open a supervised inhalation site at the clubhouse early last year, local residents protested and had the project, and eventually the clubhouse itself, shut down.
Although Stolee supports harm reduction in principle, she opposed the opening of the inhalation site on safety grounds. The incidents near her home were concerning: an assault just outside her window, a drug-addled individual stabbing a pole with scissors, people carrying weapons on the street in front of the site. When her daughter’s phone was stolen, it was eventually recovered from a man at the clubhouse.
Although the clubhouse is closed, Stepping Stones continues to operate and has been similarly chaotic. Stolee watched a suspected drug dealer attack one of the residents there, and learned that another resident had made an inappropriate comment to her daughter.
She has also observed fire hazards near local homeless encampments, including a burning electrical panel and abandoned fires, and says that local drug users “play with fires” on sidewalks and streets. She finds these incidents concerning, as BC and Alberta have recently been ravaged by large wildfires and Nelson’s downtown is filled with historic wooden architecture.
Calling the police seemed unhelpful. In one case, officers dismissed her concerns about a man who was carrying large rocks, considering him non-threatening. However, the man was later arrested for assault and for using these types of rocks to break into a gas station.
Gavin Halford, a representative of Interior Health, the provincial agency which oversees most of the region’s harm reduction programs, stated that his organization “does not tolerate or condone any form of criminal activity, including trespassing.” He claimed that Interior Health has taken “a number of steps to increase security at the Clubhouse,” including increased signage, lighting, video surveillance and on-site security services.
However, the acquisition of 24/7 security services was facilitated by Stolee’s partner, after Interior Health told him that no such options were available. The partner also alleges that he was told by local police officers that Interior Health asked them not to enforce the “No Trespassing” signs around the clubhouse.
Stolee’s family has since invested $1,000 into security upgrades such as video surveillance and fencing. “We have baseball bats and pepper spray by our front door and a bat under the bed,” she said, noting that she wrote a letter to BC Premier David Eby detailing their experiences, which received no reply.
Kari Kroker, another neighbour of Stepping Stones, said that downtown Nelson has experienced a noticeable decline as open drug use and trafficking have proliferated, including sales to youth. “The alley behind my house has become a place of screaming and chaos,” she said, expressing frustration at how some drug users have told local children that using drugs is a form of “play.”
“I’m all in favour of putting more money into this situation, but I think we’re going the cheap way,” said Kroker. “I don’t see the province doing much to solve this. I don’t see rehab and supports for people. We need rehab. Where are the facilities to support people?” She believes that the town’s social fabric is fraying and that “harmony has been completely undermined.”
Tanya Finley, owner of Finley’s Bar and Grill and Sage Wine Bar, is an outspoken critic of provincial harm reduction policies and a leading figure in N2, the local residents’ association. She says that human feces, drug dealing, broken windows and home invasions are daily issues in her community: “Our eighty-year-old neighbour, who had just had surgery, had a brick thrown through her window.”
Finley says that her activism has had personal and professional costs and that, after she wrote a newspaper article advocating that homeless individuals be relocated to more suitable locations, a harm reduction advocate urged for a boycott of her business on social media. This led to a decline in sales and caused some of her employees to worry about their job security.
N2 was formed earlier this year after the province attempted to open the aforementioned supervised inhalation site. Local residents believed that the location of the site was unsuitably close to several youth facilities and that health authorities had, in contravention to Health Canada guidelines, failed to adequately consult the community.
“We were lied to deliberately and continuously,” said Kroker. “We found out later that this had been in the works for almost a year.”
Early efforts to address public safety concerns were undermined by accusations of NIMBYism and inadequate responses from government authorities. After N2 was formed and took collective action – such as letters to officials and media engagement – officials began to take these concerns more seriously and temporarily halted the opening of the inhalation site.
Polly Sutherland from ANKORS, a local harm reduction organization, acknowledged friction with the community but said that deteriorating public safety is largely due to limited resources. “We need more staff hours… We have the expertise and compassion for these individuals. Just give us the resources to do our jobs, and we will get it done,” she said.
She said that high rents have worsened homelessness and dereliction, and that mobile services could mitigate the concentration of public disorder in certain areas.
Nelson’s Mayor, Janice Morrison, who has had 35 years of experience working in healthcare, emphasized that municipal authority over healthcare is limited and argued for improved communication with provincial and federal agencies, which she believed needed to provide more funding.
“I think ANKORS is totally correct in that they need more staff hours and more resources,” she said, while stressing the importance of funding existing roles, such as community safety officers and outreach workers. “Drug addiction is a health issue, not a crime,” she said.
Morrison also criticized Interior Health for its inadequate community consultation regarding the placement of harm reduction sites. “They’ve had a hard go of it in their area,” the mayor said, referring to these sites’ neighbours.
Despite public safety challenges, Morrison noted that Nelson has made progress with operating several safe injection sites and would soon be adding 28 supportive housing beds. She remained committed to finding solutions despite persistent funding difficulties. “I’m ready to hear the solutions, and to support anyone with viable ideas,” she said.
The CAA has long promoted a similar scenario for this state, arguing that kicking those suffering substance abuse or any impairment that removes their acuity to manage themselves into the gutter and walk away is effectively what we are doing in this State and is a disgusting treatment and disrespect for human life.
The drug apologists try to falsely claim the moral high ground, claiming that Harm Minimisation saves lives. How does facilitating the pumping of some questionable drug into an addict’s veins help the addict? It may be okay for them today, but what about tomorrow?
We aggravate the situation by creating an alleged safe injecting room that does nothing to address the issues of the user. How perpetuating the adverse effect that drugs have on people by providing government support in the furtherance of their addiction or risk-taking is incomprehensible.
We can learn a lot from Ontario; they have been there and are now plotting a way back.
Ontario’s decision to close safe consumption sites near schools and daycares comes in the wake of a bystander’s death and class-action lawsuit.
By Alexandra Keeler
In a dramatic shift in policy, Ontario is closing 10 safe consumption sites located near schools and daycares, citing public safety concerns.
“Our first priority must always be protecting our communities, especially when it comes to our most innocent and vulnerable — our children,” said Ontario Health Minister Sylvia Jones at an Association of Municipalities of Ontario conference in Ottawa on Tuesday.
Safe consumption sites, which enable people to use illicit drugs with sterile equipment under staff supervision, will be prohibited from operating within 200 metres of schools and child-care centres after March 31, 2025.
The province also plans to introduce legislation to prevent municipalities from establishing new consumption sites, requesting the decriminalization of illegal drugs or participating in federal safe supply initiatives, a health ministry press release says.
Safe consumption sites have faced mounting scrutiny in the wake of community feedback highlighting their effect on public safety.
“We’ve noticed a real change from 2021 onwards,” Andrea Nickel, a parent who lives near a safe consumption site at Toronto’s South Riverdale Community Health Centre, told Canadian Affairs in May.
“At the beginning of last year it just escalated out of control.”
Unacceptable danger
Ontario opened its first safe consumption site in 2017 with the aim of reducing overdose deaths and providing users with a gateway to treatment. Today, there are 23 safe consumption sites across the province, 17 of which are provincially funded.
KeepSIX, the safe consumption site in South Riverdale, is among the sites facing closure. Last July, Karolina Huebner-Makurat, a local resident and mother of two, was fatally shot during a gunfight outside the site. Her death prompted Ontario to conduct two reviews of the centre and to also review the 16 other provincially funded sites.
A review of keepSIX conducted by the hospital network Unity Health Toronto and released in February recommended improvements in security, community relations, law enforcement communication and staff training. It did not recommend closure.
Drugs found by a child in the South Riverdale neighbourhood. (Photo provided by Andrea Nickel.)
The second review, released in April and conducted by former health-care executive Jill Campbell, also opposed closure. It advocated instead for expanded harm reduction and treatment, enhanced security and increased mental health support.
In March 2024, two South Riverdale residents launched a class-action lawsuit against the operator of keepSIX and all levels of government, Canadian Affairs reported in May. The lawsuit alleges the site has exposed the community to unacceptable danger.
The site’s proximity to daycares and schools and its role in exposing children to illicit drugs and used needles are at the heart of that case.
Reacting to this week’s announcement, South Riverdale parent Andrea Nickel said she is supportive of the site’s services. “[But] it is not unreasonable to ask that they are balanced with community safety, specifically kids’ safety.”
South Riverdale’s response cited the centre’s role in reversing 74 overdoses in 2023.
“Every overdose reversed is a life saved,” Anne Marie Aikins, a public affairs consultant at AMA Communications, said on behalf of the centre.
Subscribe for free to get BTN’s latest news and analysis – or donate to our investigative journalism fund.
‘Devil’s in the details’
In Tuesday’s address, Ontario’s health minister also announced a $378-million investment to establish 19 new Homelessness and Addiction Recovery Treatment Hubs (HART hubs) across the province. These recovery-focused hubs will offer social support services and employment assistance to individuals struggling with addiction.
They will not provide supervised drug consumption, needle exchange programs or the “safe supply” of prescribed controlled substances.
“The devil’s in the details with these things,” said John-Paul Michael, an addictions case manager in Toronto who has extensive experience in harm reduction and lived experience with substance use.
“Everyone I know in the harm-reduction community is very much in favour of having better access to treatment, better access to detox, better wraparound care,” he said. “The problem becomes when it is at the expense of other evidence-based care.”
Michael says safe consumption sites are often the only form of health care available to individuals struggling with addiction. Eliminating them would leave these individuals without support, he says.
“Safe consumption sites are essential for saving lives, particularly for those who may never seek formal treatment,” he said. “Eliminating these supports disregards the value of human life.”
Michael is also concerned about the reduction of needle exchange services, which are crucial for managing HIV and Hepatitis C rates and lessening the burden on emergency rooms.
“Community-based nurses at [safe consumption sites] provide basic care that can prevent emergency department visits and potentially severe outcomes, such as [intensive care unit] stays,” Michael said.
The province will soon seek proposals to establish up to 10 HART hubs. Priority will be given to proposals that aim to transition existing safe consumption sites — especially those facing closure — into HART hubs.
“[T]he likelihood is that [these transitions] would happen very quickly,” Health Minister Jones told reporters on Tuesday. “The other applications — it will depend on what they bring forward.”
I’m not sure when the “ helping community” is going to get it through their heads that helping people stay addicted is not helping them. When addicts have their substance of choice freely available and someone to make sure they don’t die, what possible reason would they have for doing the hard work of getting clean? Users are interested in one thing above health, family, even food: the next dose.
An insightful article and video from our partners, the Dalgarno Institute.
The video is of an interview between Andy, a recovered Ice addict and Shane Varcoe, the CEO of the Dalgano Institute. Although this interview was done in 2015, it is perhaps more relevant today and gives an insight into the wrong-headed thinking of the so-called experts who advise the government on drug-related issues. Andy’s experience should motivate all clear thinkers that new and informed approach must be adopted .
You are sure to be surprised at the issues that Andy exposes – CAA
Andy’s story is a powerful testament to the challenges of ice addiction and the complexities of the recovery process. His journey, as shared in a candid interview, offers valuable insights into the realities of drug use, rehabilitation, and the systemic issues within current drug policies.
Early Beginnings
Andy’s relationship with substances began in his teenage years, starting with alcohol at age 13. While marijuana didn’t become a significant part of his life, alcohol remained a constant until he graduated from university in 2004. Following a period of sobriety, Andy’s life took a turn when his business failed and his mother fell ill.
The Descent into Ice Addiction
Struggling with depression and worry, Andy first tried ice (crystal methamphetamine) as a way to cope. The initial experience provided energy and alertness, seemingly alleviating his concerns. However, his mother’s tragic passing due to medical complications became the catalyst for increased drug use. Andy’s habit escalated rapidly, reaching consumption levels of up to 1.7 grams daily.
Andy’s addiction led to multiple arrests and periods of incarceration. His experiences in custody, particularly during the smoking riots at Melbourne Remand Centre, proved to be a turning point. The inhumane conditions and prolonged period without drugs forced Andy to confront his addiction.
The Rehabilitation Journey
Andy’s path to recovery involved participation in drug court programs and various rehabilitation efforts. He highlights the importance of drug courts in providing support but also notes the challenges within the system. Andy’s experiences shed light on the complexities of recovery, including the risk of relapse and the impact of triggers.
Insights on Current Drug Policies
Andy offers critical perspectives on current drug policies and rehabilitation programs:
Inconsistencies in messaging: He points out the conflicting messages between legal stance and harm reduction approaches.
Problematic rehabilitation strategies: Andy discusses how certain programs, intended to help, can sometimes trigger cravings or relapses.
The need for improved in-custody programs: He emphasises the potential for effective rehabilitation during incarceration, if more comprehensive programs were available.
Criticism of proposed solutions: Andy expresses scepticism about initiatives like ice smoking rooms, highlighting the potential negative impacts on recovering addicts and the broader community.
Andy’s story underscores several key points:
The importance of addressing underlying issues in addiction treatment
The need for consistent messaging in drug policies
The potential of incarceration as a rehabilitation opportunity, if properly structured
The challenges faced by recovering addicts in maintaining sobriety, especially when confronted with triggers or old associates
Andy’s candid sharing of his experiences provides invaluable insights into the world of ice addiction and recovery. To gain a deeper understanding of his journey and the issues he raises, readers are encouraged to watch the full YouTube video here.
Another insightful article from ‘Break the Needle’. The Canadian experiences with Illicit drugs seem to precede the experiences here in Victoria as the government has guided us towards the first step in a broader application of the ‘Safe Suppy’ slide with the introduction of Pill testing. With similar advocates in Victoria promoting drug proliferation, having access to the Canadian experiences gives Victoria a head start to alter course and impact the toll that drugs are taking on our predominantly younger generation.
Drug facilitation by governments all have one thing in common: they increase the use of illegal narcotics, and there is never any evidence that the addiction diminishes, but rather younger people enter the drug dependence regime convinced that because it is government-sanctioned, it must be safe.
This article highlights how drug apologists inject emotive words into their rhetoric, like the use of ‘fake news’, ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ to further promote the use of illicit drugs. – CAA
Claims about ‘safer supply’ diversion aren’t disinformation
This month, police in London, Ont., admitted to what critics have said all along: safer supply diversion is happening at alarming levels
Last spring, Canada’s minister of mental health and addictions claimed critics’ concerns about “safer supply” diversion — the illegal selling and trading of taxpayer-funded addictive drugs — were based on lies.
“For Pierre Poilievre to state untrue information about safer supply, and try to create barriers to accessing harm reduction services that are saving lives amid this ongoing crisis, is incredibly irresponsible and dehumanizing to people who use drugs,” read a statement by then-minister Carolyn Bennett’s office.
Fast forward a year, and it’s clear which side was telling the truth.
This month, police in London, Ont., admitted to what critics said all along: diversion of pharmaceutically supplied opioids to the streets is happening at alarming levels. London is home to Canada’s longest-running safer supply program, which dates back to 2016 and was significantly expanded in 2020.
The London Police Service released data that shows a staggering 3,000per cent increase in the seizure of hydromorphone tablets — the opioid predominantly given out by safer supply programs — over the last five years. In 2019, London police seized just under 1,000 tablets. By 2020, that number had tripled. In 2023, they seized 30,000 hydromorphone tablets.
For context, hydromorphone is as potent as heroin and just two or three of these pills, if snorted, can cause an overdose in an inexperienced opioid user.
Earlier this month, the city’s deputy police chief, Paul Bastien, told CBC’s London Morning, “We recognize the value that safe supply plays as part of that harm reduction piece, but diversion is an important issue that is affecting community safety. I won’t say that everyone’s doing it, but some of the tablets from safe supply are being diverted for that purpose.”
“Criminal groups are fairly adept at exploiting policy changes that are well intended. But unforeseen consequences sometimes arise and this appears to be, at least in part, one of them,” he continued.
A reasonable person may assume that, given this alarming new evidence, proponents of safer supply would change their tune about widespread diversion being “fake news.” Unfortunately, they haven’t.
Some activists are now claiming on social media that London’s spike in hydromorphone seizures was not caused by safer supply, but rather by a high-profile theftof 245,000 hydromorphone tablets from an Ontario pharmacy. Yet the spike in seizures began years before this theft and, according to multiple addiction physicians, the street price of hydromorphone collapsed in the city well before 2023, suggesting an earlier influx of diverted supply.
However, these mental contortions aren’t surprising. As more and more evidence of widespread diversion emerged over the past year, accusations of disinformation and misinformation haven’t stopped –– they have simply evolved. The narrative changed from “Diversion doesn’t exist” to “Fine, it exists, but only on a small scale” to, now, “Fine, diversion exists at scale, but imagine the alternative?”
This is the angle already emerging in British Columbia, where the province’s top doctor, Bonnie Henry, authored adamning reportthat acknowledges the regularity and harms of safer supply diversion, yet still concludes safer supply is “ethically defensible” and advocates for its expansion.
Like many safer supply activists, Henry often argues diversion isn’t a significant concern because most opioid deaths are caused by fentanyl.
While it’s true that most opioid deaths are attributable to fentanyl, hydromorphone is still incredibly dangerous. When diverted into the black market, it creates new addictions, often among young people, which culminate in fentanyl use.
Moreover, data indicate hydromorphone is implicated in an increasing share of drug-related deaths in young people in B.C. In 2019, there were no reported deaths involving hydromorphone. By 2022, that number jumped to 22 per cent. Similarly, a recent report by the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Ontario found the number of youth in the province who self-reported using prescription opioids for “non-medical” reasons jumped 71 per cent between 2021 and 2023.
Still, safer supply activists continue to insist, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that widespread diversion isn’t happening.
In 2017, Collins Dictionary declared “fake news” the word of the year. Since then, the term –– along with sister terms “misinformation” and “disinformation” –– have taken on a disturbing new life.
While fake news, misinformation and disinformation are very real democratic threats, some politicians and activists realized they could delegitimize opponents’ arguments and unflattering media stories by simply proclaiming them fake. Now, we’re in the dizzyingly ironic position of real news, and real facts, being dismissed as misinfo and disinfo by self-declared guardians of the truth.
This is the exact problem journalists and concerned medical professionals continue to face when raising the alarm on so-called “safer supply.” Despite the abundance of solid reporting, emerging data, whistleblower warnings and first-hand accounts of widespread diversion, harm reduction activists and their allies in government don’t just recklessly dismiss the problem, they weaponize the language of fake news to discredit a reality they don’t like.
Communities across Canada, and addicts themselves, deserve better.
Yet another insightful article from Break the Needle.
We are thankfully not at this stage yet, but the efforts of our politicians and the trajectory they have put in place lead to some inevitability that we will as they push the failed ‘Harm Minimisation’ approach they have embraced – ‘Safer Supply’ will be the inevitable next step after safe injecting facilities and pill testing interventions that promote drug use.
The Canadian experience highlights the failure to recognise or accept that early
intervention is the only process that can reverse this trend from ruining lives.
Addiction physician Dr. Sharon Koivu has seen the effects of safer supply programs in her clinical practice and personal life — and is sounding the alarm
Having worked on the front lines of Ontario’s opioid crisis, she views these programs as a catastrophic failure.
In an extended interview, Koivu explained the unintended consequences of these programs, which offer free tablets of hydromorphone — an opioid about as strong as heroin – to vulnerable patients with a history of addiction. While advocates of safer supply claim it mitigates the use of more dangerous illicit substances, there is evidence that most users divert — that is, sell or trade — their hydromorphone to acquire stronger substances.
Safer supply was first piloted in London, Ont., in 2016, before being widely expanded across Canada in 2020 with the help of generous federal grants. While the program looked good on paper, Koivu, who provides comprehensive addiction consultation services at a London-based hospital, saw a different reality: her patients were destabilising, relapsing and fatally overdosing because of safer supply.
Koivu says that “one hundred percent” of her colleagues working in addiction medicine have noticed safer supply diversion. Some patients have told her they have been threatened with violence if they do not procure and divert these drugs. She estimates that, because of safer supply, tens of thousands of diverted hydromorphone pills — also known as “Dilaudid,” “dillies” or “D8s” — are flooding into Canadian streets every day.
For context, just two or three of these pills, if snorted, are enough to induce an overdose in a new user.
This influx has caused the drug’s street price to crash by as much as 95 per cent. While 8-milligram hydromorphone pills used to sell for $20 each several years ago, they can now be bought for as little as a dollar or two. These rock-bottom prices have ignited a new wave of addictions and relapses, and lured opioid-naive individuals into experimenting with what is essentially pharmaceutical heroin.
Koivu estimates that 80 per cent of her opioid-using patients now take diverted hydromorphone.
“The biggest harm is that we’ve turned on the tap and we’ve made everything cheap, which is leading to a large increase in the number of people becoming addicted and suffering,” she said.
“It is the most serious issue that I’ve seen in my lifetime.”
Safer supply programs seem to regularly overprescribe opioids without considering patients’ actual needs, Koivu says. Patients have come into her hospital with prescriptions that provide 40 eight-milligram hydromorphone pills a day, even though they can only tolerate 10 pills.
‘That attraction is horrific’
Throughout the first few decades of Koivu’s career, almost “everyone” in her patient pool developed addictions due to childhood traumas or from mishandling opioids prescribed for chronic pain.
Since the advent of safer supply, the origins of new opioid addictions have shifted toward social or recreational exposure. Concerningly, this exposure often occurs in patients’ adolescent years.
“I’m seeing an increase in youth becoming addicted,” said Koivu, who has had patients as young as 15 tell her their addictions began through diverted hydromorphone.
“Almost everyone I see who’s started since 2018 started recreationally. It started as something that was at a party. It’s now a recreational drug at the youth level.”
Parents often seem completely unaware of the problem. Some have told Koivu they overheard their children discussing the availability of “D8s” at their high schools, only to later realise — when it was too late — they were referring to opioids.
“You can’t walk into your house with a six-pack of beer. If you’re smoking weed, people can smell it. But you can walk into your house with a lot of [tablets] in your pocket. So, it’s cheap, really easy to hide, and is even called ‘safe’ by the government. I think that attraction is horrific.”
“Our youth are dying at a higher rate … and we have a lot more hydromorphone found in [their bodies] at the time of death.”
While safer supply programs claim to make communities safer, Koivu’s lived experiences suggest the opposite. She used to reside in London’s Old East Village, where the city’s first safer supply program opened in 2016, but moved away after watching her neighbourhood deteriorate from widespread crime, overdoses and drug trafficking.
“I moved there to support a supervised injection site,” said Koivu. “Then I watched that community drastically change when safer supply was implemented. … I would go for walks and directly see diversion taking place. Homelessness is very complicated, but this has absolutely fuelled it in ways that are unconscionable.”
Koivu characterises the evidentiary standards used by advocates of safer supply as “deeply problematic.” She says many of the studies supporting safer supply are qualitative — meaning they rely on interviews — and use anecdotal data from patients who have a vested interest in perpetuating the program.
While Koivu has been blowing the whistle on safer supply programs for years, her concerns largely went unnoticed until recently. She has faced years of harassment and denigration for her views.
“When I came to say I’m concerned about what I’m seeing: the infections, the suffering, the encampments … I was literally told that I was lying,” she said.
Last month, the London Police Service provided the National Post with data showing that annual hydromorphone seizures increased by 3,000 per cent after access to safer supply was significantly expanded in 2020. The newspaper has since raised questions about why this data was not released earlier and whether the police stonewalled attempts to investigate the issue.
Koivu considers herself a lifelong progressive and has historically supported the New Democratic Party. But she is concerned many left-leaning politicians have ignored criticism of safer supply. Many seemingly believe that opposition to it is inherently conservative.
“I went to a hearing in Ottawa of a standing committee to talk about addiction,” she said. “We had five minutes to give a talk and then two hours to answer questions, [but] I didn’t receive any questions from the NDP or the Liberals.”
Although Koivu believes safe supply can play a role in the continuum of care for opioid addiction, she says it must be executed in a meticulous manner that prevents diversion and emphasises pathways to recovery.
“It needs to be part of a comprehensive strategy to help people get their lives back. And right now, it’s not.”
Above all, it is Koivu’s experience as a mother that drives her to criticize safer supply. One of her sons struggled with opioid addiction as a young adult. Although he eventually recovered, the experience could have killed him.
“Had this program been around … my family could have been another statistic from an opioid death. That drives me. Because it’s very real, and it’s very personal.”
This article gives an insight into the direction and traps in managing drug addiction.
Canada has been the window to the future of the drug addiction problem in Australia. It has shown the world the contrasting outcome of pragmatic management as opposed to the id
We will bring you further articles authorised to be published by Break the Needle, giving a window into where the drug epidemic is headed and what works and what doesn’t. We would do well to note the Canadian experience.
We have our own conflicted approach, with one arm of the government expending vast resources trying to control the illicit drug trade and use, the Legal system and the Health system dealing with the consequences of use, while all the while the government is promoting and facilitating drug use, with the Drug Injecting Room and further promotion of safe drugs, the Pill Testing service.
Captured by the failed ‘Harm Minimisation’ fallacy, we can expect the next big thing will be an emphasis on ‘Safer Supply’. The toe is already in the door with Pill Testing.
Opioid seizures exploded by 3,000% in Ontario City after a “safer supply” experiment.
Doctors and journalists wondering why local police failed to disclose concerning statistics to the public sooner.
JUL 07, 2024
A London (Canada) police drug seizure in April included 9,298 Dilaudid eight-milligram tablets.
By Matthew Hannick
Nigel Stuckey saved more lives during the last five years of his policing career than the previous three decades combined. “Every time you go back to the street, it has a different flavour,” said Stuckey, a former sergeant with the London Police Service (LPS) who retired in 2022. “As a frontline police officer, you are constantly going to overdoses in the city. I’ve administered Narcan to multiple people, and this is just something that never existed before.”
Stuckey first noticed a dramatic increase in overdoses and drug-related crimes occurring throughout his city – London, Ontario – in 2019. While the reasons behind this increase were initially unclear, recent data released by the LPS suggest that “safer supply” programs may be contributing to the problem.
Safer supply programs aim to save lives by providing drug users with pharmaceutical-grade alternatives to the untested street supply. That typically means distributing hydromorphone, a heroin-strength opioid, as an alternative to illicit fentanyl. However, addiction experts say the program is having the opposite effect, as many people who are enrolled in safer supply programs are illegally selling or trading their prescribed hydromorphone on the black market, a practice known as “diversion.”
Harm reduction advocates claim that safer supply diversion is not a significant issue, but according to an investigation into London Police Services (LPS) seizure data by journalist Adam Zivo, the number of hydromorphone tablets seized in London increased by 3,000 per cent after access to safer supply was greatly expanded in 2020.
In 2019, the LPS seized fewer than 1,000 hydromorphone tablets. This number jumped significantly in 2020 and continued to rise afterwards, reaching 30,000 tablet seizures last year – an unprecedented amount. The London police estimate that last year’s record will be met or exceeded by the end of 2024.
Doctors have said that this is only representative of a small fraction of what is actually out there, and that just 3-4 of these pills, if snorted, are enough to induce an overdose in a new user.
Some people are wondering why this data wasn’t released months, if not years, earlier.
Dr. Sharon Koivu, a London-based addiction physician, was among the first to recognize the harms of safer supply and has been warning the public about widespread diversion for years. Based on her clinical experiences, she believes that diverted safer supply hydromorphone is causing new addictions and falling into the hands of youth.
When Koivu tried to speak out against safer supply and call attention to diversion and an overall lack of program transparency, she was bullied and told that the suffering she was witnessing didn’t exist. This harassment was so severe that her mental health deteriorated and she worried about whether her career had been irreversibly damaged – yet the London police had quietly possessed data showing that she was right all along.
“It’s become an ideological thing,” she said. “People seem to have doubled down on the information they have. They don’t want to hear from someone who has information and concerns that don’t align with their, I’m going to say, ideology – because it’s not science.”
News of skyrocketing hydromorphone seizures might have remained hidden from the public had it not been for a major bust earlier this year.
On April 12, the London police announced a drug seizure which included 9,298 hydromorphone eight-milligram tablets. When Zivo inquired into this seizure, he received no answers to his questions for almost two months. He says that he was “stonewalled” and that the police seemed unwilling to release key data until it became impossible for them not to.
Zivo found it particularly concerning that the 2019-2023 hydromorphone seizure data was not released earlier. “Journalists and addiction physicians have been trying to raise the alarm about this issue for years,” he said, “but have been called liars, grifters and fearmongers, despite the fact that data validating their concerns existed and was held by the London Police Service.”
Stuckey, who now works as a documentary filmmaker covering London’s homelessness, addiction and mental health crisis, had a similar experience when he queried the LPS about the 9,290 hydromorphone pills seized this April.
Despite multiple requests for information about a possible connection to safer supply, the police service did not get back to him. He expressed frustration at the police’s unresponsiveness and worried that a lack of government transparency is endangering both the general public and law enforcement officers.
“Members of the London Police Service are being put in harm’s way dealing with organized crime and firearms to take drugs off the street, which were provided by the federal government. It’s absolute lunacy that we are paying one branch of government to rid a problem that was created by another branch of government,” said Stuckey.
It would be deeply concerning if the LPS knowingly withheld data pertaining to safer supply diversion. Not only has the failure to publish such data hindered informed public debate and policy development, it has also compromised the safety of the very communities which police are tasked with protecting.
According to Zivo, safer supply programs have benefitted from the silence of powerful institutions like the LPS. He said that, as there seems to be significant institutional resistance to acknowledging the community harms of safer supply, then more attention and trust should be given to local grassroots-level addiction medicine practitioners “who are bravely testifying to what they are seeing in their clinics.”
However, Dr. Koivu thinks that “the tide is turning” and that more people are beginning to understand the harms of safer supply
“I think it’s unfortunate that this data wasn’t made available sooner, when it was relevant to the funding of these programs and the changes we’re seeing in the city. The police need to be accountable for that. I really don’t understand their rationale for not addressing this” she said. “They hung me out to dry while knowing that what I was saying was accurate. If the police are afraid to come forward, no wonder physicians are afraid to come forward, too.”
They both make criminals very, very rich and make the Government look very, very silly as they continually fail to implement the tried-and-true strategies that will bring about solutions.
Both issues are intrinsically linked, and one of them could be resolved overnight, greatly affecting the operations of the other.
Removing or greatly reducing the excise on cigarettes/tobacco would seriously damage the criminal elements and destroy their marketing model, plus save many millions of dollars on enforcement.
The Government is not learning from its mistakes as it now moves to curtail and legislate against vaping, which will potentially create another opportunity for criminals to expand their black-market activities, this time predominantly with children, and that is incredibly dangerous. Associating children with the criminal element will inevitably lead to increased crime by children.
Crime entraps our young people, attracted by the lure of wealth, notoriety and excitement, ruining many of their lives and the lives of their families, who are the silent victims.
Additionally, the problem breeds and encourages criminal activity as the addicted and the desperate, some of whom were recruited as children, are forced to commit crimes to fund their addiction.
Although Tobacco and Vapes are still legal, where illicit drugs are not, the CAA is not proposing a prohibition on those products as with illegal drugs for several very good reasons. Smoking tobacco and Vaping affects individuals but does not generally affect others. Illicit drugs potentially affect everyone.
A classic example is the road toll, where evidence shows many drivers involved in collisions, including fatalities, are drug-affected. Violent and anti-social behaviour of those affected by illicit drugs is also very common.
However, there are similarities in how the black markets, which run in parallel, should be handled.
The tried and successful strategies we refer to are the Quit campaign and the Sun Smart, Slip Slop and Slap, which are outstanding examples of the power of marketing that achieved exceptional success in reducing smoking and sun exposure in the community.
It is a pity, bordering on wanton incompetence, that the same weapon has not been used in the Clayton’s Drug War. Because of its potential to succeed, and it is somewhat bothersome that this strategy is avoided, perhaps indicating that dark forces or corruption are at play.
Both initiatives succeeded because the Quit campaign used marketing to target the demand side in marketing parlance. Whether your house, car, or workplace became a smoke-free zone, the impact on the tobacco demand plummeted.
The Sun Smart campaign focused on changing public opinion to change social norms and the bronze Aussie persona. It successfully targeted parents and children to reach a high degree of compliance with the concept.
The Quit campaign worked remarkably well until the government dramatically raised taxes to make cigarettes unaffordable. This spawned the chop-chop tobacco market first, followed by packaged cigarettes smuggled in by the container load.
Criminals’ ability to afford to enter into supply contracts by the container load indicates the enterprise’s profitability. As the gulf grew between the cost of legally purchased tobacco products and what the black market could supply tobacco products for, the back market flourished.
The intent to make tobacco products too expensive and reduce tobacco usage, as a result, has dramatically backfired.
The government flipped the successful targeting of the demand to try and rely on law enforcement tackling the supply side as the solution. That strategy has failed through no fault of the Police but a failed government approach.
Rather than realising what they had done, they continued to raise taxes on tobacco, aggravating the situation by increasing criminals’ profits.
As the gap between what the Cartels can sell illegal tobacco products for and what their retail price is widens, the black-market price can increase, and that is pure profit for the criminals.
Marketing, in its simplest iteration, is all about supply and demand. If there is no demand, the supply side quivers as profits drop, but if the market is solid, there will always be a supply side to service that demand, precisely what has happened with drugs and tobacco.
The black-market enterprise is so lucrative that they are prepared to risk serious jail time by firebombing Tobacco stores to gain market control.
Gangs involved in the illicit drug trade have expanded to include the illegal Tobacco trade because the profits are more significant and the penalties, if caught, are likely to be much less.
The drug market’s primary customer base is drug addicts, and the high rate of dealers needed to distribute the drugs to support their habit, is akin to a pyramid scheme. Most participants support their habit by being a dealer selling the product, but that absorbs a significant share of the profits and becomes less attractive as gang leaders who find their income adversely impacted.
But the criminal elements had no need to fear as the government came to the rescue and provided them with a better alternative with more profit: Tobacco: a golden goose for when your market strategy is not as profitable.
If the government had targeted the demand side and relied on marketing instead of tax income from tobacco, it would not be in its current predicament.
Illicit Drugs are very similar; the government wants to assist addicts to be better addicts; this is a non-strategy to reduce the shocking impact drugs have on our society.
In this area, the government has, in part, been conned.
Drug apologists have convinced the government that the best strategy is Harm Minimization; however, they have manipulated that concept as part of a strategy to achieve acceptance of illicit drugs as the community norm.
How any government can fall for the trick of providing an Injecting Room, which has been empirically determined to be a failure, is beyond comprehension.
The Government has been diverted from the real solution, the four pillars of Prevention, Enforcement, Treatment, and Rehabilitation (PETR). Facilitating drug use in an injecting room as a stand-alone response without the other pillars is a recipe for the disaster we are experiencing.
One Pillar will not stand up without the others supporting it, and it is time for the government to take a more realistic approach to addressing these problems, using PETR principles as the basis.
To date, this government has tried to rely on law enforcement to solve the issue, but plainly, that is not working despite the best efforts of Police and Border security measures.
It is a problem that cannot be resolved by enforcement alone.
Obversely, to assumed norms, the best thing the Government can do in the short term is to drop the tax applied to tobacco products significantly. That will not considerably cause a rise in the number of smokers. But those who do smoke will likely return to legitimate retailers (increasing Tax revenue) and cause a significant blow to the illicit traders, who overwhelmingly are also illegal dealers of drugs.
Addressing these issues properly will have a profound beneficial impact on all Victorians.
When the Government gets something right, it needs to be acknowledged, and Premier Allan has just done that in spades, rejecting the Ken Lay report to install a second injecting room in Melbourne. However, Lay’s report recommended not just an injecting room but a “small (four—to six-booth) and discreet” -injecting service.
That incredible assertion attributed to Lay shows what happens when someone who knows so little about an issue is charged with making recommendations.
Small and discreet in this context belies reality.
As in Richmond, the injecting rooms are honey pots for addicts, dealers and other lowlifes to assemble and trade. Whether it is small or otherwise, the area will become a haven for dealers and addicts.
The majority of the addicts around Richmond do not always use the room but shoot up and perform other bodily functions in lanes, parks, streets and people’s gardens; many others drive to the area buy their hit and shoot up in the car. More often than not, driving away under the influence.
“Why is it acceptable for the citizens of the Richmond area, including a primary school, to be exposed to the full impact of having an injecting room nearby, while the citizens of the City of Melbourne are not?
This is an obvious question that needs to be addressed.
The Government, until now, has effectively turned a blind eye to the problems caused in Richmond, and the Premier’s pushback against this crazy injecting nonsense will save more lives than the injecting rooms ever will.
The Richmond injecting room hides behind the myth that it saves lives,
https://www.drugfree.org.au/images/pdf-files/library/Injecting_Rooms/Over-representation_of_overdose_Melbourne_MSIR.pdf
Drug deaths researched after 18 months of operation are based on empirical data available from the Coroners Court.
That the Richmond facility saves lives has never been confirmed, but what has been confirmed is there are a more significant number of deaths in a community serviced by an injecting room than without, and Richmond is no different.
The facility’s claims are no more substantial than misleading perceptions, but proper research disproves the claims that injecting Rooms saves lives.
Addicts regularly use the facility to experiment with higher dosages or different drugs, knowing that if it goes pear-shaped, the facility will resuscitate them.
Those incidents cannot be counted as positive results by the facility as the injecting room facilitates the practice. Without the room, the addicts are less likely to experiment as the risk is well known to them.
Notably, the Premier has announced that the Yooralla Building in Flinders Street will now be developed into a wraparound service dealing with the health and well-being of not only addicts but also other socially marginalised in the City of Melbourne.
This is not dissimilar to the drug strategies published by the CAA over many years.
As laudable as this is, we caution the Premier that the Harm Minimisation brigade, which has hijacked the principle, must be kept from this initiative; otherwise, it will become a de facto Injecting room by stealth.
These proponents are the enemies of addicts and the community trying to normalise the use of illicit drugs without any effort to help addicts get clean and regain their health.
Now that the Premier has taken this step, we must now turn our attention to Richmond and look to close this facility that promotes and facilitates drug use.
All of the rationales applied to the rejection of the city room are multiples of 10, the quantum of the negative aspects of the Richmond facility that must be closed or be converted to follow the Yooralla model.
Helping addicts and users, not promoting and facilitating their addiction, is the only humane way to go.
It has also amazed us that in this litigious society, an addict has not taken action against the State for the injecting rooms encouraging their drug use.
The Government must now move to close or repurpose Richmond or be accused of applying double standards.
The CAA has long expressed concern and offered alternatives to Injecting Rooms; below is a selection of our submissions published on our website:
The long-awaited report by former Police Commissioner Ken Lay into the possible location of another Safe injecting room for the CBD is now moot, having not seen the light of day.
There is now overwhelming evidence that the purpose of the facility, Called MSIR, to care for drug addicts has failed, and more addicts die as a result of the existence and function of the facility than happens without it.
An eighteen-month analysis of the MSIR overdose rates makes for a compelling read and reality check.
Not only is the facility an abject failure operationally, but the community impact has failed to be considered, and many of the locals and residents have been forced to live in a twilight of fear. Their crime is that they are unfortunate enough to happen to live in an area where the Government has placed the MSIR.
The two reasons alone that should force the Government to close the facility are:
MSIR failure to perform its intended function. Intended to reduce the death rate of addicts, the MSIR overdose rates are 23.5/1000 or 102 times higher than the Sydney Medically Supervised Injecting Centre (MSIC); the MSIR doesn’t work and must be immediately closed to save the lives of addicts.
Yes, you guessed it; the MSIR does not save lives and has not reduced the death rate of addicts but increased it. Not to mention providing the drug trade with a focal point for trading akin to a market.
2. The suffering inflicted on the residents is beyond comprehension for a failed social experiment. The MSIR is a magnet and has become the epicentre of the illicit street drug trade in Victoria, with addicts all over the state travelling to the MSIR not necessarily to use the facility but to access the rampant drug trade.
The addicts, having driven to the site to access drugs, do not drive home sober but pull up not far from the MSIR to consume their purchase before heading back from where they came. Metaphorically enjoying the trip.
That many of them drive to and from should be of enormous concern for the wider safety of the State.
The horror that the residents must endure is best illustrated by their experiences on March 6, 2024.
What long-term damage is caused to those 12-year-olds as drug apologists work to normalise Drug addiction? There are constant and terrifying stories that have become so regular the government dismisses them as a small number of disgruntled anti-drug locals intent on discrediting social advancement.
The objections to the injecting room concept are based in fact and will eventually force a rethink by the Government.
Let’s hope it is done before a local ends up the same way, as many of the addicts who use the facility – dead.
Or perhaps worse, there is an upsurge in young people being hooked on drugs because that behaviour is what they have grown up within a neighbourhood where the scourge has been normalised by the government.
The MSIR must be closed now; enough damage has been wrought, and there are alternatives.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
‘Ill-informed’
Drug deaths researched after 18 months of operation are based on empirical data available from the Coroners Court.
That the Richmond facility saves lives has never been confirmed, but what has been confirmed is there are a more significant number of deaths in a community serviced by an injecting room than without, and Richmond is no different.
The facility’s claims are no more substantial than misleading perceptions, but proper research disproves the claims that injecting Rooms saves lives.
Addicts regularly use the facility to experiment with higher dosages or different drugs, knowing that if it goes pear-shaped, the facility will resuscitate them.
Those incidents cannot be counted as positive results by the facility as the injecting room facilitates the practice. Without the room, the addicts are less likely to experiment as the risk is well known to them.
Notably, the Premier has announced that the Yooralla Building in Flinders Street will now be developed into a wraparound service dealing with the health and well-being of not only addicts but also other socially marginalised in the City of Melbourne.
This is not dissimilar to the drug strategies published by the CAA over many years.
As laudable as this is, we caution the Premier that the Harm Minimisation brigade, which has hijacked the principle, must be kept from this initiative; otherwise, it will become a de facto Injecting room by stealth.
These proponents are the enemies of addicts and the community trying to normalise the use of illicit drugs without any effort to help addicts get clean and regain their health.
Now that the Premier has taken this step, we must now turn our attention to Richmond and look to close this facility that promotes and facilitates drug use.
All of the rationales applied to the rejection of the city room are multiples of 10, the quantum of the negative aspects of the Richmond facility that must be closed or be converted to follow the Yooralla model.
Helping addicts and users, not promoting and facilitating their addiction, is the only humane way to go.
It has also amazed us that in this litigious society, an addict has not taken action against the State for the injecting rooms encouraging their drug use.
The Government must now move to close or repurpose Richmond or be accused of applying double standards.
The CAA has long expressed concern and offered alternatives to Injecting Rooms; below is a selection of our submissions published on our website:
