I've been thinking about this post for some time; in actual fact ever since Mike told me that the blog was getting a bit boring a few weeks ago. So just for you my son, I deliver some thoughts around two of your favorite topics, politics and society, and a specific interaction between them
For the political portion I choose as my subject your all time hero, none other than Mr Stephen Harper! And for the related social issue I pick one of my favorites; drug addiction in western society.
The focus of my thoughts is a recent Supreme Court of Canada ruling regarding a safe injection facility in the downtown east side of Vancouver BC. That particularr area of Vancouver is considerd one of the worst examples of Canadas injection drug epidemic. In very simple terms, Insite, as it is known, is a place where drug users can not be prosecuted for injecting themselves with their own drugs. It is a legalized, supervised injection site, and the only one of it's kind in North America. Besides providing safe injection the facility's primary focus is on getting people into treatment, and in fact functions as a referral service. It also provides basic health care for its "users"!
The court unanimously told the federal government to go blow in their attempts to shut it down. The entire issue only arrived at the Supreme Court in the first place because the federal govermnent chose to appeal all lower court decisions which had already told them to go blow!
The facility has at various times been supported by most local and provinical politiicans, and even publicly by a chief of police. Here's why. There is conclusive evidence that the facility:
Has increased referrals to health and social programs.
Has reduced overdose fatalities
Has reduced the transmission of blood-borne infections like HIV and Hepatitis C
Has reduced injection-related infections
Has improved public order
Further to those positive aspects, the Supreme Court's ruling contained the following statement issued by chief justice Beverly McLachlin:
"Insite saves lives. Its benefits have been proven. There has been no discernable negative impact on the public safety and health objectives of Canada during its eight years of operation."
At this point in my post I was going to make an objective supporting argument for this project but I decided to let you form your own opinion. The only thing I wish to do is give you this impassioned statement, something I believe it in my heart and in my soul.
"Ninety nine percent of all hard core drug users do not want to be addicts! They do not want to be sick! They do not want their hair to fall out, their teeth to rot, their veins to collapse and their bones to become brittle. They do not want to lie and steal, nor do they want to beg or prostitute themselves. They don't want to starve to death and they don't want to kill themselves or others.. They want to have a chance to get better. Insite at least keeps a few of them alive a bit longer in order that they even have a chance. Drug addicts are no different than the chronic smoker with lung cancer, the overweight person with diabetes, the underweight person with anorexia, the alcoholic with liver disease, or the "supersize it" guy with heart disease. "
Now you may ask how Michaels buddy comes into all this other then just being the head of the aforementioned federal government? Well let me tell you. His party has for several years been trying to no avail to shut the place down. The reason thay have not been able to do so, is because it has way too much support from provincial politicians and by the people of Vancouver. A poll suggest that approximately 75% of Vancouverites support the facility. Why then do you suppose that Mr Harper and his cronie Mr Clement (Federal Minsister of Health), wish to shut it down? For me Mr Harpers comment in response to the Supreme Court ruling says it all and I quote, "Yes, we're disappointed. We have a different agenda"
I'll tell you what Mr Harper's agenda is. I think it is undeniable! He chooses to disregard all of the evidence because his agenda is not the health and safety of Canadians, his agenda is re-election!!!
In closing I give you this. Whatever you may think of the whole concept that Insite represents it seems to me that any decisions around it should be based solely on the medical and social evidence, not on politics and not on social stigma.
I wonder what Mr Harpers stance would be on the London Regional Cancer Program if he thought it would get him a few votes to shut it down?
7.3 km run, 35 mins
"If Ottawa giveth, then Ottawa can taketh away."---Stephen Harper
Love
Peter
What world do you live in man? I would suggest to you that the primary agenda of any elected official is re-election! I think this is partially a function of our political system, and the voting public falls for it over and over again. Sorry to be so negative about this, but I think you are dreaming if you think it will be different in the near future. Obviously, Insite has proven it's worth, but that has nothing to do with political decisions. I also believe this political disease runs across ALL party lines, and MOST politicians, not just Mikes favourite. It has been demonstrated over and over by leaders of all the parties. What do you think Mike?
ReplyDeleteLove Old John
What I don't understand is how the voting public can believe the lines we're fed during election campaigns in spite of the actions taken while in power. I agree that there aren't a whole lot of politicians without "the disease", but do you have a better option? If you do I'd love to hear about it. I love that the supreme court told Mr Harper to go blow. They had the science and the numbers behind them and they held their ground and in doing so managed to care for some people who deeply needed it.
ReplyDeleteThis is just yet another example of Stephen Harper disregarding the evidence and ignoring all credible people on the matter.
ReplyDeleteHe is doing the exact same thing in trying to push through his disastrous crime bill, with it's punitive, fill-the-prisons approach, that will cost an enormous amount of money and has proven to be very ineffective.