There was a time when Bonnie Henry, B.C.’s Provincial Health Officer, could seemingly do no wrong. At least in the eyes of the provincial NDP government.
During the pandemic, Dr. Henry called the shots, in terms of what the public was allowed to do. Former NDP premier John Horgan constantly deferred to her knowledge and expertise. We had to trust and believe the science, Mr. Horgan would signal, in what would become something of a mantra.
And he had the full support of his cabinet, including his would-be heir, now-Premier David Eby. He, too, was one who wouldn’t question the science when it came to public-health issues, no doubt a view bolstered by the fact that his spouse is a family physician.
But it’s a funny thing about politicians and their views – they are sometimes subject to the whims of the populace.
And so it was last week when we saw Dr. Henry make public an 88-page report calling for the B.C. government to allow non-prescription access to unregulated drugs, known as safer supply. It was a decision made with input from an array of the province’s top addiction experts, after long and serious study. But no sooner was Dr. Henry finished her news conference, however, when the provincial government rendered its verdict: No.
”This is a topic we do not agree on,” said Jennifer Whiteside, the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions. For good measure, Mr. Eby reinforced that position, telling reporters the next day there was a “0-per-cent chance,” the government would approve making alternatives to opioids and other street drugs available without prescription.
Mr. Eby has a nose for detecting the winds of change in society. When it comes to the drug crisis, he has already been burned by the province’s experiment with decriminalization. The public backlash to people shooting up in public places was fierce. In response, the Premier asked Ottawa to effectively recriminalize the possession and use of illicit drugs in places such as hospitals and parks, and other public areas where people congregate.
Despite proponents like Dr. Henry saying decriminalization is a crucial piece of any effective drug and addiction strategy, when it comes to public perception, Mr. Eby has no choice. On this issue, in many ways, the public is now calling the shots.
It is most certainly why federal Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has taken a hard stance against safe consumption sites – or what he calls “drug dens.” He said he would pull funding from these centres, inevitably forcing some to close.
Mr. Poilievre is tapping into a burgeoning sentiment that measures like supervised injection sites aren’t working – we have more opioid-related deaths than ever. In fact, more than 44,000 since 2016. The public doesn’t like the types of crowds that consumption sites tend to attract, either.
It doesn’t matter that it’s an undisputed fact that these sites save lives. In fact, they’ve saved thousands since they were introduced in Canada decades ago. Studies have shown that neighbourhoods in Toronto that have supervised consumption sites, for instance, have seen dramatic decreases in drug fatalities. That doesn’t matter. To Mr. Poilievre, votes do. And when it comes to drug policy in Canada, the public is getting a louder voice.
It’s not a coincidence that both Mr. Poilievre and Mr. Eby have elections on their mind. Mr. Eby goes to the polls in October and the NDP’s central challenger is the provincial Conservative Party, which has seen an unprecedented ascension in the public opinion polls. When it comes to drug policy, the NDP is vulnerable to criticism by those same Conservatives – that the government went too far in its desire to abide by the advice of addiction experts, including Dr. Henry.
There is the academic view of our illicit drug emergency and the ways to address the problem, and then there is the real-world street view. And in advance of an election, it’s the real-world street view (see: the public) that politicians tend to respect more. Otherwise, they would be out of a job (and sometimes they still are anyway).
As someone who has written enough columns on drug policy in Canada to fill a few books, I must say I’m torn. I understand the expert view – I get why educated opinion says we must get deadly street drugs out of the hands of addicts and offer them a safer, less fatal alternative.
But I also see why the public is fed up with having to step over addicts shooting up on their downtown streets. There has to be a meet-in-the-middle option, one that respects expertise while also honouring the public’s view of it all.
Maybe that’s impossible.