The Ontario government is essentially turning its back on harm reduction measures and going all-in on addiction recovery.
Closing supervised consumption sites is politically savvy because they have become an easy scapegoat.
But it is doubtful that the latest moves will make a significant impact on the overlapping crises that are battering cities and towns both big and small: Toxic drugs, untreated mental illness, homelessness and the public disorder that flows from these social policy failures.
On Tuesday, Ontario Health Minister Sylvia Jones announced that consumption and treatment sites located within 200 metres of schools and child care centres would have to close by March 31, 2025.
This is not unreasonable. Drug consumption sites shouldn’t be near educational facilities, not any more than bars, cannabis stores, liquor stores, vape shops or sex shops.
Ten of the province’s 23 sites will close, and they won’t be allowed to reopen elsewhere. In other words, the proximity to schools/daycares business is just a ruse.
Ontario is also prohibiting municipalities and organizations from opening new sites, from participating in safer supply initiatives, or requesting decriminalization exemptions from the federal government.
Instead, Ontario has vowed to open 19 “homelessness and addiction recovery treatment (HART) hubs” and will pressure the remaining consumption sites to morph into HART hubs.
These hubs will provide supportive housing units (375 places for the province), an unknown number of addiction and recovery beds, mental health services, showers and food, and the overdose reversal drug naloxone. But they will not feature supervised consumption rooms, nor will they even provide clean needles.
Most of these initiatives are great, but getting people into treatment is easier said than done. Keeping them alive in the meantime has to be part of the equation.
Governments are responding to growing public anger about public disorder – and they should. Citizens are increasingly feeling disenfranchised by burgeoning encampments on public streets and in public parks; they are sickened by open drug use, flagrant criminality, and fearful for their safety.
This sort of chaos is often quite apparent near supervised consumption facilities. These sites haven’t always been good neighbours, so they’re an easy target.
But as much as some measures may make us uncomfortable, harm reduction is effective. These sites have a very limited goal: To keep people alive a little longer in the hope they will seek treatment. They’re not a panacea.
Ending harm reduction measures like supervised consumption, access to safer supply, decriminalization of drug possession, and access to clean needles is not going to end the triple crisis that so many cities and towns are living through today. Homelessness, toxic drugs and untreated mental illness also exist in municipalities that don’t have supervised consumption sites, too.
According to the Association of Ontario Municipalities, there are at least 1,400 homeless encampments in the province. They aren’t going to disappear by shutting down 10 (or 23) supervised consumption sites. The streets aren’t going to be magically cleaner and safer. And drug users aren’t going to suddenly flock to treatment.
Whether governments like to admit it or not, harm reduction works. According to Health Canada, safe consumption sites across the country reported 55,693 on-site non-fatal overdoses between January, 2017, and January, 2024 – and not a single death.
Close those facilities, and those overdoses happen on the streets, in alleys, in rooming houses – placing a greater strain on paramedics, police and hospitals. There will, without a doubt, be more toxic drug deaths. And we certainly don’t need more. Since 2016, there have been more than 44,000 opioid-related deaths in Canada.
The clientele of supervised consumption sites are also those most likely to seek addiction treatment. They have their act together much more so than their fellow drug users passed out on sidewalks.
If your goal is to get more people into rehab and treatment, then closing supervised consumption sites is cutting off your nose to spite your face.
It gets tiresome to repeat, but complex problems require complex solutions. We need to do a bit of everything: Prevention, harm reduction, addiction treatment, and law enforcement.
We also need to take seriously the growing ire of the public. We have been far too tolerant of the public disorder that stems from addiction, untreated mental illness and homelessness.
Our almost pathological level of tolerance has not served us well. But cleaning up our mess won’t be easy. And taking out our frustrations on supervised consumption sites, which are more a solution than a problem, won’t get us there any faster.