Watch on video – Canada’s Drug Policies are Failing
It’s no secret that Canada’s drug policies have been an abysmal failure. In fact, we’re doing so badly that U.S. President Donald Trump is threatening 25% tariffs on all Canadian goods unless we can secure our border to stem the flow of deadly fentanyl from Canada into the U.S.
Since 2016, more than 50,000 Canadians have died from opioid drug overdoses and the threat to our economy, along with the continued, unrelenting increase in deaths from opioid drug use clearly demonstrate that we should be searching for a new way of dealing with drugs and helping addicts.
Thus far, the primary Canadian response has been to focus on safer supply, safe injection/supervised consumption sites and decriminalization policies. That is, give them clean drugs, a safe place to inject or obtain drugs and legalize the drug trade so users can’t be accused of breaking the law. They all stem from a policy called Harm Reduction but, as Dr. Phil would say, “How’s that working for ya?”
Short answer: It isn’t.
There were more than 2,800 drug-related deaths (eight per day) in 2016 when we began to focus public policies on the opioid epidemic. Eight years later, in 2024, that number has almost trips to more than 8,000 – an average of 22 deaths per day.
Ethics committees would have long ago shut down any other medical experiment with such deadly results. Harm reduction policies have clearly failed.
In contrast, Alberta has focussed its drug policies on treatment and recovery. So, it was good news when it recently reported that opioid overdose deaths were down by a whopping 38 per cent from 2023 to 2024 – a decrease like that has never been reported in any other region across North America.
Alberta’s divergent approach to the opioid epidemic includes giving users immediate medical assistance in the form of drugs that mimic the impact of opioids on the brain but do so without producing a sense of euphoria or the resultant cravings.
For long-term solutions, Alberta is building a network of 11 Recovery Communities, each comprised of 50 to 100 beds. There, addicts are given a place to live; they undergo intense treatments and are offered life-changing opportunities and job training, so they won’t have to go back to the streets. They can stay in these facilities for up to one year – long enough to instill sustainable changes, and it is all courtesy of the Alberta government.
It remains to be seen if the so-called “Alberta Model” can maintain sustained drops in overdose deaths over the next few years. But other jurisdictions would be wise to consider it a valid option.
A recent study has shown that as much as 25 per cent of the safer supply opioids that are given to addicts (so they don’t purchase street drugs) are being diverted to the black market. That is, addicts are selling taxpayer funded opioids to obtain cash to purchase drugs (such as fentanyl) that provide a better high.
Further, it has been reported that primary buyers of these safer supply opioids are kids from nearby schools who are eager to experiment. In other words, safer supply is creating the next generation of drug users.
For that reason, the Ontario government has passed legislation to shut down nine of its supervised consumption sites that are currently operating within 200 metres of a school or daycare. Further, perhaps with a nod to Alberta, it is turning these sites into “homelessness and addiction recovery treatment (HART) hubs.” The province has a plan for as many as 19 treatment hubs and 375 supportive housing units.
But this positive transition now faces a constitutional challenge from the operator/advocate of a Toronto overdose prevention site. The legal claim? That shutting down safe consumption sites in favour of treatment sites discriminates against individuals with “substance use disabilities.”
If addiction is a health issue, as drug advocates constantly remind us, how can you possibly claim that treatment is discriminatory?
Time will tell what policies offer the best hope to individuals and our broader society.
Susan Martinuk is a Senior Fellow with the Frontier Centre for Public Policy and author of Patients at Risk: Exposing Canada’s Health-care Crisis.
