Insite allowed to stay open

VANCOUVER (NEWS1130) – It’s a celebration of historic proportions after years of fighting fierce opposition which included the federal government.

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled Vancouver’s supervised injection site, Insite, can stay open. Outside the facility on East Hastings, a crowd of several hundred supporters roared in a simultaneous cheer when the decision was handed down. It was broadcast live on a big TV set up on the sidewalk.

The crowd is thrilled with the high court’s decision.

“This is a really positive, fantastic day for public health in Canada,” says Vancouver City Councillor Kerry Jang. “Insite is really the very first rung to getting people off the street. These are the most desperate folks, and this is the only way they’re going to get health care.”

The crowd comprises of more than just politicians and interest groups; there are addicts, nurses, and neighbours who call the Downtown Eastside home.

“Just knowing that people have somewhere to be safe, it makes the neighbourhood better, healthier, and more inclusive for everyone,” says one woman.

“I’m supportive of the whole concept,” a man tells us. “It’s healthy for entire communities and hopefully, this sets a precedent for other sites like this to be set up.”

One man wiped away tears of relief, describing this as the heart of harm-reduction, calling it a new beginning for Insite.

Federal government reaction and notwithstanding clause

Federal Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq says the feds will comply with the ruling but aren’t backing down from their stance.

“We believe that they system should be focused on preventing people from becoming drug addicts,” she says. “A key pillar of the national anti-drug strategy is prevention and treatment for those with drug dependency.”

Beyond that, she says lawyers for the federal government still need to review the decision. Still, there is one way the Conservative governnment could get around the Supreme Court of Canada ruling.

Doug McArthur with SFU’s Political Science Department says the Tories could enact the notwithstanding clause but it would be dangerous.

“It would be pretty tough for them and I think they’d get their feet in the glue pretty badly,” he tells News1130. “I think they’ll anticipate that and not likely go near it.”

McArthur adds using the notwithstanding clause in this case would come across as too extreme.

Insite operators thrilled

Mark Townsend with the Portland Hotel Society, which operates Insite, spoke live on News1130 moments after the decision was handed down.

He’s glad the dispute is finally over.

“For decades, we’ve had a silly game over this tiny, little thing and we could do much better,” he says. “We could do much better for the addicts who suffer… and we can do much better as a society.”

Townsend calls it a victory for healthcare. “Hundreds of people said, ‘Be kind and let this thing exist because it can save lives.’ Because of that, people can get to detox and there’s a chance rather than just treating people like animals. So, it’s really amazing that the Supreme Court supported that decision.”

Dr. Thomas Kerr is with the BC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, which is in charge of evaluating how effective Insite has been. He says the evidence is clear: Public order has been improved and HIV infections and overdose deaths have been prevented.

“If we were to close this facility, it would be reasonable to expect that we would see problems with public disorder increase,” he says. “There would be more HIV infections than could otherwise be prevented, and lives would be lost due to overdose.”

He feels where there is a medical need, other Canadians should have access to supervised injection sites.

Can the federal government go further in the courts?

Opponents of Insite are at the end of the road, legally. News1130 Legal Analyst Michael Shapray says the fight is over for the federal government in the courts.

“This appears to be a very strongly-worded decision, ordering the minister to grant the exemption. It’s a unanimous court; they all have come down and said the issue is such that there is no real discretion on this issue for the minister. The exemption must be granted.”

Can Parliament come back with anything at all against Insite? “It wouldn’t appear to [be able to],” Shapray says. “They seem to say that there would be no Section 1 justification or limitation for it.”

“If parliament tried to legislate away from the ability to have this, it would seem to be that the courts would not approve of that at this stage. It would be hard to see how Parliament could get around it. Though, it should be noted that this decision is quite contrary to the stance that the government’s taking in their new crime bill with respect to drugs and law and order versus viewing anything as a health issue at all.”

Criminologist hopes this ends controversy

An local criminologist calls today a very satisfying day that could prompt more health initiatives to proceed in the future.

“After the crime bill and all of the relatively crazy things the Harper government have been doing in respect to illegal drug use… to see the Supreme Court of Canada step up is what is preeminent here,” says SFU’s Neil Boyd.

He hopes this will end the controversy.

“The Conservatives really don’t have any traction with this and I would suspect that their efforts would probably be put in to trying to stop these facilities from popping up elsewhere.”

Boyd believes Insite has had a lot of research proving its effectiveness and believes the same thing could be done with other initiatives – perhaps with handing out crack pipes on the Downtown Eastside.