Supervised consumption sites (SCS) save countless lives. Despite claims from the Conservatives, closing SCSs will not eradicate drug-related crime — it will force drug users into vulnerable positions and ultimately cause preventable deaths.
According to the Government of Canada website, SCSs “provide a safe, clean space for people to bring their own drugs to use in the presence of trained staff.”
The sites were established to not only protect people from accidental overdoses but also to connect them to several social services to acquire housing, employment opportunities, food assistance, healthcare and addiction treatment.
SCSs also help communities by providing clean drug-use equipment to avoid the spread of infectious diseases, collecting the used equipment to dispose of it safely and keeping people using drugs in a medical environment to reduce calls to emergency healthcare workers.
On many occasions, the Progressive Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre and Premier Doug Ford have publicly opposed SCSs, painting the sites and other harm reduction services as enabling drug use and threatening communities.
The Conservative Party’s radical characterisation of SCSs ramped up after a province-wide ban on the sites within 200 metres of childcare facilities, causing 10 out of 23 mandated to close by March 2025.
Although the ban is justified and shows an error on behalf of the geographical execution of SCSs, the Conservatives’ comments revolve more around encouraging the public to fear these sites regardless of their location, even with Poilievre going so far as saying SCSs “endanger the public.”
Ford called SCSs “the worst thing that could ever happen to a community,” saying they are an example of “a failed policy.”
Poilievre shared this sentiment, calling the sites “drug dens” and saying that if he and the Conservative Party win the next election, they will defund SCSs and thus plan to close them.
Their comments show a clear lack of care towards the dangers — and deaths — that will be brought upon people with addictions if the Conservatives get the chance to eradicate SCSs.
Since the mandate is causing almost half of all SCSs in Ontario to close, the provincial government is investing $378 million into a new initiative to battle addiction.
Ontario plans to open 19 Homelessness and Addiction Recovery Treatment (HART) Hubs that provide many of the same mental and physical health services that SCSs do, plus shelter beds, showers and food.
The only thing HART Hubs lack is supervised consumption services. Although the new replacement for SCSs provide several useful services in one place, the absence of medically supervised consumption areas and clean drug equipment pushes people with addictions back into unsafe — and potentially life-threatening — positions.
The most disturbing part about Ontario’s decision to slowly eradicate SCSs is that statistics show that the sites are overwhelmingly successful in reducing accidental overdose deaths.
In a report from The Lancet Public Health Journal, Rammohan et al. found that mortality rates from overdoses “decreased significantly” in neighbourhoods that had SCSs.
The provincial government’s press release also cited increased crime rates and drug trafficking as reasoning for developing a new initiative absent of SCSs, but many harm reduction workers say that the government is making the wrong moves towards drug crime.
In a CBC News report, harm reduction expert Diana Chan McNally says that the decision to limit access to supervised consumption services will not only be a “deadly mistake,” but it will increase public drug use and will not eradicate drug-related crime.
“People aren’t going to disappear immediately,” said Chan McNally. She says people will see “more drug use actually outside and in their communities” and “thousands of people actually dying as a result.”
The closure of several SCSs is so life-threatening that it prompted the Canadian Public Health Association (CPHA) to share a media release urging the government to reconsider their actions.
The scathing title of the release, “dead people don’t need recovery beds,” powerfully sums up the CPHA’s warnings.
In the release, CPHA’s executive director Ian Culbert says the closure of 10 SCSs will pose threats immediately.
“Supervised consumption sites are not only places of safety for users but also serve as crucial points of contact for those seeking to enter treatment,” said Culbert. “The removal of these sites could push people back into unsafe, public spaces, increasing the likelihood of needle-sharing, public drug use and exposure to toxic substances.”
Culbert finished his statement by responding to the fear-mongering tactics and villainization of people with addictions used by those trying to eradicate SCSs, saying “the claims of threats to public safety are a symptom of the lack of appropriately funded health, mental health, social and housing services in the Province of Ontario.”
Culbert’s sentiment fully encapsulates the nuanced nature of the conversation surrounding drug crime. The Conservatives are painting SCSs to be at the centre of a local drug crime, teaching citizens to fear vulnerable groups and attempting to push away those that need these centres the most.
All of the things Poilievre and Ford are warning citizens of, like violent crime, theft and drug trafficking, are born out of Ontario’s deteriorating social services, which cause the issues Culbert mentioned — issues that are apparently not worth the Conservatives’ funding.
In reality, the PC Party has been reluctant to put effort and money into mending the social services that would help decrease the severity and consequences of the issues causing an influx of drug addiction and crime.
Getting rid of SCSs and replacing them with less effective — and more socially acceptable — treatment centers will not save communities from drug crime. It will not “save” those with addictions from suffering.
In fact, the more communities lose SCSs, the more pain will be inflicted upon people with drug addictions. The several political actors working against SCSs are trying to mask the consequences of the social issues they refuse to work towards solving.
No matter how many progressive projects the government makes to try to cover up the fact that they will not deal with the social issues contributing to the drug crisis, blood will always be in the hands of the people who work to take away supervised consumption services from those whose lives depend on them.