On this edition of Journal; an opportunity to look back at British Columbia’s failed experiment of decriminalization – and look forward to what might come next.

Dr. Julian Somers, a clinical psychologist and distinguished professor at Simon Fraser University, was one of the first voices to speak up about the perils of decriminalization and safe supply of drugs when these initiatives were first announced, and the powers-that-be didn’t like that – or him. At one point, he was told to destroy his report and not rock the boat.

Initially, we were all told that the goal of these policies was to destigmatize drug addicts and prevent overdose deaths. But as the Minister of Health, Minister Osborne, has now admitted, it didn’t work. What it did do, however, was lead to increased public use of drugs on our streets and in our neighbourhoods, raising disorder and public safety concerns – an unintended consequence that should have been anticipated.

So, now we are moving on. To what, you might ask? And how?

Is there a consensus on first steps? I would suggest one of the most important changes that must happen is a sea change in attitude away from just supplying drugs to addicts, to the consideration of other strategies for care or recovery.

For sure, it will involve more treatment beds, more available social services for support, and – in some severe cases – involuntary care models. But are we ready to even have this conversation?

Dr. Somers believes that underpinning any future success must be data. “We need to state how our interventions are expected to result in improvements and how we’re going to measure progress.”

---

Carole Taylor's Journal is a public affairs dialogue that digs deep into the most pressing issues of our times. For more, see our website at http://www.caroletaylorsjournal.ca.

ctj064 #decriminalization #britishcolumbia #bcpoli

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On this edition of Journal, we look at the sad Vancouver tale of the rise and fall of Woodward’s on Hastings Street.

Built in 1903, the Woodward’s building was the place to be in Vancouver – a one-stop department store famous for its renowned food floor. Glory days.

But few things stay the same forever. The Woodward's decline began in the 1960s as both shopping patterns and Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside began to change. Many shoppers chose the shiny new suburban malls rather than the deteriorating downtown location. The losses at Woodward’s began to mount company-wide until they declared bankruptcy in 1993, 90 years after its much-celebrated opening on Hastings Street.

But that wasn’t the end of the Woodward’s story. The heritage building remained empty until the city bought it in 2001, with grand visions of a revitalized anchor for the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver, providing homes and services for the community. This project was controversial from the outset, with some fighting against this so-called gentrification, while others worried that too much social housing in one project would not work.

But reopen it did, in 2009 with much fanfare about the anchor tenants supporting the redevelopment: Nesters Market, TD Bank, London Drugs, J.J. Bean, among others. But that was then and this is now: TD bank has closed its doors, J.J. Bean is gone and now London Drugs has announced its imminent closure.

The reasons are all similar – increased crime and disorder on the streets, worry about safety for staff and customers, and financial losses.

Clint Mahlman, CEO of London Drugs, joins me to talk about this difficult decision.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On this edition of Journal: another hitch in the plan for a smooth path to reconciliation in British Columbia.

First, we had the BC government’s introduction of the Land Act, which unsettled many of its assertions of co-management with First Nations of all the Crown land in the province. The Act was withdrawn, but not before some name-calling.

But then in a splashy press conference, Premier Eby announced the granting of aboriginal title to Haida Gwaii. When people of all stripes and professions raised questions about what that would mean for private property owners, the Premier announced again and again it would not affect private property.

And then, boom – there was the court decision granting aboriginal title over land in Richmond to the Cowichan, with the Judge suggesting – despite what had been asserted by Premier Eby – there were issues around private property rights.

Finally, last month in another twist on this reconciliation journey, a different judge in a separate case found that BC’s mineral claims regime, fundamental to our hoped for resurgence in mining, is inconsistent with the province’s own declared law, DRIPA – the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act – because mining claims were made before receiving free, prior, and informed consent from First Nations.

With all of this cumulative confusion and uncertainty, is it any wonder that support for reconciliation has fallen in recent polls?

Joining me to make sense of all this is Thomas Isaac. As one of our country’s leading experts on aboriginal title and the law, he has concerns about what he is seeing in BC.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.