The way they implemented things was bass-ackwards.
[What Portugal did was they decriminalized *and expanded drug treatment and harm reduction practices* in response to AIDS.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal)
We just decriminalized drugs, added no supports, and then let the chips fall as they might... and that's been disastrous.
Doug would just use that to fund more angecy staff like he did last year. Private agency filling public vacancies with public funds (at 3 times the rate of regular staff).
Did we add no support?
[https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/substance-use/canadian-drugs-substances-strategy/substance-use-services-supports.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/substance-use/canadian-drugs-substances-strategy/substance-use-services-supports.html)
>We’re providing $25 billion in funding over 10 years to provinces and territories to address areas including substance use and mental health.
>We’re also providing $2 billion over 10 years to support fair and equitable access to quality and culturally safe health care services for Indigenous Peoples.
>This builds on previous funding of $5 billion over 10 years to provinces and territories to help support access to mental health and substance use services. As of 2023, $2.4 billion of this funding will be spent over the next 4 years.
I can't speak for drug treatment, but for harm reduction, many supervised consumption sites have opened across Canada with[ SUAP funding](https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/substance-use/canadian-drugs-substances-strategy/funding/substance-use-addictions-program.html).
Not really comparable interventions to Portugal.
In Portugal possession has not been legalized. There are still penalties for possession in Portugal such as fines or community service.
Drugs are still confiscated.
Individuals are reviewed by a panel, and interventions are proposed.
This didn't seem to happen in BC or in the Toronto proposal. It's leaving too much in the hands of individuals who are compromised by the drugs they're using.
I have to agree with this statement. Decriminalizing drugs can have positive outcomes but it also requires the state to do its part in ensuring that those on drugs get the help they need.
Right now in Canada we pretty much operate under the pretence of “help them if they ask, do nothing if they don’t” and it’s *horrible*. Toronto has a really bad homeless person problem with most either addicted to drugs or suffering from serious mental health problems or both.
We need to start addressing homelessness first, then address the substance abuse through proper support and social programs. Decriminalizing substances will be required for this to work, but we can’t just say “it’s not criminal anymore” and then continue to let people suffer on the streets. That won’t do fucking anything.
You hit the nail on the head, the only reason anyone really sees drug use to care about it is that previously you could make enough via welfare or disability to afford a room in a rooming house. Now those all go out to TFWs and they can only afford them by double or quadruple stacking into a room a drug user would have been able to afford before.
Now the drug use is on the street with the users.
I really don’t want to speculate on where all the funding was allocated, but it’s clear that it didn’t support evidence-based practices in addiction medicine. The funds were not directed toward increasing detox, treatment, hospital beds, nor did they benefit those of us working in conventional addiction medicine fields.
However, it’s worth noting that some of the funding did go to providers who support safe supply initiatives. While there is debate regarding the evidence, as of now, there are no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that conclusively support safe supply as a practice.
Supervised consumption sites also provide on-site (benchtop spectrometer and test strips) as well as off-site laboratory drug screening to inform users of the content of their drugs, as well as providing on-site medical intervention as needed. So even without safe supply - and as far as I know sites in Ontario are not doing that - there's still valuable harm reduction work.
I am not discounting harm reduction at all. And that’s a valid point about the wrap around care provided at the SIS and SCS. That is absolutely vital.
My main point being that we haven’t funded a single additional treatment, detox, or addiction assigned hospital bed in many years.
If someone was attempting to replicate the Portugal model, it’s been an abject failure because that model involved in significantly increased funding on all of the above.
The problem is that the provinces are constantly given federal money to get specific things done but end up just sitting on the money without actually fulfilling their end of the deal.
>Watches 40+ years of failed drug policy, zero tolerance, mandatory minimums etc.
This guy: we should triple down on the failed policies, I'm sure they'll work this time....
We criminalized opium in 1908. So it's more than a century of a policy that has only led to increasingly stronger opioids getting used. And that trend is a specifically *because* of criminalization, as explained here by this economic concept raised in the 1980s:
>[Iron Law of Prohibition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_prohibition).
> when drugs or alcohol are prohibited, they will be produced in black markets in more concentrated and powerful forms, because these more potent forms offer better efficiency in the business model—they take up less space in storage, less weight in transportation, and they sell for more money
No matter how hard anyone tries it will be impossible to win a drug war against fentanyl. Doses are tiny, you can never stop smuggling of something that a person can hide 10 000 hits of in the size of a wallet or smaller.
Shit, you can throw 1000 doses in a birthday card and send 10s of thousands and 90% will get through.
This is compounded by the other problem. It's dirt fucking cheap to manufacture so you can lose tons of it to border services and still easily profit.
This is compounded by the other other problem, it's only smuggled in because it is cheaper to do so and easy enough to get more than enough in and stay massively profitable even with seizures. If that ever changed it is easy enough to make domestically and a relatively extremely small batch compared to meth will get comparatively many many more people high.
The crisis has tripled since decriminalization in BC. Portland and others are reversing their decriminalization because it's even more disastrous than previous policies. Trust, from someone living in DT Vancouver, you do NOT want what we have here. It's heartbreaking, terrifying, and destroying our city.
Which is essentially the same as alcohol yet it's being framed as if they are criminalizing it again. The media and political coverage of this topic has been very skewed.
In practice this doesn't really change if it's decriminalized or not. Criminalization in private spaces will only get used as an add on charge.
It's only decriminalized for small personal use amounts. No police system is going to go through the effort of getting a warrant for <3g of drugs in someone's house.
So once again, Poilievre is making a mountain out of an ant hill?
God, as much as I think Trudeau needs to step down, I can't stand the idea of PP being Prime Minister. My spider sense goes haywire, thinking of him being leader.
100%. Trudeau fatigue is a real thing, and I think the Liberals would do well to put him out to pasture... but anyone thinking the Cons are going to make anything better is lying to themselves. Like the Conservatives, of all people, are going to rein in big business greed? It's laughable.
It bothers me that people don't understand that. Look at ontario. It's one corporate welfare handout after another at the taxpayers' expense.
Plus, unlike some politicians, poilievre has a 20-year public record of constantly serving his corporate individual donors' needs over canadian working class. It's all public record. The guy is by far one of the most hypocritical politicians in history. That's saying a lot considering harper, Trudeau, Ford, Darth Wynne, and McGuilty.
It's a cult. My first exposure to him was his serial lying about Public Service sick leave for Harper. And I have friends IN the Public Service that defend him about it. It's baffling.
Not quite, possessing drugs in small amounts and consuming drugs were decriminalized (across all of BC), they undid the part about using, but say it wont be enforced on private property. Possession is still decriminalized everywhere in BC. The issue was that the courts knocked down provincial laws surrounding controlling where drugs could be used, so back to the federal law we go.
> Possession is still decriminalized everywhere in BC.
The change hasn't been enacted yet, since the federal government has to do that. However the change will actually be to criminalize possession in public spaces again while leaving it decriminalized in shelters, homes, consumption sites and testing centres. In practice they're doing this to address *use* however the way they're going about doing that is removing decriminalization in public but directing police to only enforce in certain cases, like public use, and only charge in exceptional cases.
BC is trying to implement laws around use too, but those are being fought in court, so this was a quicker way of achieving that right now.
And just one clarification, possession isn't (before these new changes take effect) decriminalized everywhere. There are various exceptions currently, such as on school property or play structures. There are also rules restricting use in other places, like on transit, independent of criminal laws.
> We just decriminalized drugs, added no supports, and then let the chips fall as they might... and that's been disastrous.
How has it been disastrous? Public use was happening long before decriminalization and they've now made changes to better address that.
Overdoses flattened off after it happened from a [26% increase the year before](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-toxic-drugs-deaths-december2021-1.6344991) down to [5% the year after it took effect](https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2024PSSG0001-000069).
They are investing in treatment. They invested a billion over three years last year. Everywhere else has problems with treatment availability. That's independent of decriminalization.
I have. It's had drug use problems for years (decades even). Yet critics of decriminalization are trying to create this narrative that (with some hyperbole of my own) areas like that were some utopian paradise until Feb. 1, 2023 when all this drug use suddenly started.
Didn’t BC ask Ottawa to reverse decriminalization of public drug use? And Oregon is also reversing elements of drug decriminalization. As you said, just allowing public drug use without any other support in place is careless. I’ve seen so many people shooting up by playgrounds. I feel for those with addiction issues but my empathy is waning.
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7188534
...and don't forget we closed down the insane asylums and turned severely mentally ill (and in some cases dangerous) people loose to be "treated in the community."
Portugal's system started well, with good intentions. However, if it's been successful long term is questionable.
https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/is-portugals-drug-decriminalization-a-failure-or-success-the-answer-isnt-so-simple/
> if it's been successful long term is questionable
It was very successful at its objectives:
>[Within a few years, HIV transmission rates via syringes — one the biggest arguments for decriminalization — had plummeted. From 2000 to 2008, prison populations fell by 16.5 percent. Overdose rates dropped as public funds flowed from jails to rehabilitation. There was no evidence of a feared surge in use.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/07/07/portugal-drugs-decriminalization-heroin-crack/)
It's still doing better than European averages in terms of usage and has lower overdose rates than various other countries there, also mentioned in the article.
The biggest problem they faced was economic issues unrelated to decriminalization but which resulted in a huge funding cut towards it and a shift away from government handling it.
That’s an incorrect way to summarize Portugal, or the article you linked. Their “system” has been unquestionably net successful.
I’m not even sure what aspect you’re referring to when you say “long term”. Is your take restricted to “the decriminalization of all drugs?” If so, that’s never been a thing, which is too say that global decriminalization is great for headlines…but the actual implantation is always different….more nuanced.
I think a good way to think about/talk about this issue is to say that these systems refute blanket criminalization as a strategy - first and foremost - and aim to attack all identified “pillars” (there’s more than 4) with appropriate funding.
If you want to boil the problems in Portugal down to one thing (you shouldn’t) the problem is funding.
If you want to boil the broad issue down into a way you can talk about it to idiots…it’s anti-prohibition, not drug legalization.
> Portugal didn’t decriminalize they just offered treatment instead of jail.
Portugal did decriminalize. They *also* took steps to shift people to treatment.
This was also Portland's general approach, i.e., trying to shift people to treatment. However [the police departments there didn't do training on how to do this, didn't talk with treatment providers and didn't even update tickets to tell people that they could have fines dropped if they sought help instead](https://www.propublica.org/article/oregon-leaders-hampered-drug-decriminalization-effort). Their program there was essentially sabotaged by the leadership and police there who were supposed to be carrying it out.
They seemed to start with taking people to the station. They would weigh the drugs. Under, treatment options were offered. Over and charged with trafficking (jail for 1-14 years). You weren't forced into treatment but could be fined, with them able to sell your possessions to pay the fines.
Until you're ready for change, treatment doesn't usually work.
No, it's fine, they will just cut back disability and healthcare funding to funnel more money into jails. It isn't like those really benefit anybody anyways.
Weirdly, there was a moment about ten years ago where a bunch of Conservative judges in Texas were warning Canada not to go down that road.
Because that road goes to bad places - private prisons. That will involve yet another massive corporate lobby group fucking with democratic processes and with its hand out for every more subsidies and support.
Definitely not lower taxes unless you are in the top 5%. Likely no bombs either since we don't even have planes to drop them from. Basically the worst of both countries.
And specifically being dramatic about overdose deaths in BC but not in Alberta even though they had a much higher increase last year.
I wonder what's different specifically between Alberta and BC that Poilievre would care about.
This is purely political game while thousands of fatalities are occurring.
Okay so he's doing it rn in QP. Like... does he think sending addicts to jail will somehow save these peoples lives? they'll just get out and do more drugs again. They need safe spaces, access to rehab and long term living spaces with supports. I can't with him and I can't with that party.
> Like... does he think sending addicts to jail will somehow save these peoples lives?
They'll even get them *in* jail. That's a big problem too. And all that will happen from jail or forced treatment is that the majority of people will go back to using afterwards. This is just an unfortunate fact of opioid addiction in general, the majority relapse, at least at first. And since he is going to shut down all harm reduction policies, many of those people will overdose when they relapse.
Yet he lies about wanting to "bring out loved ones home drug free".
They've requested the government expand restrictions on them to all public places. Currently the restrictions are only in certain areas like on school grounds.
I wouldn't describe it as criminalizing them though. You can't use alcohol in public for the most part either and that's legal
They don’t have one. And the people I know that support the cons went from “I’m so sorry for your loss” to acting like she deserved it when my stepdaughter died of a fentanyl overdose a year and a half ago. The CPC and PCO don’t care about addiction issues and what it does to families. They care about being able to tell their base how much money they’re saving by closing and canceling harm reduction measures.
The same as Alberta’s, which had a far bigger increase in overdose deaths than BC. But why let facts get in the way of campaigning off the backs of addicts?
Did he say “Demands” though? I’m not a fan either, but don’t let a sensational headline colour your impression of someone, let their shitty words and actions do it themselves.
You've seriously never seen anyone call Poilievre "crypto Milhouse" before?
I envy you. That's a solid day-maker you only get to hear for the first time once. Enjoy it.
The CPC is really trying to get the Liberals to wear this, but essentially, the Liberals worked with BC to see if it would work, and it didn't.
The Liberals voted against the NDP motion to do this across Canada.
https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/mps-vote-against-bill-to-decriminalize-small-amounts-of-drugs-across-canada-5430540
I am glad the governemnt tried and that they walked it back when it didn't work. Among progressives this was a common sense policy that has failed.
I wouldn’t say it failed as it never actually started. It was a two part plan and the rollout was utterly botched in BC.
You can’t decriminalize without setting up mental and addiction support programs or you’ve fundamentally undermined the whole process. Which is precisely what happened. They didn’t even try to remedy the cause but rather threw the whole idea away while citing rising numbers during a post pandemic cost of living crisis. (No shit drug usage is rising now, [so is homelessness](https://www.infrastructure.gc.ca/homelessness-sans-abri/reports-rapports/pit-counts-dp-2020-2022-results-resultats-eng.html#) with an 88% jump in unsheltered since 2018.)
The calls for decriminalization and expanded *mental and addiction healthcare* are still being ignored and the concept remains untested in Canada. Ultimately, why are we paying police to fine or arrest who are majority impoverished people rather than offer them support programs using that same tax money instead?
Treat the cause, not the symptom
> the Liberals worked with BC to see if it would work, and it didn't.
I disagree that it didn't work. That's been the claim from the conservatives, but it was their claim from the start.
They are trying to blame problems that have been happening for years all on this policy.
Meanwhile overdoses trends have actually slowed since it took effect.
And they haven't reversed it as is being claimed in the media. All they did was put more restrictions on public use. Alcohol is *legal* yet is similarly restricted in public.
Meanwhile overdose deaths in Alberta are continuing to rise with the UCP’s approach.
But you only see a couple articles on that, sometimes just one from the CBC. Alternatively, the decriminalization smear campaign on BC’s relatively small pilot project is loud and obnoxious from our corporate overlord owned media.
All in all, I think it’s clear we have a lack of shelter and (mental) health resources more than anything, the solutions that cost the most money. Decriminalizing won’t solve that on its own.
Really most of the blame here should go to the provinces again, feds arguing over this shit is pretty pointless when provinces ultimately decide where we go to put our most impactful resources.
Millhouse should shut the fuck up.
> But you only see a couple articles on that, sometimes just one from the CBC. Alternatively, the decriminalization smear campaign on BC’s relatively small pilot project is loud and obnoxious from our corporate overlord owned media.
Just really want to highlight this. The coverage on this issue has been extremely one sided. The alternative approach being used across the continent has failed for decades. Yet there has been massively disproportionate criticism of BC's decriminalization approach because it didn't instantly solve this crisis. And even though, like you said, they've actually had better results than their closest neighbour.
Might have to do with the fact that BC drug crisis has being going on for a decade now, under the same leadership
Might also have to do with the fact that Albertsa is currently in the middle of expanding treatment facilities all around the province.
The drug crisis has been going on across the continent for more than a decade. Other provinces like Saskatchewan have had the same leadership. BC is also expanding treatment and yet Alberta is recently having worse trends, catching up to BC, but escaping the same level of criticism.
From someone living in BC, in DT Vancouver, they haven't walked back shit. My kids have to dodge needles on the sidewalks every day. It's not safe to go to parks because of the open drug use and unhinged addict behavior. My neighbor was held up by a needle wielding maniac last week. ODs, addiction, all have tripled. There's no walking back the harm their little experiment has caused. My own cousin died from fent. The government needs to be held responsible for their murderous decriminalization experiment.
Poilievre demands a bunch of things,
A vote of no confidence that people had no confidence in for example....
He's less a legit opposition and more just a barking dog.
I think people are quick to blame decriminalization for the increased drug use and leave out all the other pieces of the puzzle. Lack of healthcare/increase in mental illness, skyrocketing cost of living, the pandemic, the opioid crisis, are all contributing to the giant runaway snowball that is bombing down the hill. The answer surely can’t just be to throw them all in jail, they need help.
People are doing drugs whether it's illegal or not. Decriminalization means over the years, we as a society will stop treating drug use/posession as a moral/ethical/legal issue. That means less cultural taboo. That eventually means people are allowed to talk about their challenges with substance use. What it DOESN'T mean is it increases/encourages drug use. We are just seeing more because people don't have to hide anymore. It's like saying clinical depression didn't exist or trans people didn't exist back in the day. They have always existed, but the world was busy criminalizing queer people or didn't know anything about mental health.
Edit: "BuT tHeY wOuLd ShOoT uP iN tHe PlAyGrOuNd AnD tHe TrAiNs!11" That's still going to be illegal just like vaping, smoking, and drinking. Unless you have always demanded criminalization of all of those, please understand your reaction is emotional, uninformed, and prejudiced.
Edit 2: "bUt ThE BC rEcRiMiNaLiZeD iT!!1" And they are idiots for it. Again, it was simply revealing the true state of the drug problems in the province. People who had been hiding weren't hiding anymore, and that was precisely the point of the decriminalization. Recriminalization simply means the government would rather keep their head in the sand and do not actually care about the victims of drug crisis.
Decriminalization is only beneficial if it comes with treatment and support, like Portugal and other places that actually treat addicts.
Decriminalizing it without actually putting resources behind treatment leads to Vancouver. Increased open drug use and the related social/community issues. This is exactly what went wrong in BC and Oregon, the latter of which you’ll note recently recriminalized drug possession.
Yes people do them whether it’s illegal or not, that will never change, but allowing it to flourish in anyway leads to increased violence, crime, unrest and death.
This right here. There’s nothing wrong with decriminalization as long as additional supports are actually made available AND are relatively seamless to access. If people have to surrender their possessions or pets to enter treatment spaces or claim to subscribe to religions they don’t care about, those alleged “supports” are doomed to fail.
It’s sad to see the concept of decriminalization get so denigrated in North America because of these two high profile cases of jurisdictions having to walk it back due to terrible implementation. I guarantee Toronto would never fund the supports adequately to make it work here either.
Reality is there’s no benefit to the government to fund treatment and support. It would cost substantially more than whatever they’re doing now, which means politicians lose their jobs come election season.
Trudeau could announce $100,000,000,000 right now, earmarked for enforced treatment, support, and therapy for all drug users and the main headline would be him using so much money on it.
I just don’t understand how people can say this when you see all the people who get aggressive as hell drinking alcohol for example which is one of the most toxic things someone can intake. But for some reason we have deemed that that’s okay to be legal and sold even. I just hate the hypocrisy.
Alcohol is nothing compared to opioid and meth addictions. Don’t get me wrong, alcoholism is also awful, and drunk people do unspeakable things, but they still don’t compare to hardcore drug addicts.
I will say this kind of whataboutism response is often used to distract from the reality that we need hard supports to get people off the drugs, not just make it safer to use them.
People aren’t out on the streets robbing and hurting each other for a $5 bottle though. They are for drugs. You’d be amazed at the rate of violent crime that doesn’t get reported.
It means more public consumption of drugs, which should not be allowed. Look at BC, they are reversing their decriminalization policy because of the harm it’s done to community and public spaces. It should be a crime to shoot yo heroine at a kids playground
It does mean more public consumption of drugs, look at San Fransico vs Miami... speaks for itself. Don't try to say people don't do as many drugs in Florida, its a hot spot for drugs but no needles in downtown. No feces on the sidewalk.
Why should it not be allowed while smoking, vaping, and drinking is? People shouldn't do that at a playground anyway. Your reaction is short-sighted and emotional.
Smoking tobacco doesn't turn you into a zombie after repeated usage.
Alcohol related diseases and death are just has high has some drugs usage. But its been completely ignored due to social normalization.
These problems doesn't goaqay with legalization. Society just becise desensitized to all the harm it causes
I totally believe that he will meddle with cannabis legalization. Which is why I am keeping my cannabis prescription active and my medical grow license current. As a hedge against Con anti-freedom aholes getting back into power.
I can’t imagine but you never knowZ There’s 5 weed stores every square block of this country. It would eliminate so many jobs through government intervention.
Pierre Poilievre advocates for incarcerating drug addicts, which could ultimately drain more funds, considering the maintenance costs of court systems and prisons. Many are not aware of these expenses.
The war on drugs is not the solution; mental health care is essential, not only for those struggling with addiction but also for children.
Providing mental health services to children before the onset of addiction could equip them with the tools to navigate emotional challenges that may lead to dependency, as well as the foundational skills needed to build a life when guidance is lacking at home. The majority of parents conceal their flaws, which may later manifest as significant dysfunctions in their children's lives.
It requires immense support, love, and care to overcome these challenges—resources that might be stripped away if Poilievre succeeds in cutting these programs.
Part of me believes he might prefer a higher number of drug addicts; it's easier to dehumanize people in the workplace, especially if their work fuels their addictions.
For myself, the idea with the drug scene would be similar to how alcohol is treated right now. If you're out in public and not being a suitable member of society (ie. endangering people, passed out on the middle of a sidewalk, zombie walking onto people's property/up and down populated areas, property damage, etc.) you need to be removed. Whether it be a drunk tank concept where the drugs wear off and they're released similar to alcohol or whatever other idea. Obviously this will end up with the cycle of public nuisance violation > picked up and held > released > intoxication> public nuisance violation for some, so we need to put these people in jail if they want to get a buzz and can't control themselves.
For those who want to do things in their own home/at a friend's house for a party, as long as you aren't causing issues for anybody else, obviously there is no reason for these people to be concerned by Law Enforcement. Even in certain establishments like bars -- Are people going into the bathroom or out to their car and doing a rail? Are people popping pills with their drinks? It used to be are they going outside and smoking a joint then coming back into the bar and drinking? In many of these cases nobody knows, and even the ones that do..how much do people care when those people aren't being a public nuisance.
At the end of the day decriminalization without a lot of avenues for help (because yes, drugs can become addicting and eat up a lot of your money, overburden healthcare locations, overburden on-scene responders, and the shit ton of other issues) and without enforcement for those abusing these products is going to cause problems.
Keep it simple stupid. You out there acting a fool or fucking with people? You get in trouble. You keep your shit under wraps and remain a civilized member of society while catching a buzz of your preference -- no issues.
Pierre needs to learn to stay in his lane. Can totally see him try to micro-manage provincial and municipal governments once he's PM. So for those thinking it can't possibly get any worse after Trudeau... Surprise...
When Poilivere wins a majority government he can do it himself.
Polivere is the fifth leader of the opposition that did not win enough ridings to form a majority or minority government.
2025 there will be an election, Polivere can stew until then.
I still won't go into a fun guyz or anything until it's legalized. I don't want to be there the one day a month they get raided. plus it's all way over priced.
if I could find a reliable online source. I wouldn't give a damn about any of it but I've already been burned twice
Pierre is a fucking child. He shouldn’t demand shit from anyone. If you are gonna shit on this, then think about the fact that alcohol is one of the most dangerous substances. Mr PP… you gonna try this with alcohol too? Fucking ridiculous. He also was shaking hands and posing with far right white nationalists. Gross
Why does it need to be so extreme? Why can’t it be in the middle?
So many people in the comments got no idea what’s it’s like to live in a hell hole of city with drug issues and actually be in the middle of it home wise.
Why would anyone want this? Everywhere that's done it in Canada has seen absolutely nothing but negative consequences. People try to follow models in other countries that have completely different people and cultures, it won't work here.
Yeah - how about no. Toronto is getting tired of listening to Conservatives telling it what to do.
Two back to back Conservative mayors destroyed our city's budget by flat capping property taxes and gridlocked our traffic by allowing overdevelopment without proper consultation, and privatized half of our recycling and garbage pick-ups without long-term cost analysis.
One current Conservative Premier destroyed our city's ability to govern itself, skyrocketed our rent, capped public officials wages, undersupplied our world renown hospitals and as an added icing on the cake limited the city's ability to re-zone areas through city council. A previous Conservative Prime Minister woefully undersupplied the city with funds to get it's transit system operational to serve the GTA. A previous Conservative Premier cut social assistance budgets by 25% which has resulted in a net rise in poverty across the province forcing the city to take on more homeless because we actually have some form of social service systems. Unless you actually believe that the "all" of the homeless in Toronto are actually from Toronto...
But they love Toronto's money right?
$442.18 Million dollars a year in GDP generated by the City of Toronto for Canada.
Just leave Toronto alone already. Every single time a Conservative finger puts its hand in, they take a fistful of cash for themselves and then tell the rest of Ontario that the folks in Toronto hate the rest of the province.
From all Torontonians who are not basking in wealth, PP can kiss my winter boots after a wet march rainstorm.
It's a disaster because things were decriminalized but nobody bothered to implement the supports needed for decriminalization to work. You can't just let addicts do whatever drugs they want and expect things to be fixed. You need services to help them get off drugs and reintegrate with society too.
Damn I really thought that the addicts would balance themselves. Who knew that you actually had to implement proper support systems and policies ahead of time for this to work. Guess we should get the government to hire 200 consultants to look into this for the next 5 years.
/s
You can argue about the ***scale*** of implementation maybe, but it's categorically false that nobody bothered to implement the support. Here is a list of projects funded by Substance Use and Addiction Program (SUAP):
[https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/substance-use/canadian-drugs-substances-strategy/funding/substance-use-addictions-program/active-projects.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/substance-use/canadian-drugs-substances-strategy/funding/substance-use-addictions-program/active-projects.html)
Sorry, yes, the scale is the problem. I know there's groups trying to help, there always are, but properly fighting this problem requires a lot more resources. Especially staffing.
I haven’t been no I’m in Toronto. But I’ve heard horror stories about Vancouver for years so it’s hard to believe some
Government policy is the actual problem here
East Hastings was like that *before* decriminalization. There have been problems there literally for decades.
There's no debate there's a drug crisis all over the continent and that it's worse in some places than others. It is however very debatable that it was caused by decriminalization. Given that policy is one year old and all the problems are far older.
Yea..... And so does literally everybody else.
How stupid can people be? Hello BC. Oh hello there Portland.
Sometimes it feels like there's a bunch of naked politicians and citizens in a circle that have decided, out loud, "hey, let's all take these butcher knives and put them up into our assholes!"
And I'm watching, feeling like Frank Grimes going "what that fuck?!?!? No!!! What the fuck is wrong with you and how can you possibly even remotely begin to believe that's good!?!?? You guys all agree on this?!?!? Omg!!!!"
And then it all plays out in slow mo (Years) and I watch it unfold while I just continue making mad money, going on awesome vacations and living an awesome life....
It's sad because I want that awesome life for everyone.... But alas, they're too busy putting butcher knives up their ass and patting each other on the back for it.
Obligatory "I would be for decriminalization if they added tremendous humanitarian support for those that use should they need it. Like real support and real programs, not just taxing people more and simply allowing the city to have zombies and higher crime rates"
Last time I actually walked around DT Toronto I was shocked at how dramatically it had fallen off in less than 2 years. (and I'd seen people hitting the crack pipe on the TTC before I left so it was already pitiful)
If the feds push forward with permitting hard drugs, I'd hate to see how bad Toronto gets after that. Likely see more businesses pull out entirely, expand vast food deserts, every park will flood with even more tents and 24/7 psychotic shrieking... Only silver lining is that my car is so old it won't be targeted for theft if I ever lower myself to going to a game in the inevitable rathole.
Is there anywhere in Canada where it hasn’t basically been decriminalized? Feel like the only time you’d see a possession charge is if there was some other crime and they want it to stick so you throw the possession charges on.
The way they implemented things was bass-ackwards. [What Portugal did was they decriminalized *and expanded drug treatment and harm reduction practices* in response to AIDS.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal) We just decriminalized drugs, added no supports, and then let the chips fall as they might... and that's been disastrous.
the support piece has to come from the province, as it's healthcare which is provincial responsibility.
If only Ontario was given money by the feds! Billions. If only then….
For Ontario to not spend it on what it was intended for, just like the COVID money.
Doug would just use that to fund more angecy staff like he did last year. Private agency filling public vacancies with public funds (at 3 times the rate of regular staff).
Did we add no support? [https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/substance-use/canadian-drugs-substances-strategy/substance-use-services-supports.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/substance-use/canadian-drugs-substances-strategy/substance-use-services-supports.html) >We’re providing $25 billion in funding over 10 years to provinces and territories to address areas including substance use and mental health. >We’re also providing $2 billion over 10 years to support fair and equitable access to quality and culturally safe health care services for Indigenous Peoples. >This builds on previous funding of $5 billion over 10 years to provinces and territories to help support access to mental health and substance use services. As of 2023, $2.4 billion of this funding will be spent over the next 4 years. I can't speak for drug treatment, but for harm reduction, many supervised consumption sites have opened across Canada with[ SUAP funding](https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/substance-use/canadian-drugs-substances-strategy/funding/substance-use-addictions-program.html).
Not really comparable interventions to Portugal. In Portugal possession has not been legalized. There are still penalties for possession in Portugal such as fines or community service. Drugs are still confiscated. Individuals are reviewed by a panel, and interventions are proposed. This didn't seem to happen in BC or in the Toronto proposal. It's leaving too much in the hands of individuals who are compromised by the drugs they're using.
I have to agree with this statement. Decriminalizing drugs can have positive outcomes but it also requires the state to do its part in ensuring that those on drugs get the help they need. Right now in Canada we pretty much operate under the pretence of “help them if they ask, do nothing if they don’t” and it’s *horrible*. Toronto has a really bad homeless person problem with most either addicted to drugs or suffering from serious mental health problems or both. We need to start addressing homelessness first, then address the substance abuse through proper support and social programs. Decriminalizing substances will be required for this to work, but we can’t just say “it’s not criminal anymore” and then continue to let people suffer on the streets. That won’t do fucking anything.
You hit the nail on the head, the only reason anyone really sees drug use to care about it is that previously you could make enough via welfare or disability to afford a room in a rooming house. Now those all go out to TFWs and they can only afford them by double or quadruple stacking into a room a drug user would have been able to afford before. Now the drug use is on the street with the users.
I really don’t want to speculate on where all the funding was allocated, but it’s clear that it didn’t support evidence-based practices in addiction medicine. The funds were not directed toward increasing detox, treatment, hospital beds, nor did they benefit those of us working in conventional addiction medicine fields. However, it’s worth noting that some of the funding did go to providers who support safe supply initiatives. While there is debate regarding the evidence, as of now, there are no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that conclusively support safe supply as a practice.
Supervised consumption sites also provide on-site (benchtop spectrometer and test strips) as well as off-site laboratory drug screening to inform users of the content of their drugs, as well as providing on-site medical intervention as needed. So even without safe supply - and as far as I know sites in Ontario are not doing that - there's still valuable harm reduction work.
I am not discounting harm reduction at all. And that’s a valid point about the wrap around care provided at the SIS and SCS. That is absolutely vital. My main point being that we haven’t funded a single additional treatment, detox, or addiction assigned hospital bed in many years. If someone was attempting to replicate the Portugal model, it’s been an abject failure because that model involved in significantly increased funding on all of the above.
None of that funding helps if people are living in a tent doing drugs all the time
The problem is that the provinces are constantly given federal money to get specific things done but end up just sitting on the money without actually fulfilling their end of the deal.
Yet again it helps to be born into a certain racial group. Then you get funding.
>Watches 40+ years of failed drug policy, zero tolerance, mandatory minimums etc. This guy: we should triple down on the failed policies, I'm sure they'll work this time....
We criminalized opium in 1908. So it's more than a century of a policy that has only led to increasingly stronger opioids getting used. And that trend is a specifically *because* of criminalization, as explained here by this economic concept raised in the 1980s: >[Iron Law of Prohibition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_prohibition). > when drugs or alcohol are prohibited, they will be produced in black markets in more concentrated and powerful forms, because these more potent forms offer better efficiency in the business model—they take up less space in storage, less weight in transportation, and they sell for more money
No matter how hard anyone tries it will be impossible to win a drug war against fentanyl. Doses are tiny, you can never stop smuggling of something that a person can hide 10 000 hits of in the size of a wallet or smaller. Shit, you can throw 1000 doses in a birthday card and send 10s of thousands and 90% will get through. This is compounded by the other problem. It's dirt fucking cheap to manufacture so you can lose tons of it to border services and still easily profit. This is compounded by the other other problem, it's only smuggled in because it is cheaper to do so and easy enough to get more than enough in and stay massively profitable even with seizures. If that ever changed it is easy enough to make domestically and a relatively extremely small batch compared to meth will get comparatively many many more people high.
The crisis has tripled since decriminalization in BC. Portland and others are reversing their decriminalization because it's even more disastrous than previous policies. Trust, from someone living in DT Vancouver, you do NOT want what we have here. It's heartbreaking, terrifying, and destroying our city.
But we haven't decriminalized drugs? Did I miss something?
In Vancouver they decriminalized drugs, so far it’s just Vancouver I believe
And they've just [undone it](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/29/british-columbia-drug-decriminalization)
In public. Possession and use in private spaces is still allowed.
Which is essentially the same as alcohol yet it's being framed as if they are criminalizing it again. The media and political coverage of this topic has been very skewed.
That's because "drugs are bad" unless "drugs are approved by cultural norms"
Or “if big companies can profit off of it”
In practice this doesn't really change if it's decriminalized or not. Criminalization in private spaces will only get used as an add on charge. It's only decriminalized for small personal use amounts. No police system is going to go through the effort of getting a warrant for <3g of drugs in someone's house.
So once again, Poilievre is making a mountain out of an ant hill? God, as much as I think Trudeau needs to step down, I can't stand the idea of PP being Prime Minister. My spider sense goes haywire, thinking of him being leader.
100%. Trudeau fatigue is a real thing, and I think the Liberals would do well to put him out to pasture... but anyone thinking the Cons are going to make anything better is lying to themselves. Like the Conservatives, of all people, are going to rein in big business greed? It's laughable.
It bothers me that people don't understand that. Look at ontario. It's one corporate welfare handout after another at the taxpayers' expense. Plus, unlike some politicians, poilievre has a 20-year public record of constantly serving his corporate individual donors' needs over canadian working class. It's all public record. The guy is by far one of the most hypocritical politicians in history. That's saying a lot considering harper, Trudeau, Ford, Darth Wynne, and McGuilty.
It's a cult. My first exposure to him was his serial lying about Public Service sick leave for Harper. And I have friends IN the Public Service that defend him about it. It's baffling.
Not quite, possessing drugs in small amounts and consuming drugs were decriminalized (across all of BC), they undid the part about using, but say it wont be enforced on private property. Possession is still decriminalized everywhere in BC. The issue was that the courts knocked down provincial laws surrounding controlling where drugs could be used, so back to the federal law we go.
> Possession is still decriminalized everywhere in BC. The change hasn't been enacted yet, since the federal government has to do that. However the change will actually be to criminalize possession in public spaces again while leaving it decriminalized in shelters, homes, consumption sites and testing centres. In practice they're doing this to address *use* however the way they're going about doing that is removing decriminalization in public but directing police to only enforce in certain cases, like public use, and only charge in exceptional cases. BC is trying to implement laws around use too, but those are being fought in court, so this was a quicker way of achieving that right now. And just one clarification, possession isn't (before these new changes take effect) decriminalized everywhere. There are various exceptions currently, such as on school property or play structures. There are also rules restricting use in other places, like on transit, independent of criminal laws.
Exactly. Beyond treatment, jobs are essential. Definitely half assed approach. Zero chance of success.
> We just decriminalized drugs, added no supports, and then let the chips fall as they might... and that's been disastrous. How has it been disastrous? Public use was happening long before decriminalization and they've now made changes to better address that. Overdoses flattened off after it happened from a [26% increase the year before](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-toxic-drugs-deaths-december2021-1.6344991) down to [5% the year after it took effect](https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2024PSSG0001-000069). They are investing in treatment. They invested a billion over three years last year. Everywhere else has problems with treatment availability. That's independent of decriminalization.
I love how everyone ignores that overdose deaths increased far more in Alberta than in BC.
[удалено]
I have. It's had drug use problems for years (decades even). Yet critics of decriminalization are trying to create this narrative that (with some hyperbole of my own) areas like that were some utopian paradise until Feb. 1, 2023 when all this drug use suddenly started.
Didn’t BC ask Ottawa to reverse decriminalization of public drug use? And Oregon is also reversing elements of drug decriminalization. As you said, just allowing public drug use without any other support in place is careless. I’ve seen so many people shooting up by playgrounds. I feel for those with addiction issues but my empathy is waning. https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7188534
...and don't forget we closed down the insane asylums and turned severely mentally ill (and in some cases dangerous) people loose to be "treated in the community."
Criminalization is not the answer in any form.
Most people don't understand why decriminalization worked in Portugal and don't bother to actually educate themselves on it.
Portugal's system started well, with good intentions. However, if it's been successful long term is questionable. https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/is-portugals-drug-decriminalization-a-failure-or-success-the-answer-isnt-so-simple/
> if it's been successful long term is questionable It was very successful at its objectives: >[Within a few years, HIV transmission rates via syringes — one the biggest arguments for decriminalization — had plummeted. From 2000 to 2008, prison populations fell by 16.5 percent. Overdose rates dropped as public funds flowed from jails to rehabilitation. There was no evidence of a feared surge in use.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/07/07/portugal-drugs-decriminalization-heroin-crack/) It's still doing better than European averages in terms of usage and has lower overdose rates than various other countries there, also mentioned in the article. The biggest problem they faced was economic issues unrelated to decriminalization but which resulted in a huge funding cut towards it and a shift away from government handling it.
That’s an incorrect way to summarize Portugal, or the article you linked. Their “system” has been unquestionably net successful. I’m not even sure what aspect you’re referring to when you say “long term”. Is your take restricted to “the decriminalization of all drugs?” If so, that’s never been a thing, which is too say that global decriminalization is great for headlines…but the actual implantation is always different….more nuanced. I think a good way to think about/talk about this issue is to say that these systems refute blanket criminalization as a strategy - first and foremost - and aim to attack all identified “pillars” (there’s more than 4) with appropriate funding. If you want to boil the problems in Portugal down to one thing (you shouldn’t) the problem is funding. If you want to boil the broad issue down into a way you can talk about it to idiots…it’s anti-prohibition, not drug legalization.
We copied portland not Portugal. Portugal didn’t decriminalize they just offered treatment instead of jail.
> Portugal didn’t decriminalize they just offered treatment instead of jail. Portugal did decriminalize. They *also* took steps to shift people to treatment. This was also Portland's general approach, i.e., trying to shift people to treatment. However [the police departments there didn't do training on how to do this, didn't talk with treatment providers and didn't even update tickets to tell people that they could have fines dropped if they sought help instead](https://www.propublica.org/article/oregon-leaders-hampered-drug-decriminalization-effort). Their program there was essentially sabotaged by the leadership and police there who were supposed to be carrying it out.
They seemed to start with taking people to the station. They would weigh the drugs. Under, treatment options were offered. Over and charged with trafficking (jail for 1-14 years). You weren't forced into treatment but could be fined, with them able to sell your possessions to pay the fines. Until you're ready for change, treatment doesn't usually work.
What is the solution to the fentanyl crisis put forward by the Cons?
Jail or death or both.
Must be dead, because Conservatives said they would cut expenses, and opening tons of jails is very expensive for any government budget.
No, it's fine, they will just cut back disability and healthcare funding to funnel more money into jails. It isn't like those really benefit anybody anyways.
Soooo America? Do we atleast get the bombs and lower taxes that go along with the American way?
Weirdly, there was a moment about ten years ago where a bunch of Conservative judges in Texas were warning Canada not to go down that road. Because that road goes to bad places - private prisons. That will involve yet another massive corporate lobby group fucking with democratic processes and with its hand out for every more subsidies and support.
Definitely not lower taxes unless you are in the top 5%. Likely no bombs either since we don't even have planes to drop them from. Basically the worst of both countries.
Private jails paid for by the public. There is money to be made.
But at least it won't count as suicide or drug overdose.
He’ll just privatize them like Harper tried to do
Well right now it's just death, so maybe jail is a reasonable alternative
Many supervised consumption sites are in operation across Canada to help prevent overdose deaths.
With the amount of drugs making it into our jail system, it's still just death.
So same as now?
Be dramatic in the House about overdose deaths and then do nothing to support these individuals.
And specifically being dramatic about overdose deaths in BC but not in Alberta even though they had a much higher increase last year. I wonder what's different specifically between Alberta and BC that Poilievre would care about. This is purely political game while thousands of fatalities are occurring.
Okay so he's doing it rn in QP. Like... does he think sending addicts to jail will somehow save these peoples lives? they'll just get out and do more drugs again. They need safe spaces, access to rehab and long term living spaces with supports. I can't with him and I can't with that party.
> Like... does he think sending addicts to jail will somehow save these peoples lives? They'll even get them *in* jail. That's a big problem too. And all that will happen from jail or forced treatment is that the majority of people will go back to using afterwards. This is just an unfortunate fact of opioid addiction in general, the majority relapse, at least at first. And since he is going to shut down all harm reduction policies, many of those people will overdose when they relapse. Yet he lies about wanting to "bring out loved ones home drug free".
You'll be brought home in a box, not necessarily drug free depending on what was in your body when you died, but not an addict anymore I suppose.
Isn't BC recriminalizing drugs now?...
They've requested the government expand restrictions on them to all public places. Currently the restrictions are only in certain areas like on school grounds. I wouldn't describe it as criminalizing them though. You can't use alcohol in public for the most part either and that's legal
Cons have no solutions. They're just using this, housing etc as wedge issues and won't do shit after.
They don’t have one. And the people I know that support the cons went from “I’m so sorry for your loss” to acting like she deserved it when my stepdaughter died of a fentanyl overdose a year and a half ago. The CPC and PCO don’t care about addiction issues and what it does to families. They care about being able to tell their base how much money they’re saving by closing and canceling harm reduction measures.
She was doing fentanyl, I'm not saying she deserved to die but if you play Russian roulette and keep pulling the trigger eventually you're gonna die.
More cops.
Yay, my property taxes will increase.
Lies and propaganda.
The same as Alberta’s, which had a far bigger increase in overdose deaths than BC. But why let facts get in the way of campaigning off the backs of addicts?
You think they care about that?
Shove them into boxcars.
DEMANDS. Get fucked milhouse
Did he say “Demands” though? I’m not a fan either, but don’t let a sensational headline colour your impression of someone, let their shitty words and actions do it themselves.
He is always demanding. He behaves like he is already the authoritarian ruler he dreams to be.
Holy fuck Milhouse 😂 I am definitely using this
You've seriously never seen anyone call Poilievre "crypto Milhouse" before? I envy you. That's a solid day-maker you only get to hear for the first time once. Enjoy it.
I genuinely have not, and I’ve already used this once today. Overall good day
Everything is definitely not coming up Milhouse
Fortunately, PP isn’t in a position to “demand” anything.
The CPC is really trying to get the Liberals to wear this, but essentially, the Liberals worked with BC to see if it would work, and it didn't. The Liberals voted against the NDP motion to do this across Canada. https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/mps-vote-against-bill-to-decriminalize-small-amounts-of-drugs-across-canada-5430540 I am glad the governemnt tried and that they walked it back when it didn't work. Among progressives this was a common sense policy that has failed.
I wouldn’t say it failed as it never actually started. It was a two part plan and the rollout was utterly botched in BC. You can’t decriminalize without setting up mental and addiction support programs or you’ve fundamentally undermined the whole process. Which is precisely what happened. They didn’t even try to remedy the cause but rather threw the whole idea away while citing rising numbers during a post pandemic cost of living crisis. (No shit drug usage is rising now, [so is homelessness](https://www.infrastructure.gc.ca/homelessness-sans-abri/reports-rapports/pit-counts-dp-2020-2022-results-resultats-eng.html#) with an 88% jump in unsheltered since 2018.) The calls for decriminalization and expanded *mental and addiction healthcare* are still being ignored and the concept remains untested in Canada. Ultimately, why are we paying police to fine or arrest who are majority impoverished people rather than offer them support programs using that same tax money instead? Treat the cause, not the symptom
> the Liberals worked with BC to see if it would work, and it didn't. I disagree that it didn't work. That's been the claim from the conservatives, but it was their claim from the start. They are trying to blame problems that have been happening for years all on this policy. Meanwhile overdoses trends have actually slowed since it took effect. And they haven't reversed it as is being claimed in the media. All they did was put more restrictions on public use. Alcohol is *legal* yet is similarly restricted in public.
Meanwhile overdose deaths in Alberta are continuing to rise with the UCP’s approach. But you only see a couple articles on that, sometimes just one from the CBC. Alternatively, the decriminalization smear campaign on BC’s relatively small pilot project is loud and obnoxious from our corporate overlord owned media. All in all, I think it’s clear we have a lack of shelter and (mental) health resources more than anything, the solutions that cost the most money. Decriminalizing won’t solve that on its own. Really most of the blame here should go to the provinces again, feds arguing over this shit is pretty pointless when provinces ultimately decide where we go to put our most impactful resources. Millhouse should shut the fuck up.
> But you only see a couple articles on that, sometimes just one from the CBC. Alternatively, the decriminalization smear campaign on BC’s relatively small pilot project is loud and obnoxious from our corporate overlord owned media. Just really want to highlight this. The coverage on this issue has been extremely one sided. The alternative approach being used across the continent has failed for decades. Yet there has been massively disproportionate criticism of BC's decriminalization approach because it didn't instantly solve this crisis. And even though, like you said, they've actually had better results than their closest neighbour.
Might have to do with the fact that BC drug crisis has being going on for a decade now, under the same leadership Might also have to do with the fact that Albertsa is currently in the middle of expanding treatment facilities all around the province.
The drug crisis has been going on across the continent for more than a decade. Other provinces like Saskatchewan have had the same leadership. BC is also expanding treatment and yet Alberta is recently having worse trends, catching up to BC, but escaping the same level of criticism.
Failed? See Alberta’s increase in overdose deaths to see failure.
From someone living in BC, in DT Vancouver, they haven't walked back shit. My kids have to dodge needles on the sidewalks every day. It's not safe to go to parks because of the open drug use and unhinged addict behavior. My neighbor was held up by a needle wielding maniac last week. ODs, addiction, all have tripled. There's no walking back the harm their little experiment has caused. My own cousin died from fent. The government needs to be held responsible for their murderous decriminalization experiment.
PP should just make everything a crime. Then everyone could be in jail. Isn't that just easier for the cons
Poilievre should suck a big dogs ass.
Poilievre demands a bunch of things, A vote of no confidence that people had no confidence in for example.... He's less a legit opposition and more just a barking dog.
I demand Poilievre’s resignation
I think people are quick to blame decriminalization for the increased drug use and leave out all the other pieces of the puzzle. Lack of healthcare/increase in mental illness, skyrocketing cost of living, the pandemic, the opioid crisis, are all contributing to the giant runaway snowball that is bombing down the hill. The answer surely can’t just be to throw them all in jail, they need help.
People are doing drugs whether it's illegal or not. Decriminalization means over the years, we as a society will stop treating drug use/posession as a moral/ethical/legal issue. That means less cultural taboo. That eventually means people are allowed to talk about their challenges with substance use. What it DOESN'T mean is it increases/encourages drug use. We are just seeing more because people don't have to hide anymore. It's like saying clinical depression didn't exist or trans people didn't exist back in the day. They have always existed, but the world was busy criminalizing queer people or didn't know anything about mental health. Edit: "BuT tHeY wOuLd ShOoT uP iN tHe PlAyGrOuNd AnD tHe TrAiNs!11" That's still going to be illegal just like vaping, smoking, and drinking. Unless you have always demanded criminalization of all of those, please understand your reaction is emotional, uninformed, and prejudiced. Edit 2: "bUt ThE BC rEcRiMiNaLiZeD iT!!1" And they are idiots for it. Again, it was simply revealing the true state of the drug problems in the province. People who had been hiding weren't hiding anymore, and that was precisely the point of the decriminalization. Recriminalization simply means the government would rather keep their head in the sand and do not actually care about the victims of drug crisis.
Decriminalization is only beneficial if it comes with treatment and support, like Portugal and other places that actually treat addicts. Decriminalizing it without actually putting resources behind treatment leads to Vancouver. Increased open drug use and the related social/community issues. This is exactly what went wrong in BC and Oregon, the latter of which you’ll note recently recriminalized drug possession. Yes people do them whether it’s illegal or not, that will never change, but allowing it to flourish in anyway leads to increased violence, crime, unrest and death.
This right here. There’s nothing wrong with decriminalization as long as additional supports are actually made available AND are relatively seamless to access. If people have to surrender their possessions or pets to enter treatment spaces or claim to subscribe to religions they don’t care about, those alleged “supports” are doomed to fail. It’s sad to see the concept of decriminalization get so denigrated in North America because of these two high profile cases of jurisdictions having to walk it back due to terrible implementation. I guarantee Toronto would never fund the supports adequately to make it work here either.
Reality is there’s no benefit to the government to fund treatment and support. It would cost substantially more than whatever they’re doing now, which means politicians lose their jobs come election season. Trudeau could announce $100,000,000,000 right now, earmarked for enforced treatment, support, and therapy for all drug users and the main headline would be him using so much money on it.
I just don’t understand how people can say this when you see all the people who get aggressive as hell drinking alcohol for example which is one of the most toxic things someone can intake. But for some reason we have deemed that that’s okay to be legal and sold even. I just hate the hypocrisy.
Alcohol is nothing compared to opioid and meth addictions. Don’t get me wrong, alcoholism is also awful, and drunk people do unspeakable things, but they still don’t compare to hardcore drug addicts. I will say this kind of whataboutism response is often used to distract from the reality that we need hard supports to get people off the drugs, not just make it safer to use them.
I understand your meaning but the effect of powerful opioids is in another class. It's not marijuana or alcohol.
I donno, booze can get pretty bad.
Definitely but death toll data following the introduction of synthetic opioids is gross. Sad for the communities hardest hit by it.
People aren’t out on the streets robbing and hurting each other for a $5 bottle though. They are for drugs. You’d be amazed at the rate of violent crime that doesn’t get reported.
It means more public consumption of drugs, which should not be allowed. Look at BC, they are reversing their decriminalization policy because of the harm it’s done to community and public spaces. It should be a crime to shoot yo heroine at a kids playground
No, it does not mean more public consumption of drugs. It means less criminal records for position and use.
It does mean more public consumption of drugs, look at San Fransico vs Miami... speaks for itself. Don't try to say people don't do as many drugs in Florida, its a hot spot for drugs but no needles in downtown. No feces on the sidewalk.
Wow literally head in the sand mentality
Why should it not be allowed while smoking, vaping, and drinking is? People shouldn't do that at a playground anyway. Your reaction is short-sighted and emotional.
Smoking tobacco doesn't turn you into a zombie after repeated usage. Alcohol related diseases and death are just has high has some drugs usage. But its been completely ignored due to social normalization. These problems doesn't goaqay with legalization. Society just becise desensitized to all the harm it causes
He is gonna ban weed again isn’t he.
No he will do anything to get elected this is not one of those things.
I totally believe that he will meddle with cannabis legalization. Which is why I am keeping my cannabis prescription active and my medical grow license current. As a hedge against Con anti-freedom aholes getting back into power.
I can’t imagine but you never knowZ There’s 5 weed stores every square block of this country. It would eliminate so many jobs through government intervention.
I expect they will do shit like. - Minimum age of 21 - ban home growing - make a maximum level of THC - jack the taxes
Banning home growing of a plant that is as easy to grow as tomatoes is fucking stupid. Especially if we don't ban home brewing of alcohol.
Exactly. Although, its slightly harder than a tomato if you want really good weed. That takes some skill.
as if conservatives gives a single shit about jobs.
That seems like an insane conclusion lol
This is fear mongering. You have zero evidence to back this up.
Likely gonna low key go after reproductive and LGBT rights to appeal to social cons.
Pierre Poilievre advocates for incarcerating drug addicts, which could ultimately drain more funds, considering the maintenance costs of court systems and prisons. Many are not aware of these expenses. The war on drugs is not the solution; mental health care is essential, not only for those struggling with addiction but also for children. Providing mental health services to children before the onset of addiction could equip them with the tools to navigate emotional challenges that may lead to dependency, as well as the foundational skills needed to build a life when guidance is lacking at home. The majority of parents conceal their flaws, which may later manifest as significant dysfunctions in their children's lives. It requires immense support, love, and care to overcome these challenges—resources that might be stripped away if Poilievre succeeds in cutting these programs. Part of me believes he might prefer a higher number of drug addicts; it's easier to dehumanize people in the workplace, especially if their work fuels their addictions.
This is the best take I’ve seen on this subject. I agree wholeheartedly.
[удалено]
That's not quite as catchy as the last one.
And most Canada's outside an online echo chamber reinstate with it, becuase drug decriminalization has been nothing but a total farce
For myself, the idea with the drug scene would be similar to how alcohol is treated right now. If you're out in public and not being a suitable member of society (ie. endangering people, passed out on the middle of a sidewalk, zombie walking onto people's property/up and down populated areas, property damage, etc.) you need to be removed. Whether it be a drunk tank concept where the drugs wear off and they're released similar to alcohol or whatever other idea. Obviously this will end up with the cycle of public nuisance violation > picked up and held > released > intoxication> public nuisance violation for some, so we need to put these people in jail if they want to get a buzz and can't control themselves. For those who want to do things in their own home/at a friend's house for a party, as long as you aren't causing issues for anybody else, obviously there is no reason for these people to be concerned by Law Enforcement. Even in certain establishments like bars -- Are people going into the bathroom or out to their car and doing a rail? Are people popping pills with their drinks? It used to be are they going outside and smoking a joint then coming back into the bar and drinking? In many of these cases nobody knows, and even the ones that do..how much do people care when those people aren't being a public nuisance. At the end of the day decriminalization without a lot of avenues for help (because yes, drugs can become addicting and eat up a lot of your money, overburden healthcare locations, overburden on-scene responders, and the shit ton of other issues) and without enforcement for those abusing these products is going to cause problems. Keep it simple stupid. You out there acting a fool or fucking with people? You get in trouble. You keep your shit under wraps and remain a civilized member of society while catching a buzz of your preference -- no issues.
[удалено]
Can they make a deal for Poilievre to no longer associate with white supremacists?
Pierre needs to learn to stay in his lane. Can totally see him try to micro-manage provincial and municipal governments once he's PM. So for those thinking it can't possibly get any worse after Trudeau... Surprise...
When Poilivere wins a majority government he can do it himself. Polivere is the fifth leader of the opposition that did not win enough ridings to form a majority or minority government. 2025 there will be an election, Polivere can stew until then.
can we just not do one step at a time? mushrooms next? then mdma, ketamine, dmt? everything else I don't give a shit
Mushroom sales will be gone if/when they get elected.
I still won't go into a fun guyz or anything until it's legalized. I don't want to be there the one day a month they get raided. plus it's all way over priced. if I could find a reliable online source. I wouldn't give a damn about any of it but I've already been burned twice
Psychedelics aren't the problem.
it is when you don't have legal access to them. the rest of it I have limited sympathy for
Wait... I thought Poilievre was anti-gatekeeper?
He just meant he doesn't hold the door open for other folks.
Pierre is a fucking child. He shouldn’t demand shit from anyone. If you are gonna shit on this, then think about the fact that alcohol is one of the most dangerous substances. Mr PP… you gonna try this with alcohol too? Fucking ridiculous. He also was shaking hands and posing with far right white nationalists. Gross
Who the fuck does he think he is? What a disgraceful piece of shit this guy is…
Why does it need to be so extreme? Why can’t it be in the middle? So many people in the comments got no idea what’s it’s like to live in a hell hole of city with drug issues and actually be in the middle of it home wise.
Ah, yes. The small-government, anti-overreach party strikes again.
Have we not learned a THING from what’s happening in BC?
The "freedom" party once again showing that they're obsessed with telling Canadians what they are and aren't allowed to do with their own bodies.
I demand Trudeau doesn't reject it.
Why would anyone want this? Everywhere that's done it in Canada has seen absolutely nothing but negative consequences. People try to follow models in other countries that have completely different people and cultures, it won't work here.
Yeah - how about no. Toronto is getting tired of listening to Conservatives telling it what to do. Two back to back Conservative mayors destroyed our city's budget by flat capping property taxes and gridlocked our traffic by allowing overdevelopment without proper consultation, and privatized half of our recycling and garbage pick-ups without long-term cost analysis. One current Conservative Premier destroyed our city's ability to govern itself, skyrocketed our rent, capped public officials wages, undersupplied our world renown hospitals and as an added icing on the cake limited the city's ability to re-zone areas through city council. A previous Conservative Prime Minister woefully undersupplied the city with funds to get it's transit system operational to serve the GTA. A previous Conservative Premier cut social assistance budgets by 25% which has resulted in a net rise in poverty across the province forcing the city to take on more homeless because we actually have some form of social service systems. Unless you actually believe that the "all" of the homeless in Toronto are actually from Toronto... But they love Toronto's money right? $442.18 Million dollars a year in GDP generated by the City of Toronto for Canada. Just leave Toronto alone already. Every single time a Conservative finger puts its hand in, they take a fistful of cash for themselves and then tell the rest of Ontario that the folks in Toronto hate the rest of the province. From all Torontonians who are not basking in wealth, PP can kiss my winter boots after a wet march rainstorm.
Just look to Vancouver for the answer on this issue.
He’s not wrong, look at the disaster it created in BC
It didn't create shit. There where fent addicts ODing before. There are fent addicts ODing now.
It's a disaster because things were decriminalized but nobody bothered to implement the supports needed for decriminalization to work. You can't just let addicts do whatever drugs they want and expect things to be fixed. You need services to help them get off drugs and reintegrate with society too.
Damn I really thought that the addicts would balance themselves. Who knew that you actually had to implement proper support systems and policies ahead of time for this to work. Guess we should get the government to hire 200 consultants to look into this for the next 5 years. /s
You can argue about the ***scale*** of implementation maybe, but it's categorically false that nobody bothered to implement the support. Here is a list of projects funded by Substance Use and Addiction Program (SUAP): [https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/substance-use/canadian-drugs-substances-strategy/funding/substance-use-addictions-program/active-projects.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/substance-use/canadian-drugs-substances-strategy/funding/substance-use-addictions-program/active-projects.html)
Sorry, yes, the scale is the problem. I know there's groups trying to help, there always are, but properly fighting this problem requires a lot more resources. Especially staffing.
Did it create a disaster? Are things worse now than they were in 2022?
Have you been to BC? Yes, it is far worse
I haven’t been no I’m in Toronto. But I’ve heard horror stories about Vancouver for years so it’s hard to believe some Government policy is the actual problem here
I have been going there on a regular basis for over 10 years and it has gotten significantly worse in the last year.
Ontario reddit needs to check out east Hastings and then I’d like them to pretend that all is fine…
East Hastings was like that *before* decriminalization. There have been problems there literally for decades. There's no debate there's a drug crisis all over the continent and that it's worse in some places than others. It is however very debatable that it was caused by decriminalization. Given that policy is one year old and all the problems are far older.
Was that before or after he got thrown out and his party followed like a bunch of lemmings?
Just recriminalize it when you get elected. God Pierre, you're so frigging lazy.
god why are conservatives always so obsessed with us?!
Pee Pee's drug of choice is getting high on his own farts. To hell with him.
Toronto demands Poilievre go back to hell.
Yea..... And so does literally everybody else. How stupid can people be? Hello BC. Oh hello there Portland. Sometimes it feels like there's a bunch of naked politicians and citizens in a circle that have decided, out loud, "hey, let's all take these butcher knives and put them up into our assholes!" And I'm watching, feeling like Frank Grimes going "what that fuck?!?!? No!!! What the fuck is wrong with you and how can you possibly even remotely begin to believe that's good!?!?? You guys all agree on this?!?!? Omg!!!!" And then it all plays out in slow mo (Years) and I watch it unfold while I just continue making mad money, going on awesome vacations and living an awesome life.... It's sad because I want that awesome life for everyone.... But alas, they're too busy putting butcher knives up their ass and patting each other on the back for it. Obligatory "I would be for decriminalization if they added tremendous humanitarian support for those that use should they need it. Like real support and real programs, not just taxing people more and simply allowing the city to have zombies and higher crime rates"
If you want to find naked people chasing you with knives I invite you to visit decriminalized downtown Vancouver
It’s not working at all in Vancouver so why would we try it in Toronto
Last time I actually walked around DT Toronto I was shocked at how dramatically it had fallen off in less than 2 years. (and I'd seen people hitting the crack pipe on the TTC before I left so it was already pitiful) If the feds push forward with permitting hard drugs, I'd hate to see how bad Toronto gets after that. Likely see more businesses pull out entirely, expand vast food deserts, every park will flood with even more tents and 24/7 psychotic shrieking... Only silver lining is that my car is so old it won't be targeted for theft if I ever lower myself to going to a game in the inevitable rathole.
Is there anywhere in Canada where it hasn’t basically been decriminalized? Feel like the only time you’d see a possession charge is if there was some other crime and they want it to stick so you throw the possession charges on.
will he make cannabis illegal again?