Pubdate: Wed, 27 Sep 2006
Source: Vue Weekly (CN AB)
Copyright: 2006, Vue Weekly.
Contact:  http://www.vueweekly.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2918
Author: Carl Conradi

REPORT BY PREMIER'S TASK FORCE ON CRYSTAL METH MISSES THE POINT

I had never much considered the problem of crystal meth until I moved 
in to an apartment just a few blocks away from Edmonton's Greyhound 
station. I had experienced meth highs in other people, and I knew it 
wasn't the type of addiction you'd want to cuddle or nurture.

This perception was entrenched when I had to coerce a meth-addled 
traveller out of her rage by spending the night in her room, 
indulging deeply depressive thoughts until the sun came up. Earlier 
that evening, she'd exploded out of her hotel window, sending shards 
of glass through the sky. Two of my friends were sent to the hospital.

It was not a pretty sight.

But, again, I hadn't fully realized how pervasive an issue it had 
become in Alberta until I moved downtown. Now, every night, I'm 
treated to a chorus of manic screaming and moaning, and when I peek 
through my blinds, I see young people my age scratching their flesh to ribbons.

Having recognized the need to address this nightmare--which is as 
much if not more a problem in rural Alberta than it is in the 
cities--the provincial government created a task force to investigate 
the culture of crystal meth and to make appropriate policy 
recommendations regarding its prevention, treatment and legal status.

Their report, which was summarized in a news release issued on Sep 
19, is controversial both in terms of its findings and its 
recommendations. For example, Recommendation 21 states that "Alberta 
Human Resources and Employment should require all Alberta employers, 
through their workplace safety policies, to adopt a drug and alcohol 
policy that fosters drug-free Alberta workplaces and worksites.

They should also encourage employers to support drug education and 
prevention programs and employee self-referral programs for 
addictions treatment."

This recommendation is particularly salient within the context of 
Alberta, as the task force discovered that during this current period 
of economic prosperity, when recruitment has become an increasingly 
cumbersome task, workplace management often refuses to see drug use 
as a priority issue.

Employers are now quick to turn a blind eye to drug users, as they 
have a vested interest in retaining qualified employees.

The rationale behind Recommendation 21 is that employers should pay 
more attention to their employees' habits, all in the interest of 
improved staff productivity. Evidently, however, staff retention is 
perceived as being more important that staff productivity, and it 
will be a very difficult challenge to convince workplace management otherwise.

Even more controversial is Recommendation 61, which states that, "The 
Government of Canada should enact and/or amend legislation that 
places a reverse onus on the accused, requiring them to prove that 
the possession of precursors [household chemicals used to produce 
meth] was for a purpose other than meth production." Justification 
for this recommendation comes from the United States and Australia, 
both of which already follow policies of reverse onus in cases 
dealing with meth.

The problem here is twofold.

First, precursor chemicals are extremely common and include products 
such as cold medications, drain cleaner and paint thinner.

The fact that the presence of such household items could instantly 
and legitimately incriminate the accused is arguably questionable. 
Second, reverse onus is an extremely unfamiliar idea to the average 
Canadian. In essence, it states that an individual accused of meth 
production would be considered guilty until proven innocent.

Is this form of law something we as Canadians should be comfortable with?

Finally, Recommendation 71 suggests that, "The Government of Canada 
should rescind its policy of requiring Aboriginal people to return to 
their home reserve for treatment services.

This would allow Aboriginal people to choose treatment where they 
want it while still receiving federal government financial support." 
This recommendation is special insofar as what it points out about 
the status quo: non-reserve Canadians are free to receive 
rehabilitation services wherever they want, whereas reserve 
Aboriginals are forced, often at a great inconvenience, to return to 
their own reserves. One should be shocked to read this fact, as it 
smacks of humiliating apartheid.

In addition, the task force points out that, "There are no 
[conventional] detox or treatment facilities located on Aboriginal 
reserves and limited detox capacity outside of the major two centres 
[of Edmonton and Calgary]." Once again, the question must be asked: 
is this a situation we as Canadians should be comfortable with?

At the end of the task force's report, it becomes very clear that any 
initiative to tackle the problem of crystal meth--and of drugs in 
general--must be collaborative. Our attention is drawn to the success 
of Hinton's local Family and Community Support Services Agency, which 
was responsible for the construction of a firm, meth-fighting nexus 
between law enforcement, AADAC and the municipality. Crystal meth use 
is pervasive, and it has become a community affair. We must take note 
of the users who stand outside of our windows in the early hours of 
the morning, and we must recognize them as our neighbours. We must 
realize that this is a very public scourge that should offend our 
pride as Canadians, and we should see that we each play a part in its 
perpetuation--through the prosperity most of us enjoy, through the 
laws we choose to uphold and through our conscious and shameful 
decision to collectively ignore.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Elaine