Downtown Eastside - DTES Issues

[jlousa]

People keep bringing up the Portugal solution without knowing much about it. Speak to the Portuguese people about their opinion of the Portugal solution and not just the "professionals" pushing it and you'll get a very different opinion. After the brief improvements it showed, drug use is again on the rise and has surpassed what they were when the program started.

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by rofina

Agreed, I think that's the final step that will be taken in the current direction before a large enough change in a completely opposite one. It will become apparent, quickly, that it wont be the solution advocates are hoping for.

The NAOMI trial showed promising results in the Vancouver context (it was done in vancouver and montreal.) it wouldn't be unfettered access to heroin, but monitored intake, similar to methadone maintenance currently.

But I agree it won't be a magic wand for everything...

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by jlousa

People keep bringing up the Portugal solution without knowing much about it. Speak to the Portuguese people about their opinion of the Portugal solution and not just the "professionals" pushing it and you'll get a very different opinion. After the brief improvements it showed, drug use is again on the rise and has surpassed what they were when the program started.

Yeah I'm going to need a source on those claims. I've never heard anything to support that there were only "brief improvements". I sure hope you aren't conflating smoking marijuana with shooting up heroin together as "drug use".

Frankly, saying you should just "speak to the people not the professionals" is some weird populist rhetoric.


Via The New Yorker

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by jlousa

People keep bringing up the Portugal solution without knowing much about it. Speak to the Portuguese people about their opinion of the Portugal solution and not just the "professionals" pushing it and you'll get a very different opinion. After the brief improvements it showed, drug use is again on the rise and has surpassed what they were when the program started.

By most accounts, Portugal has a lot to be proud of.

“Decriminalization is not a silver bullet,” he said. “If you decriminalize and do nothing else, things will get worse.

“The most important part was making treatment available to everybody who needed it for free. This was our first goal.”

Underlying the policies is a national conviction that addiction is a chronic, recurring disease best dealt with through treatment not jail.

This paper presents an analysis of the social costs of illicit drug use in the wake of the strategy's approval. Taking into consideration health and non-health related costs, we find that that the social cost of drugs decreased by 12% in the five years following the NSFAD's approval and by a rather significant 18% in the eleven-year period following its approval. Whilst the reduction of legal system costs (possibly associated with the decriminalization of drug consumption) is clearly one of the main explanatory factors, it is not the only one. In particular, the rather significant reduction of health-related costs has also played an important role.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

What is the completely opposite one though? With free/safe drugs I can see the following:

1. Less deaths
2. More people using (coming from elsewhere, why wouldn't they?)
3. Homeless/street problem gets worse
4. Petty crime down marginally

So then what? The usual advocates will want more. The other side will want the problem cleaned up. But that's the same issue we have today. Charter Rights and an army of enablers will fight anything tooth and nail.

US based, and as such few of the details are American law, but very much applicable to the issues here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MRrlIpQ-Hk

[Nites]

I heard everyone from Crab Park/Port Parking moved to Strathcona Park in the last 2-3 days is this true? I still drive past Oppenheimer park every day to work and that place is absolutely leveled and it's just pure dirt at this point. They would probably have to put in new sod for the entire park. I can see the situation gettings worse then it was at Oppenheimer and the Port area because residential houses actually surround Strathcona park where as the area down by the port was actually quite out of the way and it didn't really bother anyone.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Nites

I heard everyone from Crab Park/Port Parking moved to Strathcona Park in the last 2-3 days is this true? I still drive past Oppenheimer park every day to work and that place is absolutely leveled and it's just pure dirt at this point. They would probably have to put in new sod for the entire park. I can see the situation gettings worse then it was at Oppenheimer and the Port area because residential houses actually surround Strathcona park where as the area down by the port was actually quite out of the way and it didn't really bother anyone.

Strathcona Park only has some housing on one side, on the other side of Prior Street. It's mostly surrounded by industry. That's possibly why they chose it. Only some of the campers from Crab Park moved there.

[jlousa]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Yeah I'm going to need a source on those claims. I've never heard anything to support that there were only "brief improvements". I sure hope you aren't conflating smoking marijuana with shooting up heroin together as "drug use".

Frankly, saying you should just "speak to the people not the professionals" is some weird populist rhetoric.

I spend every summer in Portugal so it's not rhetoric it's first hand information. You have the mayor of Porto the countries second largest city pleading for the government to recrimalize drugs as its not working. All this info is readily available for anyone that actually researches the situation there instead of just reading the tidbits pushed out by organizations hoping to decriminalize drugs locally. Here is a graph showing the bounce back up.



A bunch of stats can be found here, sure the site is anti drugs and biased but the numbers are numbers.
http://saynopetodope.org.nz/portu

[scryer]

Originally Posted by Nites

I heard everyone from Crab Park/Port Parking moved to Strathcona Park in the last 2-3 days is this true? I still drive past Oppenheimer park every day to work and that place is absolutely leveled and it's just pure dirt at this point. They would probably have to put in new sod for the entire park. I can see the situation gettings worse then it was at Oppenheimer and the Port area because residential houses actually surround Strathcona park where as the area down by the port was actually quite out of the way and it didn't really bother anyone.

I'll have to walk by and see for myself when I get back.

But yeah, the occupation of Strathcona Park is going to be a problem for the families that live nearby.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by jlousa

I spend every summer in Portugal so it's not rhetoric it's first hand information. You have the mayor of Porto the countries second largest city pleading for the government to recrimalize drugs as its not working. All this info is readily available for anyone that actually researches the situation there instead of just reading the tidbits pushed out by organizations hoping to decriminalize drugs locally. Here is a graph showing the bounce back up.

There was an increase in drug use in Portugal for a few years in the early 2000s among youth, and your anti-drug New Zealand group selected that data to make their case. But overall, over a longer period the numbers are better. Here's a more recent infographic from Statista (who have no policy position for or against drug legalization or decriminalization). This paper from 2015 shows a steady decline in drug use up to 2013, based on a University of Lisboa study.



More recent data can be found on the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. Their Portugal statistics show a 2016 total of 30 deaths after a single-year jump to 50 deaths in 2015. The full report is here.

The death rate is way below most of Europe, and the US, and Canada, and BC. The statistics on use of drugs also indicates a much lower use than almost all other European countries for cocaine, heroine, MDMA and Amphetamines.

[scryer]

Thank you Changing City for sharing that .

I do have some questions as it pertains to the data collection though and I kindly invite someone with insight to help understand:

1. What, in Portugal, defines itself as a legal or illegal drug? For example if cocaine was decriminalized then is there a certain amount of the drug that a user can carry before carrying an "illegal" amount of drugs?

2. Is there a certain amount of a given drug that is considered criminal to have in your system under Portuguese law? This would be tedious to prove all the time with anyone you suspect but you would need to prove that they are using a criminal amount before charging them. Perhaps there is no criminal amount to have in your system?

3. Which leads me to my next question: how much usage constitutes itself as a prevalent usage to make the statistic in the link?

4. How does the Portuguese government keep up with the decriminalization of new drugs entering the black market? A drug, in NA standard AFAIK, is defined by its chemical composition. All you need to do is change the chemical composition to comply or avoid the law (technically..). I'm thinking that the Portuguese government has some sort of a way to keep up otherwise they would have entered into a bit of an administrative nightmare.

5. I am open to misunderstanding the Portuguese government's program as I have never been there before but with the decriminalization of drugs, does that mean pharmacies can carry and sell narcotics without prescriptions? I know that their pharmacies work drastically different from ours but I think that Canada would want a way to regulate usage some how via prescriptions...

6. Why was data from people older than 34 years omitted from the data provided? I know that this statement is going to get me in hot water but I have witnessed first hand a lot of older people still using drugs. Therefore I'm wondering if the stats benefitted one generation and not the other? I don't see how it could but this is an innocent question!


Anyways my point with posing these questions is that we have to really analyze the reasons why these statistics are reading super positively. To me this looks like it could be a way to clean your books of criminal statistics linked to drug usage to look good from an administrative standpoint.

Perhaps I just need to get out of the house more but I don't see travelers in Portugal or Portuguese people singing praises of their country eradicating drug problems with the magic wand of decriminalization left and right. You can decriminalize something and on paper it will look great (via an admin-wash) but in reality it could be very different. You could still have a drug problem in your city even though you aren't recording it. I doubt that this is Portugal's game as other countries would adopt this method of cleaning their books of criminal activity but with the way things are going on in the world, we owe it to ourselves to question how stats were gathered. Stats are constantly used to influence public opinion whether for better or for worse.

I just think that we owe it to the tax payers and to the addicts to ask the harder questions and to analyze the Portuguese system with a fine-tooth comb before throwing billions blindly thinking it's a solution.

[logan5]

Keep in mind that the Portugal approach is at the national level, so if we adopt that approach or some other approach that makes life easier for addicts, we would also have to implement that approach nation wide, not just locally here in Vancouver, otherwise even more addicts will make their way here.

We need a program or government bill that mandates that cities look after their own homeless and addicts, and not have Vancouver look after the nations homeless population.

https://theprovince.com/news/local-news/...-b-c-last-year-were-from-out-of-province

[scryer]

Originally Posted by logan5

Keep in mind that the Portugal approach is at the national level, so if we adopt that approach or some other approach that makes life easier for addicts, we would also have to implement that approach nation wide, not just locally here in Vancouver, otherwise even more addicts will make their way here.

We need a program or government bill that mandates that cities look after their own homeless and addicts, and not have Vancouver look after the nations homeless population.

I agree with everything you just said. This needs to be a big government solution.

[jlousa]

No one is claiming that the number of overdoses hasn't been reduced in Portugal, nor that there aren't some benefits to it. It has not reduced the number of addicts though and that is that final goal is it not? Here is a different report which shows its shortcomings.
https://www.dalgarnoinstitute.org.au › ...PDF
The Truth on Portugal - Dalgarno Institute
Again we had a built in Vancouver approach which could've worked called the four pillars, instead we focused on two pillars and ignored the other two and guess what happened...we dumped more money into those same two pillars thinking that would help.

[Sheba]

Part of an e-mail reply I received last summer:

As a government, we can all agree on supporting police and first responders to connect more people to the treatment and the care they need. However, possessing these substances is still illegal under federal law. No provincial action can change that – that remains up to the federal government.

We recognize that addiction is a health issue and there are already police forces working within the current parameters to reduce the fear of reporting overdoses and connect people to care. Our policing partners continue to prioritize drug trafficking and the supply of illegal drugs, and a number of police forces have adopted practices that support a harm reduction approach whereby incidents involving only ‘simple possession’ offences are not the focus of investigations. For example, we have three pilot projects underway with police in Vancouver, Abbotsford, and Vernon referring people to treatment and other supports instead of the criminal justice system.

...

We will continue to escalate our response to this crisis, including looking at legal, prescription alternatives to the toxic drug supply that can be provided under medical supervision to save lives. Because that is our ultimate goal – to save lives. Patient and community safety are at the core of this work, and as we look at innovative solutions we will be guided by evidence.

We have also vastly expanded our harm reduction efforts, because people need to be alive in order to find their pathway to hope and recovery.

...

As I am sure you can understand, this is an incredibly complex issue and is not a change that can be implemented overnight. As the criminalization of particular substances falls under federal jurisdiction through the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, I encourage you to contact your local Member of Parliament and share your thoughts on decriminalization and access to safer drug alternatives.

...

Sincerely,

Taryn Walsh
Assistant Deputy Minister
Strategic Initiatives Division

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by jlousa

No one is claiming that the number of overdoses hasn't been reduced in Portugal, nor that there aren't some benefits to it. It has not reduced the number of addicts though and that is that final goal is it not? Here is a different report which shows its shortcomings.
https://www.dalgarnoinstitute.org.au › ...PDF
The Truth on Portugal - Dalgarno Institute
Again we had a built in Vancouver approach which could've worked called the four pillars, instead we focused on two pillars and ignored the other two and guess what happened...we dumped more money into those same two pillars thinking that would help.

The data on drug use in Portugal from the European Monitoring Centre suggests the number of young adults (15-34) using cocaine, MDMA and Amphetamines all fell quite significantly between 2007 and 2017. Only cannabis use increased - but that's not an issue in the Canadian context. The data on treatment is more mixed. Treatment for cocaine addiction fell, and then rose again over the ten years from 2007 to 2017 - but not as high as it was in 2007. Far fewer people are seeking treatment for heroin addiction - falling from over 3,000 in 2007 to under 500 in 2017. So it's not a perfect record of reducing reliance on drugs in the population, but it's a way better record than almost anywhere else, especially in North America.

The Mayor of Porto seems to have made a sudden 180 having supported the health/treatment approach (rather than criminalization) since he was elected in 2013. In April 2019 he followed Lisbon in announcing a safe injection site at a conference in Porto. Then in September he stated his support for reintroducing criminal penalties for drug use in public spaces in the city. I guess those might not actually be contradictory positions - he seems to support treatment, but not permitting public use of drugs. The concern is that if drugs are once again illegal it will lead to more deaths and a potential reversal of the apparently successful reduction in drug activity.

It's all a work in progress, and obviously politics get mixed in (both here and in Portugal, it would seem). I agree that there were never sufficient resources made available to the Four Pillar approach, and it would seem that the current national political position is 'business as usual'. That suggests only local initiatives can be attempted, so affecting change (of any sort) will presumably be slow. Meanwhile there's a pandemic that has taken everybody's attention. Here's a long, thoughtful and up-to-date US piece that gives some examples of how things work in Portugal, answering some of Scryer's questions.

I find it interesting that BC, with around 5 million people, has pretty successfully (so far) dealt with Covid19, and seen only 168 deaths - but still has far more overdose deaths (918 last year). In contrast Portugal has around 10 million people, has seen 1,528 deaths from Covid19 but only 30 to 50 from drug overdose.

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by Changing City

I find it interesting that BC, with around 5 million people, has pretty successfully (so far) dealt with Covid19, and seen only 168 deaths - but still has far more overdose deaths (918 last year). In contrast Portugal has around 10 million people, has seen 1,528 deaths from Covid19 but only 30 to 50 from drug overdose.

[Sheba]

Stathcona Park homeless camp prompts new call for sanctioned tent city

Residents and businesses in Vancouver’s Strathcona neighbourhood are calling on government to create a permanent, sanctioned site for homeless campers.

The call comes as a new homeless camp in East Vancouver’s Strathcona Park continues to expand, with just a few days before sports teams are expected to return to the green space.

As of Friday, there were about 50 tents at the site, which is adjacent to well-used soccer, baseball and tennis facilities.

“We know that housing is the ultimate solution and that is not something that comes together overnight, but we are growing frustrated with different levels of government passing the buck,” said Strathcona Business Improvement Association executive director Theodora Lamb.

The Strathcona BIA, Strathcona Residents Association, businesses on Produce Row and other community groups have now written to city and provincial leaders calling for a permanent site for homeless campers.

The newest homeless camp sprang up after Vancouver police enforced an injunction against another camp on Port of Vancouver land next to CRAB Park. That camp was established after the province shut down the two-year-old Oppenheimer Park homeless camp.

Before that, homeless people had been living in a series of tent cities on Powell Street, Main Street, East Hastings, and before that, Oppenheimer Park once again.

Lamb said residents and businesses recognize homelessness as a complex problem, and that displacing homeless camps one after another does nothing to help anyone.

“Strathcona is perfectly aware that the solutions are still likely going to be in our community we’re here to help, we’re here for the long term, but this is not a long term solution,” she said.

“What there isn’t a lot of space or tolerance for is the criminal or violent activity that any displaced camp attracts.”

There was at least one overdose death associated with the CRAB Park camp, while police recorded a homicide, brutal sexual assault and multiple weapons seizures from the Oppenheimer Park camp.

Michelle Plant, who moved into the park with her partner after living on the streets in the Downtown Eastside said the camp offers a measure of safety and dignity.

“There’s people that watch your back, that watch your tent when you’re gone. There’s food. Just the community feeling that we haven’t had in a few years.”

She said housing is the long-term solution, but wouldn’t be opposed to a city-sanctioned camp as a middle-step.

“Some people have been living in tents for a long time, and to transition from a tent to say, an apartment building or [modular housing] or a hotel is quite a transition,” she said. “It’s a bit too much.”

It’s not the first call for a city-sanctioned permanent encampment.

Last winter, the Downtown Vancouver Business Improvement Association also called for a permanent site, modelled on San Diego’s response to the homelessness crisis.

Lamb said it is now time for government to step in and ensure the Stathcona camp doesn’t simply get moved to another public park.

“We waited years for Oppenheimer, and what did we learn?” she asked.

“There needs to be a moment where we all step back and ask what did we learn from this?”

[logan5]

“Some people have been living in tents for a long time, and to transition from a tent to say, an apartment building or [modular housing] or a hotel is quite a transition,” she said. “It’s a bit too much.”

Seriously? Jesus, these people have an excuse for everything, but this one is top notch.

But I do like the idea of a designated area for these camps, and while we are at it, find a more appropriate designated area for the street people that have destroyed our city's most historic area so we can restore back to the condition it deserves to be in.

The DTES would easily be one of the great neighbourhoods in North America if it wasn't overrun by addicts.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by logan5

Seriously? Jesus, these people have an excuse for everything, but this one is top notch.

But I do like the idea of a designated area for these camps, and while we are at it, find a more appropriate designated area for the street people that have destroyed our city's most historic area so we can restore back to the condition it deserves to be in.

The DTES would easily be one of the great neighbourhoods in North America if it wasn't overrun by addicts.

But where? Seriously, where would you put a place like that?

The DTES was pretty much chosen by accident, and pretty much every large parking lot in the DT/ False Creek area is going to be developed in the next decade.
Conceivably they could take a lot out of the Flats, but the City's been trying to gentrify that area.

Not to mention they still have tent cities springing up anyways.