Expert Advisory Committee report: Insite works

insiteLate Friday afternoon (PST) Health Canada tried to quietly release the Final report of the Expert Advisory Committee on Supervised Injection Site Research. (Since government reports are public domain I’ve created a downloadable, easier to read, PDF version that can be found here).

Why quietly release such an upbeat report? Because the Health Minister is ideologically committed to closing Insite. Unfortunately for him, the report confirms what researchers and scientists have been telling us all along: that Insite works.

Consequently, for what must be the first time in Health Canada’s history the department is trying to bury a study that highlights how one of its programs improves healthcare outcomes to Canada’s most marginalized citizens.

Ah, the irony.

Well, one can’t blame him. The Minister simple doesn’t want anyone to know that his own hand picked experts have robbed him of any scientific basis for ending the program.

Below are some of the report’s highlights about how INSITE benefits the public:

  • INSITE encourages users to seek counseling, detoxification and treatment. Such activities have contributed to an increased use of detoxification services and increased engagement in treatment. Translation: INSITE helps drug users get off drugs.
  • Observations taken 6 weeks before and 12 weeks after the opening of INSITE indicated a reduction in the number of people injecting in public. Translation: INSITE gets drug users off the streets, making the safer and more community friendly.
  • There was no evidence of increases in drug-related loitering, drug dealing or petty crime in areas around INSITE. Translation: INSITE doesn’t increase crime.
  • A private security company contracted by the Chinese Business Association reported reductions in crime in the Chinese business district in a surrounding area outside the DTE. Analysis of police data for the DTE and surrounding areas showed no changes in rates of crime recorded by police. Translation: INSITE definitely doesn’t increase crime.
  • There is no evidence that INSITE influence rates of drug use in the community or increase relapse rates among injection drug users. Translation: INSITE doesn’t encourage drug use.
  • Every dollar spent on INSITE saved 0.97 to 2.90 in government spending on other services. Translation: INSITE saves taxpayers dollars – especially in heathcare costs.

These benefits are significant. However, the Conservatives spin machine is already hard at work. Specifically, it is trying to use this line – out of context – to support its claim that INSITE is ineffective:

“The injections at INSITE account for less than 5% of injections in the Downtown Eastside. This limits the likelihood of significant direct impact from INSITE in the Downtown Eastside.”

However, since the report also points out (contrary to what James Moore has misleadingly telling his constituents) that:

“An average of more than 600 visits a day shows that INSITE operates near capacity.”

The report isn’t arguing that INSITE is ineffective, it’s simply pointing out that it isn’t large enough to meet the demand. This is akin to claiming that a hospital should be declared “ineffective” and shut down because the people it didn’t have the capacity to serve were still dying of heart attacks.

The Conservatives now have two months before the June deadline they created to decide: are they going to shut down a program that reduces drug addiction and saves the public money?

Canada’s World seeks bloggers

Canada’s World, a citizen-led initiative inspiring conversations on Canada’s role in the world, is looking for some politically savvy, wonderfully geeky yet hip types who understand blogging culture and are eager to write about different aspects of Canada’s role in the world. As a member of our group blog, you’ll receive the following:

  1. Money – We’ll be paying our bloggers $20 per post under 200 words, $30 per post over 200 words, to a maximum of $60 per month. It’s not a huge sum, but it might cover your phone bill.
  2. Exposure – The blog itself will be a great way to get your perspective or your research out to a popular audience. In addition, Canada’s World has ties to many more traditional media outlets. For example, we partnered with the Globe and Mail last month for an online feature (still visible here: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080215.wqacanadaworld16/BNStory/Front) When we’re asked to recommend commentators on particular issues to the media outlets we partner with, our bloggers will obviously be top of mind.
  3. Good Karma – If you’re at all familiar with the blogging culture in Canada, you’ll know that the vast majority of blogging on politics here is deeply partisan. We’re going to contribute something that transcends those divides — that is fresh, clear-minded and engaging — to the online environment in Canada. You’ll be part of a movement to get people thinking about Canada’s role in the world in a new, more active and more constructive way.


In exchange, we’ll need you to do the following things for us:

  1. Write in an accessible (read: not academic) way – We want to engage the public – not by dumbing anything down, but by considering the ways that we can communicate what we know and believe to people from very diverse backgrounds. This means we can discuss things like “the diaspora” and “transnationalism” but first we need to explain what those things are. Part of our mission is to open up conversations about Canada’s role in the world to a broader audience, and the blog is motivated by that same concern.
  2. Post once a month – That’s the minimum.
  3. Write about Canada’s role in the world – Posts about any international issue are welcome – but only if they are examined through the lens of Canada’s role in the world. That means always paying some attention to Canada’s position on/contribution to the issue up for discussion.
  4. Be reasonable and interesting. As stated above, we’re looking for work that is clear-minded and above the fray of political debates. Our Online Community Facilitator Reilly will be vetting posts, and will let bloggers know if anything they’ve said seems to advance a partisan agenda or be generally unconstructive.
  5. Submit a sample post by April 30th 2008. The sample post should be 200-400 words long and should touch on one of our nine theme areas (http://www.igloo.org/canadasworld/learnmor/ninenewr) broadly interpreted. Send sample posts to reilly@canadasworld.ca with the subject line Sample blog post. We’ll be getting back to potential bloggers to let them know if they’re been selected by the end of May at the latest.

Questions? Email Reilly Yeo, Canada’s World Online Community Facilitator

Selling of RADARSAT

The sale of RADARSAT-2 is one that has been bubbling below the surface and is finally starting to get some media attention. There is a real and valid concern that the sale of B.C.-based MacDonald Dettwiler & Associates (MDA) to Alliant Techsystems of Minnesota will result in the loss of domestic capacity to monitor ice and traffic in the North – capacity that Canadian taxpayers paid to develop and deploy.

For those who are also concerned about this issue – or who simply want to learn more – the Liu Institute and the Rideau Institute will be holding a joint event this Wednesday, April 7th 16th at the H.R. MacMillan Space Centre in Vancouver.

RADARSAT-2: ARE WE SELLING OUR EYES?

A Public Forum on the Proposed Sale of MacDonald Dettwiler’s space division

Wednesday, April 16, 7:00 PM

H.R. MacMillan Space Centre, Vanier Park, Vancouver

Speakers include:

Michael Byers, Canada Research Chair in Global Politics and International Law, UBC
Paul Cottle, former employee, MacDonald Dettwiler & Associates
Wade Huntley, Director, Simons Centre for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Research, UBC
Steve Staples, President, Rideau Institute on International Affairs

Sponsored by the Liu Institute for Global Issues, UBC & Rideau Institute on International Affairs

ALL WELCOME

Walking blues

As some of you know (and for reasons outlined here) I try to walk at least one direction to every meeting I have in Vancouver.

Obviously I’m interested in all things walking which is why – in a brief fly by of Boston – I was stunned to find this store. A specialty store dedicated to walking nerds. If only I’d had time…

Still interested? Well… fellow walking nerds may wish to know about Pednet. Founded by Chris Bradshaw, Pednet was started in 1995 and (according to the site):

“is the international list for those advocating for more and safer walking, focusing on urban environments. Topics include: intersection design, pedestrian-driver interface, effects of walking on individual & streetscape, weather conditions, trends, disabled/children/seniors, & cetera.”

Something that combines my interest in public policy with my zeal for walking… could be dangerous! But such are the opportunities afforded to us by the internet. H/T and thank you to Peter M. for the link.

Afghanistan: Tears are not enough, but neither are troops

Taylor Owen and Patrick Travers had a nice op-ed published in Saturday’s Toronto Star. Entitled, “2011 is a date, not a goal” it drives to the heart of the debate we aren’t having on Afghanistan.

It increasingly feels that in referencing the “Afghan Mission” the “mission” part has been lost somewhere. It is as though simply being in Afghanistan has become an end in of itself. This should not the case. We have a mission there, one that it would be nice if the government articulated from time to time and that it would talk to the public about whether or not we were getting closer or further away from achieving it.

Get the new Beta of Firefox 3

Mozilla recently released a new beta version of Firefox 3. If you haven’t been using it I highly recommend downloading a copy. I’ve been using Firefox 3 a few months now and there are 2 features I couldn’t imagine living without.

The first is the revamped address bar. Most address bars boast an auto-complete function (e.g. start typing http://www.ea… and it will fill in the rest). But Firefox 3’s address bar allows you to type in any word from the url and it will give you a list of choices, balanced between sites you frequently go to and the sites you most recently visited. So for example if, after reading this post, you simply type “beta” into the address bar, this page will almost certainly be one of your choices. It makes finding that web page you were at yesterday, but can’t remember than name of, really, really easy.

The second is that – upon request – Firefox will remember all the sites you are viewing when you shut it down. That way, when you load it back up – say, the next morning – all the tabs and sites you had open will reappear. I no longer to a bookmark a bunch of sites when I’m shutting down my computer. Super convenient.

On a seperate but parallel note, Apple recently released its Safari browser for the PC and has been bragging about how it is faster than Firefox. This is true, if you are using Firefox 2! According to an independent industry observer, Firefox 3 is actually faster than Safari.

myforeignpolicy.ca

So in February, during the online discussion with Granatstein and Axworthy, when I picked up on the Canada25 Middle to Model Power thread and argued that:

“As a country we may appear adrift, but, as individuals, Canadians are more effectively and successfully engaged than ever. Quietly, we’ve transitioned from a middle power — a plucky country whose government prevented conflicts and ensured stability — to a model power — a country whose plucky citizens innovate solutions to new global challenges.”

and that

“In an era where technology enables individuals to self-organize, deploy resources, or simply get involved, Canadians have jumped at the opportunity.”

These women – profiled by the Globe & Mail – pretty much refer exactly to what I was talking about.

They are making their own foreign policy – and power to them.

Canada's racial stalemate

Calvin Helin author of Dances with DependencyThe other week – as virtually everybody is now aware – Obama gave his much celebrated speech on the racial stalemate in America.

Here in Canada we have a stalemate as well. It is discussed less frequently (if at all) then the American stalemate Obama spoke of, and it does not fall along clearly delineated racial lines. I am speaking of the stalemate between First Nations and the rest of Canada. On page 157 0f his book “Dances with Dependency: Indigenous Success through Self-Reliance” (if you don’t have a copy I highly recommend picking one up), aboriginal rights activist Calvin Helin writes a paragraph that parallels the sentiment of Obama’s speech.

When chronicling and discussing the very real problem of abuses of power, mismanagement, nepotism and corruption found on some First Nation band councils, Helin notes:

Aboriginal people are reluctant to speak publicly about these issues because they do not wish to provide grist for the political right in Canada who many feel are racist, and have no real interest in actually trying to make the situation better (though often there is a sizable, but silent contingent that supports the publication of such issues in what might be considered right-of-centre publications, because they are regarded as only telling the truth and trying to make things better for the ordinary Aboriginal folks). Generally, non-aboriginal observers have been reluctant to raise this issue as well because, in the current climate of political correctness, they might automatically be labelled as racists. Even the many Chiefs and Councils that are running honest governments in the best interests of their members feel compelled to defend against such reported abuses, because they fear their activities may become tarred with a brush that does not apply in their particular circumstances. Usually when this matter is raised publicly, there are entrenched positions on both sides of the debate and little communications as to how to solve these problems. (my own italics)

While this hardly captures the entire dynamic, it highlights an important dimension of Canada’s racial stalemate.  That anger and guilt in both communities – aboriginals and non-aboriginals – can sometime build narratives about the other that reinforce their mutual distrust and preventing us from reaching out and finding a way to address what is our country’s most important challenges.

I suspect this stalemate will not last. A new force could be about to completely alter this debate. A new generation – a demographic tsunami in fact – of smart, educated, and motivated young First Nation is about to crest over this country (While Calvin Helin is an excellent example, he is much older than the cohort I’m thinking of). I’m not sure that non-aboriginal leaders – and, to be frank, current aboriginal leaders – are even aware of what is about to hit them. Gauging from those I have met and befriended, this cohort is frustrated, but motivated, organized and very pragmatic. But perhaps, most importantly, they increasingly urban and, not as tied to the power structures of the reserves or chiefs. In this regard they transcend the discussion, living in, and comfortable in, both the aboriginal and non-aboriginal domain. One way or another they are will redefine this debate.

Clinton can't have it both ways on democracy and delegates

So Hillary Clinton has spent the last 3 months talking about how Michigan and Florida should be seated because”their votes should count.” It is important that these states, and their voters, be represented at the convention in Denver.

Now she’s arguing that pledged delegates – those delegates that were allocated by the outcomes of the caucuses and primaries – are not bound to abide by the election results that earned them their seat at the convention.

“Every delegate with very few exceptions is free to make up his or her mind however they choose,” Clinton told Time’s Mark Halperin in an interview published Wednesday.

So just to make sure we get this straight: it is important that democracy happen – especially in Florida and Michigan – but it is okay if the elected delegates violate that democratic process by not voting for the candidate they were elected to vote for. And this is democratic because…

…it isn’t.

For Canadians this simple translation is this: Clinton wants to encourage delegates to be like David Emerson. To get elected for supporting one party/candidate and then to switch sides immediately following the election. It is appalling position and undermines the very notion of democracy. While her concern over the Michigan and Florida delegates was never genuine (just look at her remarks back in New Hampshire and Iowa) this only serves to further confirm what many of us fear – Clinton is willing to trade in any principle in order to win. It’s hard to be inspired by that.

Hargrove vs. Layton

According to National Newswatch Buzz Hargrove is ruminating running as a Liberal against Jack Layton.

It is no secret that Hargrove and Layton dislike each other. Indeed, the NDP even revoked Hargrove’s membership during the last electoin after he suggested NDP voters vote strategically (e.g. for Liberals) in some ridings to prevent the Conservatives from gaining power.

The bigger question is why the Liberals would want to be the vehicle for this feud. Taking out Layton will not end the NDP. Indeed, it’s unclear why the Liberals would want to take out Layton at all. He’s has been pretty good for the Liberals… the NDP remains more or less stuck in the polls. Why would the Liberals mess with a good thing?

The downside however, is not insignificant. Taking a run at Layton could galvanize NDP voters as well as give him greater prominance in the election. Layton usually has to fight for media attention. By offering up a high profile challenger the Liberals will draw attention to him that he could never earn on his own. Worse still, a high profile match up would enable Layton to claim the Liberals perceive him as a threat – lending him an air of credibility and respect that again, he has been unable to earn on his own.

All in all, it’s obvious what Hargrove gets out of it, the Liberals… less so.

But then, this is all rumour and speculation…