Experts say Sask. legislation meant to crack down on public drug use may worsen crime

Saskatchewan's announcement that it would expand police authority to address drug use and trafficking has some applauding it for protecting businesses, but others predict it will backfire and lead to more crime as people attempt to survive under more pressure.

On Tuesday, the Saskatchewan government said it would amend or establish laws that, among other things, would allow police officers to remove people using fentanyl or meth in a semi-public space — like a library, mall, restaurant, park or business entrance — without certain responsibilities usually required from a property owner. 

Also, people could face hefty fines and see their provincial social service benefits suspended if they are convicted of a drug-related crime.

Community members see pros and cons in the proposed laws.

Dan Hearn, who is in recovery from drug addiction and co-hosts Hard Knox Talks: Your Addiction Podcast, said he doesn't like taking his children downtown and having them see open drug use, but doesn't think more strict enforcement is the solution.

"I don't like having them see people with burnt meth pipes in their mouths or walking around with syringes behind their ears or whatever the case," Hearn said.

"However, I don't think further punitive measures is the solution."

Hearn said it's "unfathomable" that removing government benefits is going to stop people from using drugs. He also referenced a proposed policy allowing driver's licences to be cancelled, stating that while he was using drugs a suspended licence would not have stopped him from driving.

He said he agrees with other experts who say funding should be put toward health care, education and housing rather than strictly justice and enforcement.

"We can't punish the trauma out of people by creating more trauma."

On the other hand, he said he understands why some — like business owners — see this as a necessary change.

Legislation offers respite to business: organizations

The changes are being welcomed by the Saskatoon Chamber of Commerce and the North Saskatoon Business Association, who say the new laws will protect business owners and customers.

"There is an unfair onus on the owner or manager to address the immediate risks associated with these incidents and then spend extra time and effort providing a statement, or testifying in court, to have individuals removed from their properties," Jason Aebig, CEO of the Saskatoon Chamber of Commerce, said in an emailed statement.

According to the province, the new measures are expected to:

• Create provincial fines up to $1 million for production, transportation, distribution and use or illicit substances.
• Examine updates to the Fine Option program, allowing offenders to attend eligible addictions programming as credit against court-imposed fines.
• Prioritize drug-related offenders and have the Warrant Intelligence Team work with the province to suspend offenders's government benefits.
• Focus efforts under existing laws that allow the government to seize property used to commit crimes or gained through illegal activity.
• Amend regulations to classify drug use and other disruptive activities as trespassing to deter those actions in semi-public spaces, including listing "dangerous, drug-related items" as street weapons to allow police to seize them.
• Implementing policy to cancel provincial licences — including driver's licences, provincial firearms licences, hunting and fishing licences, some municipal licenses and provincial social services benefits — for people convicted of drug-related crimes.

In a news release, the government framed the new changes as a route to protecting communities "from illicit fentanyl and methamphetamine production, transportation, trafficking and street use in the province."

Experts expect that the legislation could do the opposite.

Less social benefits, more crime

Barbara Fornssler, an assistant professor in the school of public health at the University of Saskatchewan who researches substance use and harm reduction, said encampments form in public spaces, like outside the library, because of provincial policy failures.

Fornssler said threatening fines that users can't handle or suspending social service benefits is not going to be effective. She said policy makers need to understand people who use substances are not going to be scared into sobriety because their social benefits are threatened.

"Instead, what's going to happen is that they're going to be driven further into hiding and further away from those supports for fear of having that basic standard of living taken away," she said.

Fornssler said people will search elsewhere to fill those gaps. Without the help of basic community supports, users could face with tough decisions, like whether to steal spare change from a vehicle console to buy food or not eat.

Both Fornssler and Dr. Peter Butt, a retired associate professor of medicine at the University of Saskatchewan, say that punitive approaches to stopping drug users has proven to be ineffective.

Butt also said the proposed rules consider drug users and dealers as equals, and argued that's an issue.

He said increasing penalties for people on the production and trafficking side of drug use is key to policing, but that penalizing users to the same extent will not work as hoped, especially if their social benefits are taken away.

"It's going to create more homelessness on the streets. It's going to create more desperation," he said.

"Frankly it's only going to make the problem worse with regards to people perhaps committing crime in order to manage their day-to-day life."