Sask. residents split on province funding safe consumption sites, survey suggests

A survey from the University of Saskatchewan found that while nearly four in five respondents believe drug addiction is a health issue, fewer than half of respondents say the provincial government should have funded the province's first supervised consumption site.

Advocates say the stigma around substance use is hindering progress.

In March, the provincial government denied Prairie Harm Reduction's request for $1.3 million in funding for its supervised consumption site in Saskatoon, which provides safe supplies and medical attention to people while they use drugs.

It's the only active facility in the country with a safe inhalation space, according to the organization's executive director, Jason Mercredi.

The survey of 400 Saskatchewan residents was commissioned by CBC and done by the U of S's Canadian hub for applied and social research.

A large majority (78.6 per cent) of those surveyed said yes when asked if drug addiction is a health issue, compared with 15.9 per cent who said no.

One in four people surveyed (25 per cent) had been, or knew someone who had been, affected by opioid addiction. That portion increased to 35 per cent in respondents from rural populations. 

About 30 per cent of all survey respondents — urban and rural — said supervised consumption sites were somewhat effective at reducing harm associated with drug use. The next most common answer — at about 20 per cent — was that they were very ineffective.

People from urban areas and middle-aged people were more likely to believe the sites were effective, while about 81 per cent of young, rural respondents believe the sites are ineffective and agreed with the province's decision not to fund Prairie Harm Reduction's site. 

The number of overdose deaths in Canada has been called a second epidemic accompanying the COVID-19 pandemic.

There were about 6,200 apparent opioid overdose deaths in the country last year — about 17 each day. A study from the University of Waterloo found there was a 592 per cent increase in the number of opioid deaths from 2000 to 2017.

Last year, there were 67 confirmed overdose deaths in Saskatoon and 118 in Regina, according to the Saskatchewan Coroners Service, which said 2020 was the deadliest year for drug overdoses. 

"It shouldn't be up for debate whether people live or die. Period. This is a health-care issue. We need to address it through a health-care lens," Mercredi said. 

While Prairie Harm Reduction does get funding from the provincial government — about $305,000 is allotted for the 2021-22 year — that money is for its other programming. The supervised consumption site is paid for via fundraising.

In the survey, 43.2 per cent of people said the province should have funded the site, while 38.7 per cent said the province was right not to do so. Another 14.6 per cent said they didn't know and 3.5 per cent refused to answer.

Mercredi blames the lack of funding on the government's stigmatization of substance users. He said he's even more frustrated about the funding because the Saskatchewan government's own documents outline the benefits of the site. 

In partially redacted documents released to The Canadian Press under freedom-of-information legislation, the provincial government says they are effective and evidence suggests a site won't negatively impact public safety in a community.

Mercredi said 724 people used the supervised consumption site between October, when it opened, and March 31. While some overdosed, none died, he said.

Dead people can't recover.- Cheryl Deschene

Cheryl Deschene's son, Jordan, died from an overdose in 2015. Now, Deschene advocates for systemic changes and tries to address the stigma around addiction.  

Deschene said supervised consumption sites offer a safe place for users, keep drug use away from public spaces, provide help if users ask for it and, most importantly, keep people alive. 

"Dead people can't recover," she said.

Deschene understands why others are apprehensive about supervised consumption sites — she once felt the same way. She compares such sites to bars, saying alcoholism doesn't carry the same stigma as other substances. 

"I can go to the liquor board and buy safe liquor, that I know will not kill me unless I drink to the extreme, and I have a safe place to consume it [like a bar] if I so choose. Drugs are the same thing," she said. 

More than half of survey respondents (68.4 per cent) said having people who inject drugs in your neighbourhood makes it either very or somewhat unsafe.

Gabriela Novotna, an associate professor in the faculty of social work at University of Regina, said that belief was supported by a nearly 200-page review of supervised consumption sites from the Alberta Ministry of Health in 2020. 

But Novotna said the evaluation was criticized by researchers for its weak methodology. She said research suggests there's no correlation between consumption sites and increased criminality in a community. 

"I do understand that people do feel unsafe when they witness drug consumption in public," she said. 

"That's actually what I think those supervised drug consumption facilities address: that they provide space for people who consume drugs and have difficulties [engaging] in other recovery-based activities."

When asked if a supervised injection site may make the community unsafe, or if it would promote substance use, Mercredi's tone changed. The purpose of the site is to keep those who use it from dying, he said.

"The crime rates haven't gone up around our building; the internal documents from the Ministry of Health show that we're not having an adverse effect on the community. So if the facts show that, what [do] opinions matter?" said Mercredi.

Data for the survey was collected by surveying 400 respondents by telephone from June 1 to 9. The margin of error is plus or minus 4.9 per cent, 19 times out of 20.