Canadian cities are declaring states of emergency over rampant public disorder, as libraries, transit systems and parks struggle to balance their core functions with providing crisis services for the homeless, mentally ill and drug addicted.

This September, both Barrie, Ontario and Smithers, British Columbia declared emergencies, citing public disorder caused by open drug use, encampments, theft and violence. In June, Williams Lake, B.C. followed suit, planning to implement an 11 p.m. curfew and exploring involuntary detention before the province intervened.

The crisis has prompted urgent questions about Canada drug policy failures and whether the country’s approach to harm reduction has backfired spectacularly.

Public Institutions Overwhelmed

This week, Toronto Transit Commission announced it would station crisis worker teams directly on subway platforms to improve public safety. Last week, Toronto Public Library revealed plans to increase branches offering crisis and social support services, building on a 2023 pilot project with Toronto’s Gerstein Crisis Centre.

Amanda French, manager of social development at Toronto Public Library, told CBC the move “only made sense.”

But does it? Over the past decade, public institutions have steadily increased resources devoted to servicing the homeless, mentally ill and drug addicted, often at the expense of serving the groups these spaces were intended for.

Without public order, Canadians will increasingly cease to patronise the public institutions that make communities welcoming and vibrant. Businesses will close up shop in city centres, accelerating community decline and creating a vicious downward spiral.

Harm Reduction Under Scrutiny

Canada drug policy failures stem largely from harm reduction approaches that correlate directly with rising public disorder. These policies aim to reduce harms associated with drug use, such as overdose or infection, and were intended to be introduced alongside investments in recovery services.

Unlike Portugal, which prioritised treatment alongside harm reduction, Canada failed to make these investments. For this and other reasons, many experts now say the policies aren’t working.

Dr. Launette Rieb, a clinical associate professor at the University of British Columbia and addiction medicine specialist, recently told Canadian Affairs: “Many of my addiction medicine colleagues have stopped prescribing ‘safe supply’ hydromorphone to their patients because of the high rates of diversion and lack of efficacy in stabilising the substance use disorder (sometimes worsening it).”

Despite such damning assessments, some Canadians remain closed to the possibility that these policies may need changing. Worse, some foster a climate that penalises dissent.

“Many doctors who initially supported ‘safe supply’ no longer provide it but do not wish to talk about it publicly for fear of reprisals,” Rieb said.

Europe’s Different Approach

Canada and the United States have been far harder hit by the drug crisis than European countries, according to reporting by The Globe and Mail in August. The article points to potential factors spanning doctors’ prescribing practices, drug trade flows, drug laws and enforcement.

Unlike Canada, most of Europe has not legalised cannabis. European countries also enforce their drug laws more rigorously.

“According to the UN, Europe arrests, prosecutes and convicts people for drug-related offences at a much higher rate than that of the Americas,” the article noted.

Treatment rates also vary dramatically. According to the latest UN data, 28 percent of people with drug use disorders in Europe received treatment, compared to only 9 percent in the Americas.

And then there’s harm reduction. No other country went “whole hog” on harm reduction the way Canada did, one professor told The Globe.

The Cost of Ideological Rigidity

Canadian pharmaceutical policy mistakes extend beyond harm reduction. The reluctance to critically examine failing policies has created a climate where evidence-based concerns are suppressed rather than addressed.

Cities across Canada have reported on the crisis, from Toronto and Ottawa to Nanaimo. These cries for help must be taken seriously. The solution cannot simply be more of the same, further expanding public institutions’ crisis services whilst neglecting their core purposes and clientele.

Canada must make public order a priority again, but many remain unwilling to acknowledge that current approaches have failed. Some cities have taken extraordinary steps, yet federal and provincial responses have been inadequate.

Looking Abroad for Solutions

If Canada wants public order, it should look to countries that are orderly and identify what makes them different. There is no shame in copying good policies. There should be shame in sticking with failed ones due to ideology.

European countries demonstrate that stricter enforcement, higher treatment rates, and more cautious approaches to harm reduction can coexist with compassion for those struggling with addiction. Canada drug policy failures highlight what happens when ideology trumps evidence.

The question isn’t whether Canada’s approach needs changing. Multiple cities declaring states of emergency have answered that definitively. The question is whether policymakers will acknowledge reality before more communities descend into disorder.

For businesses closing in city centres, for families avoiding public transit, for library patrons seeking quiet study spaces, the current trajectory is unsustainable. Canadian pharmaceutical policy mistakes have real consequences for real people trying to navigate public spaces that have become increasingly unsafe.

Without urgent policy reform, more cities will follow Barrie, Smithers and Williams Lake in declaring emergencies. The choice facing Canada is stark: continue down the current path and watch communities deteriorate, or admit the experiment has failed and look abroad for better alternatives.

Source: Breaking Needles