The people of Canada have been at war over Cannabis for longer than we have ever been at war before. The war is called ?Canada?s Drug Strategy? and for more than 30 years the Canadian government ? and particularly the Royal Canadian Mounted Police ? have waged a vicious and costly campaign against our own citizens.
They have not done this for our protection, for our health, or to make our society better. The reason they have done this is simple. Money. The Canadian government spends more than $500 million annually enforcing drug laws. However, as Solicitor General Sheila Fraser wrote, ?The federal government could not provide complete information on resources spent to address illicit drugs.?
The prohibition of certain substances in our society has created by the government?s own admission, an uncountable trough of funding. No group is more aware of this than the RCMP and all other police forces in Canada, as they have not only become the biggest feeders, they have wormed their way into a position of writing the very policies and laws that ensure their trough will always be full. Ignoring that the Canadian Senate reported in 2002 that the continued prohibition of cannabis is far more harmful to the Canadian people than the substance itself, 70% of all criminal drug charges laid in Canada are for cannabis offences. Each year Canadians increasingly show a desire to decriminalize Cannabis, while the arrest numbers continue to rise. It should be called ?Cannabis Drug Strategy? written by the Royal Canadian Marijuana Police.
This uncountable trough of money has attracted a feeding frenzy of what the Federal Health ministry calls ?The Stakeholders.? This group, led by the police, includes the pharmaceutical industry, the alcohol industry, the huge industry of substance abuse research, and the United States of America. Their very name would imply that they all have something to be lost or gained but in reality it would be the same thing. The gain is the unlimited federal funding and the possible loss would be the unlimited federal funding.
The notion of influencing policy for your own gain was first used by Murray B. Koffler, O.C., then President of Shoppers Drug Mart. He started The Council On Drug Abuse (CODA) back in 1969. According to their own web page:
?When the Council on Drug Abuse was founded in 1969, the prevailing view was that with a pro-active approach, the disturbing trend toward drug abuse, especially among youth, could be halted if not eradicated. This opinion was shared by concerned corporate heads in the pharmaceutical industry in Canada whose mandate to supply potentially life-saving drugs to the public was being undermined.?
Our mandate to supply drugs is being undermined? They don?t even try to hide the fact that this is all for corporate gain. They say they are a charitable, non-profit organization, but ?CODA receives financial support from the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. It also relies on foundations, corporations and individuals to complement its program funding requirements.? I?m not sure how it remains charitable with government funding, nor do they list who else is giving them financial support, but it would seem that there is profit to be gained. When you go to their web page you?ll see a banner that says CODA is celebrating 30 years of Drug Abuse Prevention with Dramatic Results. What do they have to celebrate? They have not halted or eradicated drug use among our youth, and the dramatic results would be their overwhelming failure to do so. Perhaps they are celebrating for a different reason.
Somehow this organization has been allowed to sponsor and continues to sponsor preventive alcohol and other drug education programs in schools for students, teachers and parents. In fact, they are going into our schools and teaching our children all about drugs as early as kindergarten. From CODA?s web page:
?The What If? Drug Awareness Program has been in operation through CODA since 1997. More than 55,000 children have heard the storytelling approach in their classrooms across Ontario, in the North West Territories and in South Carolina. The original stories are narrated using stuffed animal characters for enhancement. Stories vary with age groups, touching on more and more involved issues related to substance abuse. Children in kindergarten really enjoy the street proofing and poison proofing aspects of the story. As with their older siblings and friends, they repeat the rhymes and songs with enthusiasm. The Drug discussions can sometimes be surprising.
?For example, children in grade two have had in-depth knowledge of drugs such as ecstasy, cocaine, marijuana and speed. Their approach to the discussions detailed the descriptions of the drugs, street names and, in some cases, unsolicited demonstrations of how the drugs are used. One child explained that the flower of the marijuana plant was the best part because it had more of the drug in it. As the grade levels progress, more time is allowed for the program so more discussion can be accomplished. Disclosures have ranged from one child in grade two turning to her friend (after asking about marijuana) and exclaiming ?Oh, oh, mom isn?t gonna? like it when she hears this!?, to one child plaintively asking what would happen to her when her mother died from using ?really bad drugs?. Schools staff members are present during the sessions to allow for follow up and to ensure that disclosures are dealt with in an appropriate manner. Daycares, cub, beaver, brownies and sparks groups have also enjoyed the program and, judging by the feedback from leaders, gained a great deal of knowledge. Summer camps indicated that children repeated the rhyme in the story and prevented others from picking up needles and other discarded drug paraphernalia.?
This is stunning. I can?t believe that they are allowed to brainwash our children for their own corporate greed. Or why they are surprised that kids in Grade 2 know all about drugs? they taught them about them in kindergarten! This is a self-professed special interest group invented to service the pharmaceutical industry and now the RCMP.
One of the educators out there spewing their pro-prohibition anti-reform garbage is Heather Hodgson. ?She has been a CODA educator since 1998. She has been involved in the drug, alcohol and impaired driving education field since 1981. Her 17 years of police experience included drug and safety education, (sergeant) supervision of safety bureau and sergeant in traffic duties. She has received awards for her work in the safety and drug education field from organizations including the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (CACP), Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police Drug Abuse Committee, the Solicitor General of Ontario and several community groups.?
Seventeen years a cop, she also received awards from the CACP, so is absolutely beholden to their enforcement and anti-reform point of view. Although they don?t say, she must be retired. She also affects drug policy by being on The Board of Directors for the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse (much more on that in a moment).
In 1986, Brian Mulroney and the Conservative party declared that Canada had a ?drug epidemic?. Coincidently it was just two days after Ronald Reagan declared his War on Drugs in the U.S. One year later, $210 million dollars was doled out to form the policy program of Canada?s Drug Strategy (CDS). $100 million of those dollars was earmarked for the expansion of drug treatment programs through federal transfers to the provincial health organizations. However, only $50 million was actually allocated, with most of the rest being granted to police education programs, creating a whole squad of drug education specialists in the RCMP, and giving them a huge propaganda tool to force Canadians to go along with their cruel War. Canada?s ?drug strategy? has been pro-prohibitionist and anti-reform ever since.
To prove this, the Conservatives introduced bill C-85 in 1992 calling for harsher sentences and maintaining that Cannabis continue to be treated the same as cocaine and heroin. One year later the successive Liberal government introduced Bill C-7 that was almost identical and continued to target the drug user. When literally all of the external witness groups (i.e. policy analysts, public health reps and most of the Canadian public) rejected both bills in hearings while the legislation was being drafted, the only exception was the Chiefs of Police Association ? not surprisingly, since cannabis possession charges made up half of all drug-related criminal incidences in Canada in 1993. Given the stats, Canada?s ?drug problem? is an institutionally maintained cannabis problem. It has been manufactured by the police using enormous, persistent misinformation campaigns and by infiltrating every organization that affects policy regarding cannabis.
?The Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse (CCSA) was established by an Act of Parliament in 1988 as an arm?s-length, not-for-profit organization supported by the Federal Government through Canada?s Drug Strategy?. Under the umbrella of Health Canada, ?they work collaboratively with governments, researchers, enforcement agencies, treatment professionals and the private sector to achieve a balanced and holistic approach to addictions that will lead to a healthier and safer Canadian public.? They are ?dedicated to disseminating information, providing policy guidance, and sharing treatment knowledge and best practices related to substance abuse issues. Their mission is to provide objective, evidence-based information and advice to help reduce the health, social and economic harm associated with substance abuse and addictions.?
When we look at the CCSA?s board of directors, we find a bunch of retirees representing all of the same ?Stakeholders?. The largest representation is from the police.
Chief Barry V. King
?Chief King?s 44-year career includes 19 years as Chief of Police in the cities of Brockville and Sault Ste. Marie, 18 years with Peel Regional Police (Superintendent) and service with the Ontario Provincial Police and the Canadian Forces Military Police. Chair of the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse since 2001, he is a member of the Executive Committee. Chief King is also Secretary-Treasurer of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police and served for 12 years as Chair of the CACP Drug Abuse Committee. In addition, he is the recipient of both Canadian and Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police Service Awards for Outstanding Contribution to the Advancement of Law Enforcement, and the Addiction Research Foundation (Ontario) Community Achievement Award for Outstanding Leadership in the Development of Youth Drug and Alcohol Educational Programs in Canada. He graduated from the 128th session of the F.B.I. National Academy, the FBI LEEDA Executive Program, the Canadian and Ontario Police Colleges.?
Wow. Could you be more of a cop than this guy? He is absolutely beholding to the police in every way possible. They even gave him an award for advancing law enforcement. He is pro-enforcement and anti-reform all the way. In all my research they always refer to him as ?Chief?. I think it might actually be his first name.
Heather?s been on the board since 2000. As a police officer, she assisted in the development of the Drug Abuse Prevention Training Officers Course for the Canadian Police College. She presented a paper entitled ?The Role Of Police In Drug Education in Ontario? There Is Something We Can Do.? She is also author of a widely used textbook, ?Community Policing: Working Together to Build Safe Communities?, and a series of programs on drug awareness under the umbrella title of ?Living Life?. This woman obviously is coming from an enforcement point of view.
Normand Beauchesne ? retired in 2002
Beauchesne is a part time member of the National Parole Board. He was a police officer in Toronto before becoming a lawyer and started providing legal advice to the Toronto Police. He is a life member of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police.
A lawyer for cops. Is there anything scarier than that? It?s not tough to see whose point of view he supports.
This guy was an obstetrician-gynecologist before retiring in 1996. He has absolutely no background in substance use or abuse. He is merely a connection to the Association Of Physicians.
This guy spent 39 years with Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commissions and is currently the chair of Alcoholics Anonymous. He was given awards by the CCSA and the Canadian Government for ?outstanding contributions to all phases of Canada?s Drug Strategy?. This man spent his entire life feeding off the drug abuse trough and was given an award for it. He is beholding to the system completely, and considering the amount of alcohol abuse in Alberta, he was a failure.
This woman has made her entire living from the Drug Abuse trough through the Health and Community Services of Newfoundland and Labrador including a stint as Deputy Minister of Policy and Planning.
He founded and endowed the Kaiser Foundation, which is an American organization that is hooked up the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) and all other insane U.S. drug programs. He comes from big business and is up to his eyeballs in the research and addiction program trough.
Roger D. Landry
Formerly the chair of the Canadian Press and the Canadian Daily Newspaper Association this guy has no experience whatsoever with substance use or abuse. He was ?Marketing Man of Year? in 1980 and no doubt brings his media connections and marketing skills to the table when it comes to the information disseminating part.
Lavack similarly has a background in marketing having coordinated campaigns for Health Canada. Her Ph.D. thesis examined the use of fear appeals in social marketing advertising campaigns directed at drug abuse. She has no experience with drug use or abuse.
President of A.J. Liston & Associates Ltd., providing consulting services to the pharmaceutical industry. Prior to that he was Assistant Deputy Minister, Health Protection Branch, governing the very industry he now consults for. He has no experience with drug use or abuse.
Dr. Christine Loock
Loock?s experience has been all about Fetal Alcohol Syndrome.
Morrison is president of Sakamor & Associates Inc., a consulting business services firm specializing in government relations, charitable fundraising and event planning. Prior to that he had a long career with the Brewers Association of Canada.
Retired in 1999, he spent his entire life working for the government. And now, wouldn?t you know it, is a consultant on federal-provincial affairs. At one point he was Assistant Deputy Minister of the Medical Services branch of Health Canada and was responsible for Indian and Northern Health Services, including the National Native Alcohol and Drug Abuse Program.
These are the people who are directing our drug policies and are responsible for keeping cannabis illegal in Canada. None of them have any experience with cannabis except from an enforcement or abuse point of view. They are mostly all retired from a living off the government trough. Many still make a living from the industries that benefit most from prohibition and anti reform.
When you look at Canada?s Drug Strategy, most recently renewed in 2003, you can see how it is totally designed to increase enforcement and the need for more cops. In their own words;
?The harmful use of legal substances, such as alcohol and prescription drugs, and illegal substances, such as marijuana, cocaine, heroin and ecstasy, have serious, negative consequences for all Canadians.?
This is bullshit right away. Marijuana is just heaped in with all of the dangerous substances. What are the negative consequences of using marijuana? Notice how they don?t even call it use, its ?harmful use?, so instantly they are biased in their approach. They go on to say:
?The Strategy uses a balanced approach to deal with both the demand for, and supply of, drugs based on four key pillars:
? prevention – to teach about the dangers of harmful substance use and to provide information on how to adopt healthy behaviours;
? enforcement – to prevent the unlawful import, export, production, distribution and possession of illegal drugs;
? treatment – for those with an unhealthy dependency on substances; and
? harm reduction – to limit the secondary effects of substance use, such as the spread of infectious diseases like HIV/AIDS and Hepatitis C.?
Where does Cannabis fit into the four pillars? There are no real dangers to teach about, you can?t develop an unhealthy dependency and no one gets a disease from using it. The only pillar left is enforcement.
?With the renewal of the Drug Strategy, the Government of Canada has reinforced the strong, balanced foundation provided by the four pillars, and broadened its commitment to the goal of the Drug Strategy by investing in four new areas of activity:
? leadership – to ensure coordination, consultation and accountability among the federal partners in the strategy and to reach out to other stakeholders as partnerships bring the best results;
? research and monitoring – to better understand substance abuse problems in Canada, and ensure effective decision-making;
? partnerships and intervention – to support community-based education and prevention initiatives to discourage and treat harmful substance use and to address marijuana grow operations and clandestine laboratories used to manufacture illegal substances; and,
? modernized legislation and policy – to ensure legislation and policy reflect the current views of Canadians.?
They even singled out marijuana grow ops and vow to ?support community-based prevention initiatives? against them. This is insane. Then in the next breath they vow ?to ensure legislation and policy reflect the current views of Canadians.? Here are the views of Canadians since the CCSA snorted into the world:
Canadian Cannabis Policy Public Opinion Polls Support for Decriminalization (survey terms are shown in parenthesis)
2005: 59% Canada, (?possession should not always result in a criminal record?)
2003: 69% (?fines rather than jail sentences for marijuana possession?) SES Research
2003: 58% (?reduced criminal implications?) Decima Research
2003: 83% (?want pot prohibition to be less stringent?)
2003: 65% (?decriminalization?)
2002: 50% (?decriminalization?)
2000: 65% (?decriminalization?)
1997: 51% (?should not be a criminal offence?)
1987: 39% (?decriminalization?)
Canadians have overwhelmingly wanted an end to cannabis prohibition since the year after the CCSA was formed. With so many snouts at the trough it?s no surprise this is all hog wash.
The CCSA?s mission statement is a complete lie. They are not objective, as they only collaborate with the stakeholders who certainly profit from their involvement. They are not at arm?s-length when providing policy guidance and have done nothing to help reduce the health, social and economic harm associated with substance abuse and addictions ? in reality, the use of drugs has risen each year. The economic harm is as a result of taxpayer?s dollars being wasted unable to stop it. The social harm results from more and more people being put in prison. This organization should be renamed the Continual Request for Additional Policing (CRAP).
I thought the police were here to serve and protect, not to be influencing the laws that are made. But they are involved BIG TIME, more so than any other organization. It is safe to say that our cannabis laws in Canada have completely been made by the RCMP, not our legislators. They are involved with every government organization that has anything to do with cannabis. In fact, the police have their own Drug Abuse Committee made up of only police. What could they possibly be talking about there? With 75% of all criminal drug charges laid in Canada being for cannabis, they must be talking about how to keep arresting more of us. These are the cannabis arrest stats.
Here?s the CCSA?s position on Cannabis:
?Indications are that cannabis use in the general Canadian population rose during the 1990s; it is estimated that between 10% and 15% of the adult population has used cannabis in the past year, up from 7% in 1994.?
By their own admission they have completely failed to stop people from smoking pot. 15% of the adult population is 3 or 4 million people, which they say has more than doubled during their existence.
?Approximately one in four clients in selected Canadian treatment systems report that cannabis is a ?problem? substance.?
The key to this claim is that it is in ?selected treatment systems?. Selected no doubt to make the point.
?Typical effects from recreational use of cannabis include relaxation, impaired concentration and short-term memory, and increase in appetite.?
This is why they put us in jail? Because my short term memory may become impaired?
?Some people experience hallucinations, anxiety, and depression; a few experience panic, paranoia, or an increase in pre-existing psychiatric symptoms.?
Again, so what? Most of those symptoms are brought on because of the risk of getting hit with the enforcement pillars. The rest is just made up. Hallucinations? Get real. In over 30 years of smoking I?ve never had one, nor have I ever heard of anyone having any. There must be very, very few people this happens to. Why not just put them in jail?
?Usual doses impair motor skills; especially when used in combination with alcohol.?
They couldn?t wait to associate cannabis with something way more dangerous. If cannabis does in fact impair motor skills it is extremely slight. Alcohol by itself impairs motor skills. Cannabis is also dangerous when used with dynamite.
?Cannabis use before driving (or undertaking any other activity requiring motor coordination, such as using heavy machinery or playing sports) is dangerous.?
This is a lie. Cannabis does not impair you. I am a walking anecdote. I have driven cars and operated heavy machinery thousands of times while smoking the strongest cannabis in the world. It made my performance better, no question about it. But playing sports on pot is dangerous? Sports are much more dangerous than pot. How many injuries, even deaths have been because of sports, perhaps because of playing them while on Ritalin?
?Cannabis smoking damages the respiratory system. Studies suggest that developmental delays may occur in children whose mothers used cannabis regularly during pregnancy. Effects from chronic, heavy use may include decreased motivation and difficulties with memory and concentration. It appears that cannabis use may bring about the onset of schizophrenia, at least among some with a predisposition. Tolerance may develop with regular, high-dose use as can psychological and physical dependence among people who use heavily or regularly.?
Look at how much they packed into that paragraph tying concepts together with words like ?may? and ?studies suggest?. This is just the way they want to spin it, desperate to find something wrong with cannabis. But even if it is all true, none of this is a threat to society.
?Although scientific evidence is currently lacking, anecdotal reports suggest that cannabis can help relieve nausea and vomiting related to AIDS and cancer therapies, and is effective in treating other diseases or conditions, including anorexia, chronic pain, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, glaucoma, arthritis, and migraines.?
They don?t use the word ?may? in that, they use the word ?can?.
Here are the sources they have used to come up with this nonsense.
? Canada?s alcohol and other drugs survey 1994: a discussion of the findings Health Canada, 1997.
? Canadian campus survey 1998 Centre for Addiction and Mental Health Link
? Straight facts about drugs and drug abuse Public Works and Government Services Canada Student Drug & Alcohol Use Statistics Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission
The government is only quoting some old studies the government has done. Why would they do that? They totally ignore the massive study the Canadian Senate did in 2002, where they found that the continued prohibition of cannabis is far worse than the substance itself. Our Drug Strategy says it wants ?to ensure legislation and policy reflect the current views of Canadians?. It doesn?t even reflect the views of the Canadian Government.
This cash cow of the CCSA was too good to be true for those participating. They pretty much got to write their own ticket, so in 1994 the Government of Canada created the National Crime Prevention Centre (NCPC) and its National Crime Prevention Strategy Phase I. This was an ?action plan to reduce crime by addressing its root causes in order to build stronger, healthier communities.? The strategy ?is built on the common sense principle that the surest way to reduce crime is to focus on the factors that put individuals at risk — factors such as family violence, school problems and drug abuse. Its goal is to develop community-based responses to crime, with a particular emphasis on children and youth, Aboriginal people and women by providing a framework for coordinating a range of federal initiatives that emphasized a proactive and social development model for crime prevention.?
?Built on the common sense principle that the surest way to reduce crime is to focus on the factors that put individuals at risk.? I?m not sure whose common sense that is. It appears only designed to re-enforce the need for enforcement. Made up by one of the CCSA?s marketing geniuses no doubt.
?Phase II was launched in 1998. It was built on the recommendations and the four years of consultation and policy work of the NCPC. It supported Canadian communities in undertaking crime prevention activities, primarily through the distribution of grants and contributions but also through the dissemination of ?lessons learned.? In other words, it enabled the Government of Canada to broaden its partnerships and help communities design and implement innovative and sustainable ways to prevent crime.?
Why do they write a paragraph so confusing that they need to re-write it in ?other words?? The explanation is even more vague and meaningless. The important message is that they are allowed to act on their own recommendations and buy their way in to every community with grant money, spewing the need for more police. In 8 years they have in no way ?implemented innovative and sustainable ways to prevent crime.? But failure to them only means that you need to create a new trough.
The Canadian Epidemiology Network on Drug Use (CCENDU) was established in response to a 1995 ?feasibility? study that identified the need for a Canada-wide surveillance system on substance use. Spearheaded by the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse (CCSA) and guided by a steering committee, CCENDU is a collaborative project involving federal, provincial, and community agencies, with intersecting interests in drug use, health and legal consequences of use, treatment, and law enforcement.
Its strategic vision is: ?A partnership to monitor emerging drug trend and associated factors?. Ultimately, CCENDU ?strives to support and encourage sound policy and program development related to drug use.?
I guess the CCSA, and the NCPC weren?t able to handle any of this. So what did they do? Create The Canadian Epidemiology Network on Drug Use (CCENDU), whose Steering Committee is made up of people who already work for the CCSA, and the RCMP.
Ep?i?de?mi?ol?o?gy (n.) The branch of medicine that deals with the study of the causes, distribution, and control of disease in populations.
Why then are three RCMP reps at a table discussing the control of disease? They don?t say who did the ?feasibility? study that identified the need for a Canada-wide surveillance-system on substance use, but with cops on the Steering Committee you can be pretty sure in which direction they are steering.
Since 75% of all enforcement dollars are being spent on policing a substance that does not cause any harm, the trough feeders needed a way to ensure that they could keep the money flowing, without having to address issues that are truly harmful and dangerous to Canadians. So in 2002 they invented The Canadian Executive Council on Addictions (CECA) ?a national, non-governmental organization established in April 2002, as a means of delivering proactive advice to all three levels of government, to influence public policy on substance use.?
?CECA is currently focusing its attention on various activities in support of the development of a National Framework for Action on Substance Use and Abuse. All CECA member organizations have committed to the development of multi-sectoral provincial drug strategies in collaboration with the Health, Education and Enforcement in Partnership project.?
In their own words, ?CECA is made up of senior executives of substance use agencies in Canada that have a legislated federal or provincial mandate or are recognized provincial authorities.? A national, non-governmental organization, doubt it. These are just all the same ?Stakeholders? from all of the other troughs.
If that isn?t frightening enough, the NCPC and its funding trough was taken over in 2003 by Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada (PSEPC). This is Canada?s vision of the U.S.?s nightmare Homeland Security. Look at who they are partnered with; Canada Border Services Agency, Canada Firearms Centre, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, Correctional Service Canada, the RCMP and the National Parole Board. Nothing but cops, with a collective budget of over $5 Billion.
Here?s their mission statement:
?Our work is guided by Canada?s Drug Strategy based on a balanced, four-pillar approach that incorporates initiatives focused on prevention, enforcement, treatment and harm reduction. Law enforcement agencies and PSEPC focus on the prevention and enforcement pillars. We develop strategies to stem the importation, exportation, production and distribution of illicit drugs, as well as the illegal diversion of precursor chemicals from their lawful channels. Currently much of our work is focused on the problems of marihuana grow-ops and synthetic drug operations, especially methamphetamine (crystal meth).?
By their own admission ?much of our work is focused on the problems of marihuana grow-ops?. They continue with every breath to single out cannabis.
At the same time the PSEPC is where the trough splits and the flow of unaccountable millions goes out? I guess to those ?with intersecting interests in drug use?. Here?s who is eligible for their funding:
? Not for profit volunteer organizations and groups.
? Community based coalitions and networks.
? Not for profit professional organizations and associations.
? Aboriginal communities, including Band and Tribal Councils.
? Provincial, municipal and Aboriginal police services.
? Provincial, municipal and regional governments.
I?m not making this stuff up. The police award themselves grant money! But it doesn?t end there. Every year or two the CCSA has to build a new trough. And guess what? It?s all for the same stakeholders.
In 2003 Heath Canada formed the ?Stakeholders Committee On The Medicinal Use of Marihuana?. Here?s whom they picked:
? Canadian Medical Association
? Canadian Pharmacists Association
? Canadian Aids Society
? Solicitor General of Canada
? Department of Justice Canada
? Correctional Services of Canada
? Canadian Association of Police Chiefs
? Physicians for a Smoke Free Canada
? 2 patients (hand-picked by Health Canada)
Why in God?s name are there such an overwhelming number of cops represented on a committee about medical marijuana? That was a rhetorical question.
?In 2004 the CCSA created the HEP program (Health, Education and Enforcement in Partnership). This project is funded in part through the Government of Canada?s National Crime Prevention Strategy. The HEP Implementation Team was recruited and funded jointly by CCSA, provincial health departments and the Canadian Executive Council on Addictions. The HEP Implementation Team?s priority is to nurture vibrant, multi-disciplinary networks (ideally including the health, education and enforcement sectors) that will support or enhance the development of a drug strategy addressing specific provincial or territorial substance use and abuse concerns.?
The team, as usual is made up of people who already work for the government addiction, research and treatment programs, with a purpose to provide a platform where national, provincial/territorial and municipal substance use and abuse stakeholders can share information with each other and with other provinces and national stakeholders. I guess they were too ashamed to use the proper acronym, which would be HEEP if you used both ?Es?. I wonder which one they left out? It wasn?t enforcement. Here?s the co-founder?Chief Barry V. King. When we look at the RCMP?s Drug Awareness page, they list who they are in partnership with. HEP is listed but they don?t even include Education in the name:
?HEP (Health and Enforcement in Partnership) is a network of people and partners, of individuals and organizations, of issues and perspectives all committed to addressing substance use and abuse issues. It unites key players from the health and enforcement fields in a common focus, and is inclusive of other integral partners, such as the judiciary, education and social services.?
But what about this Canadian Chiefs of Police Drug Abuse Committee that he chaired? Why do the police care so much about drug abuse that they would create their own committee? Here?s their mission statement:
?Our mission is to promote safer and healthier communities through proactive (funding) leadership by addressing and influencing prevention, enforcement and treatment of substance abuse.?
The important word there is ?influencing? enforcement of substance abuse. When we look back to the stats of substance enforcement we find 75% cannabis. Plus the only member of this committee who isn?t a cop is Michel Peron, CEO of CCSA. These are the guys who took the ?E? out of HEEP.
It doesn?t stop there, even the cop?s union, The Canadian Professional Police Association (CPPA) are lobbyists for prohibition and anti reform. Here?s what they have to say:
“Canada Needs a National Drug Strategy”
?Recent public debate surrounding proposed changes to Canada?s drug laws have reinforced the need to adopt a national approach to drug use in Canada and to ensure that young people have accurate information concerning the harms associated with the use of drugs, including marijuana. Young people are receiving conflicting and often confusing messages about the harms associated with Marijuana use. As front-line professionals who see first-hand the impact of drugs in our society, police officers share a goal of encouraging all Canadians, particularly children and our youth, to ?stay drug free?. The Canadian Professional Police Association is calling for A National Drug Strategy that incorporates a balanced approach to reduce the adverse effects associated with drug use by limiting both the supply of and demand for illicit drugs, enabling an integrated approach to prevention, education, enforcement, treatment, rehabilitation and research.
“Greater emphasis and resources must be provided for stakeholders involved in both demand and supply reduction, with a focus on public education and awareness. While we do not oppose the use of alternative measures, such as a ticket, to deal with relatively minor incidents of marijuana possession, we believe that such measures should instill meaningful, appropriate, and graduated consequences, focused on preventing and deterring drug use. We maintain that police should retain the discretion to lay a criminal charge or issue a ticket for any offence of possession under 30 grams.
?Clandestine laboratories and grow operations pose a serious threat to our communities and recommends that legislative changes be made to ensure effective deterrents are in place, not only in the form of minimum periods of incarceration, but also in the form of substantial financial penalties. Before reducing the perceived consequences of marijuana possession, we need legislation and tools to deal with drivers on our highways who are impaired by drugs. In addition to the need for new legislation to enhance police enforcement powers in situations where drug impairment is suspected, we also require resources to train police officers in drug recognition techniques.?
Why do these people even have an opinion about this? They should not have any influence over the policies that are set for the Canadian people. And certainly should not be having influence over issues that will determine budgets. Notice that they single out marijuana as their prohibition and anti reform focus.
All of the toughs come together into one big pigpen with the National Framework for Action to Reduce the Harms Associated with Alcohol, Other Drugs and Substances in Canada. Too long of a name even for an acronym, the key word here is ?action?. These are some of the principals of the Framework:
?Successful responses to reduce the harms associated with alcohol and other drugs and substances address the full range of health promotion, prevention, treatment, enforcement and harm reduction approaches.? Successful and enforcement shouldn?t appear in the same sentence. This is a complete fabrication. Enforcement has not proven to be successful.
?Problematic substance use is a health issue?. Since 75% of the drug enforcement budget is all about cannabis, you would think that they would consider it to be ?problematic substance use. Let?s see if they actually believe that it?s a health issue.
?Addressing Enforcement Issues?
?Many communities, rural and urban, are adversely affected by drugs. Organized crime groups are extensively involved in the production and distribution of illegal drugs in communities. This contributes to an increase in violence, crime rates and a disproportionate amount of law enforcement resources dedicated to the investigation of drug related crime. Marijuana grow operations and clandestine laboratories that produce synthetic drugs continue to be a growing concern.?
Here we go again with the association that marijuana causes the crime and criminal activity. I don?t see marijuana and crystal meth dealers on the streets, I see cocaine and heroin dealers. Why aren?t those a priority, or even mentioned? This seems more like a Frame Up than a Framework.
Of course the RCMP has its own side trough. It?s called Drug Awareness Service.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police ?E? Division Drug Awareness Service?s
Mission Statement: The RCMP Drug Awareness Service is committed, through partnerships, to making communities safer and healthier by reducing substance abuse and its related problems.
Beliefs: Everyone has the right to a life free from substance abuse and its effects. (What the hell does that mean? Do no police drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes or drink coffee? )
? Children are vulnerable and are entitled to our protection. (Prohibition is a far worse danger by allowing the substances to be out there)
? Well-informed people will strive for a society free of substance abuse. (Bullshit. Well informed people drink more alcohol, smoke cigarettes, shoot heroin. I wonder what the usage stats are for people who are lied to by the RCMP?)
? Substance abuse negatively affects the safety and quality of life of our communities. (This is another lie. Our society is not as safe because prohibition causes the substances to be out there in the first place.)
? Substance abuse prevention is crime prevention. (This is not the job of the police to engage in substance abuse prevention. Prohibition causes all of the crime)
? A balanced approach to prevention includes education, enforcement and treatment. (Except where it applies to cannabis. Stupid four pillars)
? Substance abuse is a barrier to social- and self-development. (This is another lie. Some substances may be a barrier, not cannabis)
? Substance abusers deserve effective treatment. (What a crock of shit coming from the RCMP. According to their actions they would think this true except for cannabis users, we are arrested)
? We can make a difference through innovative partnerships. (Here?s whom they list as their partners; The CCSA, HEP, CCENDU, and the CACP. When you go to their links. There?s only one Canadian link. The 20 or so more are all to the United States)
Commitment to our Communities
? Reducing substance abuse by: Promoting a balanced approach to prevention, enforcement and treatment. (Didn?t they just say that?)
? Providing factual information on substance abuse issues. (They have gotto be kidding.)
? Supporting enforcement initiatives. (You bet they?ll support any enforcement initiative)
? Encouraging, mobilizing and supporting community-driven initiatives that reflect our Mission, Vision and Beliefs. (I guess not any initiative will do, just ones exactly like theirs)
In November 2002, in response to an identified need to have a consistent method and strategy for dealing with marihuana grow operations, the RCMP appointed a National Coordinator specifically for Marihuana Grow Operations.
The functions of the National Coordinator for Marihuana Grow Operations are to:
? 1) create an enforcement template based on the best practices of police agencies across Canada
? 2) coordinate efforts with police agencies at all levels, to ensure common practices are implemented;
? 3) work with international law enforcement community to help curb marihuana production, exportation, and sale;
? 4) implement consistent safety standards for those exposed to the high risk duties associated with the investigation and dismantling of marihuana grow operations; and,
? 5) develop and present recommendations for potential legislative amendments.
Why are the RCMP developing legislative amendments? It is not their job. They are major stakeholders and should be focused more on ?Serving and Protecting? us.
Here we are again. The cops have created yet another trough that needs to be filled. More lies will be need to be told to keep this trough flowing. And we pay for it.
The Drug Prevention Network of Canada
This group was formed in June 2005, to serve as the Canadian contingent of the Drug Prevention Network of America. The DPNA is nothing more than another supporter of The War on Drugs. The U.S. forced this upon the world using the United Nations to issue a mandate that hemispheric and regional coalitions against illicit drugs be formed.
They say ?We are dedicated to working with like-minded organizations and individuals to advance abstinence-based drug and alcohol treatment and recovery programs, to promoting a healthy lifestyle free of drugs and to opposing legalization of drug in Canada?
This bunch is the most radical. They don?t mention where they get their funding, but it?s probably from the U.S. They are crazed Christians out to save every one from themselves. Here?s their mission statement:
?Our mission is to carry out a leadership role in providing accurate and scientifically validated information to assist Canadians in making well informed decisions in the areas of prevention, treatment and education when considering the use and abuse of substances?
They?ve already stated that no matter what, they will oppose the legalization of drugs, so how is it possible to provide accurate information? When you go to their links page, their only info link is to the National Institute on Drug Abuse in the U.S., whose only research references are their own research or statements they?ve previously made. They also direct you to Narconon, a recovery program operated by Scientology and are hooked up with some faith/cult based recovery program called Teen Challenge. Just look at who?s involved:
He?s the president and one of the biggest prohibitionists in Canada. He is a reformed alcoholic with a chip on his shoulder the size of a keg. Pretty sure he is associated with Scientology.
Barry Berger has been actively involved rescuing alcoholics and drug addicts for over last 18 years – through total abstinence programs. For the past 5 years, Barry has served fulltime with Teen Challenge and currently serves as director of Teen Challenge Alberta.
He?s worked full time for Teen Challenge for 30 years.
Ben Jenkins served as a Royal Canadian Mounted Police officer for 25 years, working in the drug enforcement field as an undercover agent, and later a drug specialist responsible for the Ontario Drug Awareness Program. In 1991 he formed his own company, Drug Awareness Strategies, specializing in workplace substance abuse issues, delivering comprehensive training and awareness programs to employers. Ben currently operates Jenkins Groups, which specializes in issues of corporate security.
The Jenkins Group actually does more than just corporate security. ?The Jenkins Group is uniquely equipped to design and deliver substance abuse programs that will limit an organization?s exposure to risk.?
? Substance abuse programs include:
? Policy development
? Supervisor & Team Leader training
? Employee education sessions
? Undercover operators
? Police liaison
Ben Jenkins believes in enforcement for the immediate problem and prevention through education and training as a long-term strategy. You bet he does, he?s made a career out of it. He?s been at the trough right from the get go. Given his trough training with the RCMP I doubt that he sees anything wrong with trying to influence public policy for your own gain.
These are only a small percentage of all the associations and committees that have been formed around the world. Everywhere you look there are hundreds of anti-drug campaigns or groups against drugs. The funding for these programs seems unlimited.
All of the organizations I?ve listed here are Canadian. I have taken all of the information directly from their own web pages. Most if not all are funded with tax dollars, yet not one of their web pages even mentions the Canadian Senate Report or the findings of the Ontario Court of Appeal concluding that the continued prohibition of cannabis is far worse than the substance itself. Nor is there any opposing opinion represented in any of these committees or organizations. The funding trough has become so large that the Stakeholders can?t even lift their snouts over the edge anymore, they just keep swimming around in their own swill.
The Conservative party now led by Stephen Harper has not changed its view in 20 years. They are still pro-prohibition and anti reform. But here?s the kicker; in the party platform, Harper cries out to create a National Drug Strategy. Even though we?ve had one just the way he likes now for 30 years. Every year since its inception more cannabis users are arrested, so I?m not sure how his strategy would be any different.
He also expresses the need for this drug strategy to be directed at the youth. He has to be kidding. It is like he?s totally ignoring the fact that all of these committees and organizations that he pays for even exist. They?ve already got the propaganda in the schools, the RCMP are a well oiled machine for lying and extracting money from the coffers? it?s nothing new. Every government since 1986 has doled out uncountable millions if not billions of dollars to the police and this hideous network of deceit and control.
War is hell.