By the Canadian Association of People who Use Drugs

This report is a general outline of the “safe supply” concept, of what safe supply is, and the role of safe supply in drug policy. The purpose of this document is to provide clarity to what is meant by the term “safe supply” with a mind to keeping conversations on point when safe supply and drug policy are being discussed.

The safe supply ideas set out in this report are meant to be examples of how they could be provided and are not meant to form a comprehensive guideline for designing a safe supply system. Safe supply program designers should be creative and thoughtful to the needs/wants of the drug using population being served. The thoughtful approach to safe supply requires thinking as economists to imagine policies and programs that will truly appeal to those who would otherwise prefer to consume drugs purchased on the illicit market.

Safe supply refers to a legal and regulated supply of drugs with mind/body altering properties that traditionally have been accessible only through the illicit drug market.

Drugs included are opioids such as heroin, stimulants such as cocaine and crystal methamphetamine, hallucinogens such as MDMA and LSD, and marijuana.

Safe supply concept document

By the Canadian Association for Safe Supply

In regions of Canada where the tainted drug supply being a significant factor in overdose deaths, safe drugs can prevent overdose death.

“Safe Supply” refers to legal and regulated drugs such as heroin and hydromorphone that perform as a substitute for illicit drugs. Unlike traditional substitution treatments, such as methadose, suboxone,and kadian, safe supply still provides the mind-altering properties that drug consumers seek in illicit drugs.

Safe supply is not just a treatment for an individual at risk of overdose, but for the systemic issues that impact individuals and increase overdose risk (criminalization, contaminated drugs).

Similar to how the Canadian government controls and distributes alcohol, providing a regulated safe supply of opioid and/or stimulant drugs reduces overdose death.

People that use stimulant drugs like cocaine, crack, and methamphetamine are also at risk of overdose from fentanyl contaminants. Safe supply means providing pharmaceutical grade cocaine and methamphetamine, not just opioids.

Safe Supply means that service providers re-conceptualize safe use practices (using sterile equipment, narcan) to include using a safe substance of known potency.

For it to be effective it has to be available: barriers reduce accessibility.

Safe supply is a catalyst to getting people in touch with harm reduction, housing, and healthcare services.

Safe supply fact sheet

By the Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit

The Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit today launched a research synthesis paper titled “The Helmand Food Zone: The Illusion of Success”. The study is supported by the EU’s three-pronged research in Natural Resources Management in Afghanistan. This study documents how the Helmand Food Zone was developed, its origins and architects, as well as the different actors involved in the implementation and the subsequent challenges of delivery. Initially presented as a drug control project, the Helmand Food Zone came to be accredited for supporting stabilisation and governance in the Helmand province between 2008 and 2012. Driven by political demands rather than evidence, the program became a flagship in Helmand, and lauded as a success, despite evidence to the contrary.

Speaking about the report, AREU Director Dr Orzala Nemat said, “This is timely research as we are heading towards the formation of a new government and a possible peace deal in the coming year. In both of these contexts, addressing the issue of drugs is a key challenge that the future Afghan leadership will have to tackle, in light of the lessons drawn from past practices.”

The study reports that the short term success of the Helmand Food Zone with regards to its association with reducing poppy was far outweighed by the role the programme played in: (i) creating the conditions for unprecedented amounts of land to be brought under poppy cultivation than ever before; (ii) institutionalising forms of corruption that further alienated the rural population from the authorities; and (iii) helping set in motion a process of agricultural intensification that is likely to lead to the displacement of at least half a million people in the next decade.

The paper argues, “However, as yields recovered in 2016 and the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces lost control over larger tracts of rural Helmand, farmers returned to poppy cultivation in ever greater numbers,” adding that “So much so that by 2017, UNODC estimated that there were 144,000 hectares of opium poppy in Helmand as a whole; and the United States Government's estimates of poppy cultivation for the Helmand Food Zone indicated that there was even more poppy within its boundaries than when the programme began in 2009.”

According to the study, the Governor’s reliance on donor patronage from funds to transport and logistics and his pursuit of an opium ban regardless of the impact on rural lives and livelihoods increased the perception amongst farmers that he did not act in the interests of the local population, but of his foreign benefactors. As such, the Helmand Food Zone served to further embed a growing sense of hostility to the provincial authorities and undermine the state-building objectives proffered by the donors as a reason for supporting the intervention.

In fact, from a governance perspective, the study concludes that the Helmand Food Zone worked through and consolidated existing systems of power and patronage, empowering the Governor, officials and village elders to solicit rent and favours from farmers in exchange for development assistance or to avoid eradication. Of particular concern, the Helmand Food Zone turned a blind eye to repeated reports of corruption with regard to the distribution of wheat seed and fertilizers and continued to support the production of unverifiable village lists by district officials and elders with all the problems that this entailed. By doing so, the programme helped institutionalise forms of corruption and fueled the frustration and anger that many rural households felt towards the government and its representatives. By operating through mechanisms that siphoned off support to the wealthy, the Helmand Food Zone helped undermine the very goal that it set out to achieve – the idea that the governor and the government could deliver services to the population

The study builds on in-depth fieldwork and high-resolution satellite imagery collected before, during and after the implementation of the Helmand Food Zone, as well as interviews with some of the main protagonists in the donor community. In total, 4,122 household interviews took place with farmers over an 11-year period in either all or some of the 28 research sites in Helmand province, in areas both north and south of the Boghra canal. The latest body of fieldwork was conducted in spring 2018 and consisted of 310 interviews in the same research sites, supplemented with a further 52 interviews with women who resided in former desert areas.

The Helmand Food Zone: The illusion of success

By the Select Committee into Alternate Approaches to Reducing Illicit Drug Use and its Effects on the Community / Legislative Council, Western Australia

The Legislative Council established the Select Committee into Alternate Approaches to Reducing Illicit Drug Use and its Effects on the Community (Committee) on 17 October 2018. The Committee inquired into approaches to reducing harm from illicit drug use in other jurisdictions and compared their effectiveness to the approaches currently used in Western Australia (WA).

The inquiry is specifically about illicit drugs, although the Committee heard about the high levels of harm associated with alcohol and prescription drugs. Importantly, the inquiry is concerned with drug users, and not people involved in the drug trade. The Committee inquired into approaches to addressing the use and possession for personal use of drugs, and not possession with intent to sell or supply, or the distribution of drugs.

People always have, and always will, use drugs. Prohibition has not stopped this. In 2016, 43% of Australians had illicitly used a drug at some point in their lives. There is a growing recognition across the world that drug prohibition has increased the harms associated with drug use. Under prohibition, black markets have thrived, prisons have filled with drug users and those committing drug-related offences, and stigma is experienced by people who use drugs.

The Committee has distinguished between non-problem and problem drug use. Most people who use drugs do so in an occasional, recreational way that does not adversely affect their lives or the community. The minority suffer from drug use disorder, and require treatment or support. Some people are more likely to develop drug problems than others. Factors including childhood trauma, economic disadvantage, unemployment, unstable housing and mental health issues are linked to problematic drug use. People living in regional and remote areas, and particularly Aboriginal Australians, are at greater risk of experiencing drug-related harm.

Drug use is associated with health, social and economic harms to the people who use drugs, their family and friends, and the wider community. Drug use itself causes some of these harms, such as death, disease and drug-fuelled violence. Other harms are caused by the criminalisation of drug use or possession for personal use. A criminal record can affect employment, housing and educational opportunities. Prohibition also increases stigma, as people are less likely to seek help when they fear criminal action. These impacts can compound existing social disadvantage. The Committee found that all of these harms are present in WA, particularly given our high rates of problematic methamphetamine (meth) use.

Help, Not Handcuffs: Evidence-based approaches to reducing harm from illicit drug use in Western Australia

On 5th December 2019 the Civil Society Forum on Drugs (CSFD) will host a seminar for Members of European Parliament (MEPs), along with other European policy makers on ‘The Future of European Drug Policy – Seminar organised by the Civil Society Forum on Drugs’ at the European Parliament. The seminar is specifically targeted at MEPs that have a clear interest and mandate in the area of drug policy, such as members of the LIBE, DROI and ENVI Committees. Through its legislative, budgetary and political oversight powers, the European Parliament has a critical role to play in policy formation and support, including on key issues related to drug policy.

Historically, the European Parliament has played an active role in the area of drug policy. It was instrumental in the creation of both the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), and the Drugs Prevention and Information Programme (DPIP) which marked the first time that funding was ringfenced for drug-related issues. This programme has existed for the previous two financial frameworks, but is scheduled to end in 2020.

As European policy makers move towards 2020 in a Europe that faces significant political, social and economic challenges, and in the context of global drug policy challenges, this event aims to:

Highlight why drug policy should remain a key priority for Europe and why MEPs and other European policy makers need to keep it on their political agendas, and

Help MEPs navigate the implications of the new phase of global and European drug policy.

With these aims in mind, this event will highlight ongoing challenges in drug policy at European and global levels and provide insight into how civil society can assist policy makers and legislators in tackling these issues. Speakers will provide inputs on the contributions of civil society to the EU and European Commission (EC) on current drug policy issues, and raise awareness of the value of civil society participation – and in particular the CSFD – in drug policy processes. This briefing paper has been prepared for participants to provide background and context to the seminar.

Publications

Safe supply concept document

Safe supply fact sheet

The Helmand Food Zone: The illusion of success

Help, Not Handcuffs: Evidence-based approaches to reducing harm from illicit drug use in Western Australia

The future of European drug policy: A briefing paper for members of the European Parliament