A recent posting deserves the attention the public health community. While much has been written on this site relative to supervised drug consumption insights into INsite Supreme court decision , the next phase of the debate is initiating and implementation in Montreal, Toronto and Ottawa. As BC demonstrates reduction in HIV transmission that have not been shared across the country you might think that policy makers would ask the question "Why" and what is different.
The April 11th Globe and Mail posting on the debates in Ottawa and Toronto are disheartening. Ottawa has backed away from many basic harm reduction activities under the current local government and now has one of the highest HIV and Hep C transmission/incidence rates in the country - duh? Who is kidding who? Why would any local government want to have such a tarnished reputation. It will likely take the son or daughter of a politician that contracts one of these illnesses at a young age because of an inability to access harm reduction equipment before the urgency and crisis becomes reality. SIS Ottawa and Toronto.
Read also the study which recommended implemenation at http://www.scribd.com/doc/88882905/TOSCA-Report-Short-Version-2