Politicizing Addiction

A conversation about drug policy in federal politics with Libby Davies, MP for Vancouver East since 1997. She is the Deputy Leader of the NDP, and has served as NDP House Leader since 2003. Libby is also the federal NDP Spokesperson for Drug Policy Reform and Solicitation Laws. 

Libby began by expressing her enthusiasm for an event as the one we are proposing and her interest in being a part of it. Being directly involved in policy making as well as he role as spokesperson for drug policy reform, Libby was able to provide some interesting insight on drug policy in Canada. She echoed the opinions of others we have spoken to in a variety of other roles: that prohibition as a policy for dealing with drugs is overall ineffective and costly. 

Libby was particularly supportive of our event focusing on the business aspect of drug policy, both through the participants being mainly business students and approaching the issue of drug policy reform from an economic angle. According to Davies, there is an argument to be made that in addition to the hardships prohibition as a policy has created for human beings, it has also been overwhelmingly costly to our economy. She pointed to publications from such business focused organizations as the Fraser Institute on the true costs of prohibition. Areas of the community such as business and political realms may begin to see the need for policy alternatives if they could understand that those alternatives will actually benefit the economy instead of hurt it. 

Davies stressed the importance of addressing addiction and drug policy as causing a variety of health issues, but also looking at it as an economic problem overall. Asking, ‘what does prohibition mean from a business perspective?’. It is important for the business community to realize that current drug policy under prohibition is both ineffective and costly for our economy. This is also a statement that is important for policy makers at the federal level to believe; changing how we approach drugs and addiction must come from higher levels to be truly transformational. Drug policy change is likely to come about much easier if those formulating policy can understand the costs associated with how we currently address this issue. 

The fact that our event will be predominantly students of business background suggests an importance of stressing this in addition to the other inefficiencies of prohibition. Perhaps new wave of business community members like those who would participate in our event could benefit from exposure to both the health and economic costs of current drug policy and decide for themselves if an alternative approach is needed.