Sign in
logging
RICHMOND, B. C. — Tony Li was unequivocal when asked if he had ever talked about drugs with his college-age daughter.
“It never crossed my mind,” said Li, a Richmond, B. C. , resident who is part of a giant organization protesting the concept of a supervised drug-intake site in the city on Feb. 19.
“Using is a criminal act. What more can I say?”
Supervised intake site projects provoke backlash from the network, but the backlash from the Richmond network in Metro Vancouver, which has a population of 210,000, has been intense and protracted, long after officials said in mid-February that a proposal to explore the concept had been abandoned.
Protesters chanted, clapped and sobbed at City Hall, marched among the loads and organized petitions.
Health Canada lists 46 official supervised intake sites across the country, adding nine in British Columbia, that operate under federal exemptions to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and offer places where other people can use drugs in a “safe and non-judgmental environment. “
It says users receive sterile devices for drug use, as well as social, medical and intellectual fitness services, and that the sites prevent overdoses and the spread of disease.
Critics of the defunct proposal point to the rate of drug-related deaths in Richmond, which is the lowest of any health care in the province, according to information from the BC Coroner’s Service.
But they constantly cite parental rights.
Richmond is the most ethnically Chinese city in Canada, yet geographer and former resident Justin Tse said there’s a kind of identity politics at play that goes beyond race, culture or religion. Tse studied Richmond and is the subject of an upcoming book on Chinese speaking. Diaspora communities.
“It’s that other people seem to need to communicate who they are as parents,” Tse said, pointing to a number of issues that have sparked intense opposition in Richmond over the years.
“And because of their identity as parents, they oppose what they believe may put their children at risk. Their fear is that a site will attract drug users to the communities where the intake site is located. And if you think about it, it’s none other than the discourse on transitional housing. Nor is it other than the discourse on gambling. “
On Feb. 12 and 13, the Richmond City Council presented the proposal to explore the concept of an intake site.
More than a hundred people signed up to speak, filling the public rostrum, and the wrath of opposing voices surprised even seasoned politicians.
“I was surprised,” Richmond Councilmember Carol Day said at the Feb. 13 meeting.
“Without delay I started contacting everyone who wrote to the mayor and city council, and provided them with knowledge such as crime statistics. . . And I got some amazing emails. ‘Oh, you’re supporting that, you’re a drug dealer. ‘Really?’
Day said the warring parties’ posts about the concept amounted to rallying cries, criticizing an “injection house in Richmond” and calling for “strangling the proposal in the cradle. “
The proposal was approved by the council, but the next day, Vancouver Coastal Health announced that one site was not under consideration, pointing to a low rate of drug poisoning deaths in Richmond.
The council has since posted a message on its website saying the proposal will not be implemented, in English and Chinese, with the headline “no supervised admissions site. “
But they refused to go away.
“IF YOU’RE A PARENT. . . TAKE RESPONSIBILITY”
On Saturday, at Richmond’s Parker Place Mall, a line formed to point to a petition calling for “mandatory drug education” in schools and for “prevention to be the number one focus” of B. C. ‘s drug policy.
An edition of the petition has garnered more than 6,000 signatures since Feb. 18.
“Recent deliberations by the City of Richmond regarding the creation of a drug injection site have raised significant public concerns,” the petition’s online page states. He said the “overwhelming focus on harm reduction” meant prevention, redress and law enforcement had been neglected.
“This oversight contributes to the worsening of Canada’s drug problem. “
At the Feb. 19 protest, all those who agreed to an interview said they were motivated by considerations about youth and families.
Dennis Gu, who has lived in Richmond for more than 20 years, said he wouldn’t possibly be able to take advantage of the potential options his two teenage daughters have when they’re adults.
But until then, I would do my best to keep them away from illicit drugs.
“If you’re a parent, you have to take on that responsibility,” Gu said. “It’s not just about feeding and clothing them. You’re guilty of the way they think and the possible choices they make in life. “
Several protesters said the network had taken an anti-drug stance and that it had worked.
Some pointed to BC Coroner’s Service statistics, which show another 26 people died of overdoses in Richmond last year, out of a provincial total of 2,511.
By comparison, neighboring Vancouver reported 644 deaths, Surrey 231 and Burnaby 50 deaths.
Richmond’s drug death rate, consistent with a population of 100,000, is 11. 4, the lowest of any fitness service delivery domain in the province. Across the Fraser River in Vancouver, the rate is 86. 7.
The number of drug-related deaths in Richmond has also been cited by some demonstrating the need for an intake site.
Belinda Chin, a Richmond resident, sees otherwise.
“This challenge is not so serious that a drug use site is needed,” Chin said at the Feb. 19 protest with her husband and parents. “The consequences of a drug site would be worse if something wasn’t implemented here. “
None of the demonstrators interviewed at the protest said they knew of any circle of family or friends who used illicit drugs.
“Drug use is the root of the problem,” Li said. “At this stage, creating a customer is a mistake, or even a planned false impression of the root of the problem. We can’t let them die, we have to save them. “
Tse explained that the intensity of the reaction is explained by the fact that Richmond continually attracts newcomers, with immigrants making up 60% of the population.
For many, it is their arrival at participatory democracy.
He said this is the first time Richmond has noticed spikes in political fandom from the Chinese-speaking or Chinese-speaking diaspora, sparking protests against transitional modular housing, sexual orientation and gender identity programs, casinos and same-sex marriage.
He said the kind of emotional investment driven by parental identity would make it easier for protesters to access Canadian politics.
“It’s because when you move to a place, you start to understand why it’s important to get involved in certain things,” Tse said. “I would say that over time, there are ethno-Burbs where Chinese immigrant communities are informed that ‘I want to worry about the local government. ‘
He vindicates the idea that Richmond is monolithic or a kind of “Chinese echo chamber,” and points to notable changes within the Chinese-speaking diaspora and the political diversity within it.
Dickens Cheung, a Richmond protester with two teenage sons, said part of the reason the chain has talked so much about a customer is that many have felt ignored by the city’s politicians.
He noted that the Richmond City Council had adopted the concept of revising the law by a vote of 7 to 2, even after hearing many votes against.
“This happened because we didn’t move to voting in the (2022) election,” Cheung said, adding that more people will vote next time because of the experience.
“If we had voted for other people who represented us on the board and on the school board, this would not have happened. . . We have to vote for our other people. “
CLASS VS. CULTURE
Proponents of supervised admission say the protesters’ attitude went beyond parents’ concerns.
Vince Tao, an organizer with the Vancouver Area Drug User Network, said protests in Richmond in recent years against modular intake and transient housing have contained “anti-homeless and anti-poor sentiments” that were “barely disguised. “
He said this is more indicative of a challenge of elegance than a cultural one.
“As a user of Chinese descent who works on the Downtown Eastside and has spent a lot of time in Chinatown, I spend a lot of time with Chinese elders,” Tao said. “If you communicate with them . . . They sense the struggle that other people are going through, because it’s reminiscent of many struggles they’ve gone through only to be accidentally forced into poverty. “
Tao also said that a strong taboo against drug use within the Chinese-speaking network could simply force users to keep it a secret.
“I can say, from personal experience, that there are Asian drug users,” he said. “I mean, that’s the reality. . . especially those who are less well-off. Many come from immigrant backgrounds.
“Even on the Downtown Eastside, the most underserved category of drug users is downright Asian. They speak Cantonese, Mandarin, Vietnamese and Tagalog. “
Tse said the relative wealth of some newcomers to Richmond could also play a role, and that family security represents an extension of the focus on private interests.
“What explains this may be as undeniable as the culture of homeownership,” he said. “I own a house. It’s expensive, especially because of the schools I enrolled my children in. So I need my assets to be respected. ” “You don’t have to be Chinese to respect that argument,” she said.
“What this tells me is that the argument about how politics is conducted in Richmond turns out to be very personal. It is about respecting the interests of people’s personal property. And with that, those who live in these assets are their families, so they need someone on whom. They live in the communities around them.
Regardless of what sparked the explosion of opposition to the admissions site, the matter is closed as far as Richmond Mayor Malcolm Brodie is concerned. He used the Feb. 27 council meeting to reiterate Vancouver Coastal Health’s message that there are no supervised drug intake sites.
Some protesters are convinced.
“I’m angry that they voted for (the site), even after seeing all those people’s voices,” Li said. “If they don’t voice their opposition, it’s very conceivable that this will continue. “
Chin agreed.
“We’re not sure they don’t want to start the site as part of some other task in the future,” he said. “We want to nip this concept in the bud before it has a chance to germinate here. “
— By Chuck Chiang in Vancouver and Nono Shen in Richmond
This report via The Canadian Press was first published on March 6, 2024.
The Canadian Press
© 2024 North Coast News