New Westminster wants the province to increase funding to overdose prevention sites in BC communities.
At Monday’s meeting, council unanimously passed a motion that will be forwarded to the Lower Mainland Local Government Association for consideration at its 2024 annual general meeting and conference.
The motion, put forward by councillors Tasha Henderson and Nadine Nakagawa, asks the province to increase funding for health authorities to augment existing and open new supervised consumption and overdose prevention sites, including inhalation services, across B.C. This would include municipalities that don’t currently offer this service to residents.
Since 2016, more than 13,000 people in B.C. have died of toxic drugs, including at least 2,500 in 2023, states the motion.
According to the motion, about two-thirds of last year’s toxic drug deaths were from inhalation, but only about 40 per cent of supervised and overdose prevention sites in B.C. offer inhalation services.
Henderson said the overdose prevention centre in New Westminster does not provide inhalation services.
She said the motion continues the advocacy work that the City of New Westminster has already done regarding the need for funding for overdose prevention services, including inhalation services and extended hours of operation.
“And we need to see overdose prevention sites in every city,” she said. “Because people are overdosing and dying in every single city across the province.”
Nakagawa said service providers are saying that inhalation services is a growing and pressing issue.
“This is a crisis in our community; we know that,” she said. “So many people's lives have been touched by this. So many people have died already.”
Inhalation sites are where people can smoke their drugs. The health contact centre in New West, which includes a safe injection site, does not have an indoor inhalation space.
According to a recent report from the BC Coroners Service, smoking was the most common mode of consumption in 2023 among people who died of unregulated drug deaths. Of the 2,511 suspected unregulated drug deaths in B.C. in 2023, 65 per cent showed evidence of smoking followed by injection (14 per cent), nasal insufflation (14 per cent) and oral (four per cent).
Amendment or no amendment?
Coun. Daniel Fontaine thanked Nakagawa and Henderson for bringing a “good motion” forward, but he felt it wasn’t complete.
“I think it's kind of like looking at a four-legged stool with only one leg; we're missing a few components of it,” he said.
Fontaine put forward an amendment stating that: in the spirit of a four-pillar approach to dealing with the health crisis of toxic overdoses, which has grown significantly over the past five years, the BC Ministry of Mental Health and Addictions allocate a portion of the contingency funds announced in the 2024 budget to implement new and significantly augment existing mental health services, as well as substance-abuse treatment and recovery programs in communities with an identified need for these services.
Nakagawa said amendments are supposed to be in keeping with the spirit of the original motion.
“For me, this is actually drastically changing the spirit of that motion,” she said. “It is a quite fundamentally different motion, in my opinion.”
Henderson said the Lower Mainland Local Government Association limits its resolutions to having “two whereas” statements and one “be it resolved” motion, and the motion, as presented by herself and Nakagawa had reached that limit.
To meet the LMLGA’s requirement, Mayor Patrick Johnstone said council would need to amalgamate the original motion and the amendment into a single resolution. He asked acting corporate officer Dennis Back to comment on whether the amendment is consistent with the original motion or is materially different.
“The mover and seconder of the motion have already indicated that, in their opinion, this is more than just an amendment to their motion, it's significantly different; it's almost a motion on its own, separate, apart from theirs,” Back said. “So, if they're not prepared to accept that is an amendment, I would agree that it's more than just a simple amendment.”
Saying he would “support the advice given by the clerk”, Johnstone ruled that Fontaine’s proposed amendment wasn’t consistent with the original motion.
Fontaine said he “fundamentally disagreed” with the mayor’s ruling, saying his amendment related directly to drug toxicity. He “challenged the chair’s ruling” – a challenge that was defeated by a majority of council (meaning Johnstone’s ruling stood regarding the amendment.)
Following the bureaucratic back-and-forth related to the amendment, council unanimously supported the motion from Henderson and Nakagawa.
