Philosophical differences drive parties’ drug policies this election
The Tories make drug policy a central campaign issue, while the other parties are quietly backing harm reduction
Read: 4 min
As fentanyl continues to drive overdose deaths in Canada, drug policy remains a political flashpoint — and a defining ideological divide heading into the federal election.
At its core, the debate is philosophical: Should policy try to eliminate drug use, or should it accept that some people will use and aim to make using safer?
“People on both sides are so baked in on their ideas,” said political strategist Jordan Paquet, a former senior advisor who once worked under prime minister Stephen Harper. “Either you want supervised consumption sites everywhere or you don’t want any of them.”
The Conservatives have made drug policy a central focus of their campaign, while the other parties have avoided doing so.
“The Conservatives have found a wedge issue in drug policy,” Paquet said.
“[For] the Liberals, this will be a shield issue — it’s something that I think they’ll react to if they have to,” he added. “But I don’t think they’re going to come out proactively with anything big on this, because they just want to keep the focus on economics.”
Liberal policies
Canada declared the opioid crisis a public health emergency in 2016. Since then, more than 51,000 Canadians have died from opioid overdoses. Three-quarters of those deaths have involved fentanyl.
The Liberals, who have been in power since October 2015, have overseen Canada’s national response to the crisis. The Trudeau government introduced a number of measures aimed at reducing the harms associated with drug use.
These included increasing funding for supervised consumption sites, expanding access to safer supply programs and opioid agonist therapies, and permitting a three-year trial decriminalization project in B.C.
Safer supply programs provide drug users with prescription opioids as an alternative to toxic street drugs. Opioid agonist medications help reduce drug cravings and withdrawal symptoms.
B.C.’s decriminalization project permitted the possession of small amounts of otherwise illegal drugs for personal use.
The rollout of many of these measures has been controversial. Supervised consumption sites have faced pushback from business owners and neighbourhood residents over safety and disorder concerns. Safer supply programs have been linked with the diversion of drugs to the black market. And B.C. halted its decriminalization project after just 15 months in response to an outcry over public safety concerns, although drug possession remains permitted in private spaces.
Most recently, in response to pressure from the U.S., the Trudeau government appointed a fentanyl czar, announced measures to tighten controls on precursor chemicals used to produce fentanyl, and launched a Canada-U.S. Joint Strike Force to combat organized crime.
Paquet views these actions as largely reactionary. “[Fentanyl] hadn’t really been a priority,” he said.
In response to U.S. demands for action on fentanyl, Liberal Leader Mark Carney said at an event in February that, “Fentanyl is an absolute crisis in the United States. It’s a challenge here, but it’s a crisis there.”
In 2023, the rate of drug overdose deaths in the U.S. was 31 per 100,000 people, versus 21.5 per 100,000 in Canada.
When he formed a new cabinet in mid-March, Carney also eliminated the federal minister of mental health and addictions role — a cabinet position the Trudeau government had created in 2021.
Paquet suggests the party is deliberately avoiding the drug policy topic this campaign. “I don’t think the Liberals want to go near [drug policy],” he said. “The Liberals are just trying to keep the campaign laser focused on trade.”
The Liberal Party did not respond to Canadian Affairs’ requests for comment on the party’s drug policies by press time.
Conservative policies
The Conservative Party has long criticized harm-reduction measures as harmful to drug users, communities and children.
Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has said a Conservative government would withdraw federal funding for supervised consumption sites and would deny or revoke approval for sites located near schools, playgrounds and other public areas. Poilievre pledged to redirect resources from these facilities to recovery-focused initiatives, such as “detox, counselling, group therapy, physical exercise, yoga, sweat lodges for First Nations, job placement and housing.”
The party has also advocated for stricter law enforcement measures, including harsher penalties for drug traffickers.
In February, Poilievre pledged life sentences for fentanyl traffickers caught with more than 40 milligrams of fentanyl, and 15-year mandatory sentences for traffickers caught with between 20 and 40 milligrams. For context, 2 milligrams of fentanyl is considered a potentially lethal dose.
“We will lock them up and we will throw away the key,” Poilievre said about individuals trafficking large quantities of fentanyl.
Poilievre has also pledged to reverse Liberal legislation that eliminated mandatory minimum sentences and loosened bail restrictions for certain drug and firearm offences.
A Conservative government could face legal obstacles to closing supervised consumption sites or introducing sentencing minimums. Poilievre has been vague about whether he would be willing to invoke the constitution’s notwithstanding clause to shield such decisions from court scrutiny.
Paquet says Poilievre’s approach aligns with a broader conservative philosophy that emphasizes treatment and recovery.
“Conservatives always have that more recovery-oriented approach that we see in Alberta,” he said.
Poilievre has also voiced support for mandatory drug treatment in specific cases, including for children and incarcerated individuals deemed incapable of making decisions for themselves.
On April 6, the party promised to fund treatment for 50,000 Canadians “in treatment centres with a proven record of success at getting people off drugs.”
“To fund this policy, a Conservative government will stop federal funding for opioids, defund federal drug dens, and sue the opioid manufacturers and consulting companies who created this crisis in the first place,” the announcement says.
The Conservatives replied to requests for comment by referring Canadian Affairs to its prior public statements on drug policy.
Smaller players
Both the NDP and the Green Party support harm-reduction measures and oppose tough-on-crime approaches to drugs.
“New Democrats want to keep people alive and help them pursue recovery when they’re ready,” Gord Johns, the NDP’s mental health and harm reduction critic, told Canadian Affairs.
“Experts in law enforcement, public health and addiction medicine have been clear that we can’t arrest our way out of this crisis,” he said.
Johns said the party would invest in prevention, early intervention and publicly funded treatment.
Similarly, the Greens say they support increased funding for harm-reduction services. They have pledged to implement a federally managed safer supply program and favour decriminalizing all illicit drugs for personal use.
“We must expand access to harm reduction services nationwide, including in rural and correctional facilities,” Fabrice Lachance Nové, press secretary for the Green Party, told Canadian Affairs in an emailed statement.
Karine Cambron, a policy response coordinator for the Green Party, said, “substance use should be treated as a public health issue, not a criminal one.”
This article was produced through the Breaking Needles Fellowship Program, which provided a grant to Canadian Affairs, a digital media outlet, to fund journalism exploring addiction and crime in Canada. Articles produced through the Fellowship are co-published by Break The Needle and Canadian Affairs.
I believe in reducing harm but i do not believe in the current ‘harm reduction’ policies. These are NOT reducing harm and putting the public in harm. I am upset that Carney has breathed a word about the crisis. But i also see that NDP and the previous liberal party completely ruined our country with this harm reduction bullshit.
This is dead-on accurate. I have actually pointed out to other lefties who care as much as I do about this issue that Alberta is leading the country in the drop in OD's since focusing on treatment and prevention. That was not the news they wanted, so they just reject it.