The article is about whether the Ontario PCs close safe injection sites, not whether SIS's actually work. Hence a bunch of politicians referring to evidence.
There is a debate happening - why shouldn't we get a link, at least, to some reasons it's considered to be a success ?
Claiming that SIS's "work" is not a compelling argument if you don't even define what "working" actually means in this context. Specific claims to demonstrate what good SIS's have been demonstrated to do in other communities would be helpful in convincing voters they are valuable.
"Working" in this context could have numerous meanings. It could mean:
-saving lives
-saving money
-getting people into treatment programs to get off drugs
You are right I didn't think about context either. But we didn't get that except in the Star article, which measured deaths.
Home
Contact
Login
Register