‘No more silence’: Hundreds protest in Richmond after safe consumption site debate

While Vancouver Coastal Health has confirmed it’s not considering a standalone supervised drug consumption site in Richmond, hundreds protested Monday in opposition to the political process that raised the possibility one could be built.

Last week, seven of nine Richmond councillors voted to ask the health authority to explore the idea as at the city’s hospital and launch a consultation process. It was a contentious decision after two nights of heated hearings that required at least one person to be escorted out by RCMP, and calls for calm from Mayor Malcom Brodie.

An event poster for Monday’s protest at Minoru Park Stadium claims the decision to consider the safe consumption site was made hastily, despite “overwhelming public protests and opposition,” as well as intimidation toward those who opposed it.

2:19 Safe consumption advocate

Protesters repeatedly chanted, “No more silence!” and waved signs that read, “The silent majority has awakened,” and “We elected you, and we can vote you out.”

Demonstrator Dickens Cheung told Global News there was insufficient public consultation about the Richmond council’s motion to ask Vancouver Coastal Health (VCH) to consider the supervised consumption site.

“The fact that Richmond City Council — at least just two of the councillors — motioned to bring something so controversial and so consequential to pass so quickly, without proper public consultation, was very appalling to me,” he said.

“Public consultation would be something like a mailout card to all the residents to ask for their input, ask for their feedback, concerns so that they can get a better gauge on what all of the Richmond residents are thinking, rather than just going forward as if they were the boss and they can make all the decisions.”

2:08 Second night of debate in Richmond

Cheung acknowledged that Richmond’s mayor and council was elected to make such decisions, but noted that the October 2022 municipal election saw a voter turnout of less than 25 per cent.

“Do they really represent the voice of Richmond?” he asked.

While residents were given an opportunity to speak in council chambers on the motion last week, he said officials weren’t “very kind to us” or “accepting of us exercising that right,” with one councillor having said, “Shame on you” to some present.

Multiple speakers at Monday’s event encouraged participants to vote, with a provincial election upcoming this fall.

5:01 Reaction to Richmond safe injection site plan

Madelyn Ng, who was at the park celebrating Family Day, said she supports the community questioning council initiatives.

“We think that it should be open dialogue because it is a complicated issue,” Ng said.

“As a community, we have a right to say we don’t want these things brought into the community, and people should be heard, these opinions should be considered in the larger scheme of things.”

2:02 Safe consumption meeting in Richmond gets heated

Protesters marched to Richmond City Hall, where Coun. Carol Day said Richmond’s motion to consider the safe consumption site also included another important ask: better public education and engagement on the topic of safe consumption sites to help reduce stigma.

“It’s become a political issue for some people who are seeking office, which is really, really unfair. A lot people who are have been grossly misinformed,” Day said.

“We have a really wonderful community that’s very multicultural, but sometimes certain politicians will use — I don’t know — the inability for people to understand the issues clearly.”

The biggest piece of misinformation, she added, was that Richmond councillors were voting for a safe consumption site, instead of an analysis to determine whether one should exist at the hospital.

The motion passed by mayor and council asked for an analysis that would produce recommendations for the “successful implementation of a supervised drug consumption site,” a process for establishing a task force to determine best practices for implementing a safe consumption site, recommendations for assessing the effectiveness a consumption site, and more.

“Richmond is a wonderful city. This is not who we are. People have been manipulated and it’s really a sad day for Richmond,” Day said. “But I’m going to work with the rest of council to help build some connection, because I think once people are educated and understand what the actual issue is … we can bring Richmond back to where it should be.”

3:02 Richmond city council debates motion for supervised consumption site

British Columbia is in the throes of a toxic drug crisis that has claimed more than 13,000 lives since it was declared a public health emergency in April 2016.

In a recent letter to mayor and council, VCH’s Richmond medical health officer supported more overdose prevention services in the city, vouching for an analysis of possible solutions that would be “appropriate to our local context.”

Based on public health data, however, VCH determined a standalone supervised consumption site at the hospital was not the most appropriate option for Richmond. It has insisted there was no political interference in its position.

3:29 Demonstrations continue at Richmond City Hall over proposed safe consumption site

“Stand-alone sites work best in communities where there is a significant concentration of people at-risk, since people will not travel far for these services,” it wrote in an emailed statement on Feb. 14.

“VCH will continue working with the City of Richmond to assess how we can strengthen overdose prevention services and keep people in the local community safe so they can access treatment — but we will not be moving forward with a stand-alone supervised consumption site.”

According to VCH, some 1,000 people live with opioid use disorder in Richmond and about 600 have a stimulant use disorder. However, the Richmond Local Health Area has a lower rate of drug fatalities compared with other B.C. regions, with the number slowly decreasing, it said.

— with files from Simon Little