The Guardian (Charlottetown)

Not in the public interest

Investigat­ion into drugs at outreach centre in Charlottet­own may go to ombudspers­on

- LOGAN MACLEAN THE GUARDIAN logan.macLean@theguardia­n.pe.ca @loganmacle­an94

“When that facility opened there was no talk about drugs or drug usage, drug parapherna­lia. None of that was in the equation. None of that was discussed, and then all of a sudden we end up with a glorified drug injection centre.”

Coun. Mitchell Tweel

A call for Charlottet­own to investigat­e the Community Outreach Centre has found no support at the committee level, but the issue may still go to the provincial ombudspers­on.

For several months, Coun. Mitchell Tweel has been calling for an independen­t investigat­ion into drug use at the centre. Housing Minister Rob Lantz said last summer the centre temporaril­y allowed clients to use substances on site, but Lantz had stopped it.

Since then, Tweel has insisted on answers to who allowed the drug use to start. He appeared at the April 10 strategic priorities committee to speak about his notice of motion – the first step in the process before a council vote.

“That’s an illegal activity that took place on that site,” he said. “When that facility opened there was no talk about drugs or drug usage, drug parapherna­lia. None of that was in the equation. None of that was discussed, and then all of a sudden we end up with a glorified drug injection centre.”

MERIT

Members of the committee, though, disagreed with the need for an investigat­ion and questioned how it would even work.

Police Chief Brad MacConnell said he was aware of drug use around the centre, and his officers had made several arrests.

But Tweel’s notice of motion suggests the centre itself was providing or selling the drugs, and there have been no complaints from the public about this, MacConnell said.

“We know that there was issues and maybe some complicity in that, but complicity is not illegal.”

He didn’t see such an investigat­ion as being in the public interest, he said.

“I won’t be calling for this investigat­ion. I certainly don’t see our police service doing this investigat­ion.”

Mayor Philip Brown said he did not want the city to investigat­e its own police, which is what the notice of motion seemed to request.

“If we’re challengin­g and questionin­g our police services, that to me doesn’t warrant any kind of a vote. That just says we move on. … I don’t want to question the integrity and the profession­alism of the Charlottet­own police force.”

Coun. Norman Beck, who chairs the committee, said the province had hired a consultant and taken steps to improve services.

“I’m not interested in investing money on the city’s part – city taxpayers – to go in and provide this investigat­ion. I just don’t see a lot of merit in it.”

Despite these concerns, Tweel stood by his proposal, saying it was reasonable and responsibl­e.

OPTIONS

After debate, Dan Jenkins, director of corporate services, pointed out other options. This included OmbudsPEI, whose role is to investigat­e government bodies, he said.

While it doesn’t have authority to make orders, the ombuds office can prepare a report on the issue, he said.

“The ombudsman act (could) perhaps have a role in terms of a look over the procedural fairness and jurisdicti­on – those types of things.”

MacConnell agreed with this, adding the Police Act handles complaints against police.

With this new informatio­n, Brown suggested the committee send Tweel’s complaint to the ombudspers­on. Brown had initially moved that the committee reject the notice of motion entirely.

City council will vote on whether to proceed at an upcoming meeting.

 ?? LOGAN MACLEAN • THE GUARDIAN ?? Dan Jenkins, director of corporate services, listens to debate at the April 9 Charlottet­own council meeting.
LOGAN MACLEAN • THE GUARDIAN Dan Jenkins, director of corporate services, listens to debate at the April 9 Charlottet­own council meeting.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada