cont'd ...

I forgot to add that if funding is taken away
from desperate people many will resort to crime.
And, that will end up costing the government
even more. Cost of police, courts, lawyers,
prison internment, medical treatment, et cetera.

Dear Shadow minister,

Yes we will have to keep it to a minimum.

Dear Big Nana,

To me it is an issue of human dignity. If I was a Newstart recipient who happened to use recreational dope but didn't want to be flagged in the system as a drug user then I shouldn't have to be forced to do a test.

The government is trying to say this is to help people but their actions show it is a punitive exercise and as such completely erodes the notion of assistance.

To me it is an issue of human dignity.
Steeleredux,
where is the human dignity in some tatooed from A -Z who's 90% of the time high on some mixture & expects me to contribute to help him ?
I have the feeling you don't understand the concept of dignity !

we see how marxism always results in the loss of dignity for humans, Just look at venezuela where our won abc and other marxist news outlets used as an example of how great marxism is. Of course now people can't even feed themselves and the lying liberal media has nothing to see.

Being unemployed is an entrepreneurial (word for the day), experience to many of the unemployed. That's a form of capitalism.

I'm tickled when the message comes from the same government, that had a tax dodging entrepreneurial Prime Minister, who made a life style from deception and slight of hand, dodging the tax man, (as one but small example of many others), that removing cash from the filthy poor for a presupposed crime of drug addiction is justified.

And maybe it is, but it misses the point. And Jacque Lambie is also right to withhold support of the bill, until a similar regime is established for that other group of wasted space, politician, to be similarly drug tested when attending parliamentary sittings.
Ouch, that one will hurt!

After all, aren't they sucking from the same taxpayer funded trough, as they abuse each other, (in a manner which resembles drunkeness), across the tax payer funded floor of parliament?

Dan

Hi there STEELEREDUX...

In principle, I agree with you, AND I also agree with Individual at the same time. No, I'm not trying to have two bites of the cherry, rather I recognise the need for people to eat, even though they've done the wrong thing.

However, INDIVIDUAL is also correct when he says,'...no test, no money and re-introduce a form of National Service to the Nation, not necessarily military, but for the overall benefit of our Country. With the same values & discipline as those inculcated in a military environment.

You're not stupid Steele; So I'm sure you see the value and benefits in that? After all, the Oz taxpayer isn't asking too much of these people? Nor can we be expected to fund their illicit drug habit either. Notwithstanding we're all prepared to help them beat their habit, does this sound, in any way, unfair to you Steele?