Testing beneficiaries for drugs?

Posted on 24-07-2012 09:49 | By maccachic

Love it how people spout on about erroding freedoms when they are happy to take handouts. Absolutly no problem with those who need a hand while they find employment, thats what it is and should only be used for. people need to grow up and stop relying on others to support them, families need to step up and help out as well.

Posted on 23-07-2012 13:17 | By PLONKER

Means then can get a benefit, positive means no chance.

Posted on 08-07-2012 22:58 | By Gary gc

Stop the source . Compulsary drug testing as part of free health check though need to sort out the real class A drug alcohol first!

Posted on 05-07-2012 20:06 | By watching

too many times i’ve finished night shift, driving home and are disgusted to see plonkers drinking in a garage bleating "i carn’t afford to feed my kids"? Drugs testing would certaintly upset some of the bleeding hearts, but too bad, get a job

Posted on 05-07-2012 20:01 | By watching

too many times i’ve finished night shift, driving home and are disgusted to see plonkers drinking in a garage bleating "i carn’t afford to feed my kids"? Drugs testing would certaintly upset some of the bleeding hearts, but too bad, get a job

Posted on 03-07-2012 22:02 | By PLONKER

Test positive means no benefit, I agree with that, bets idea is start tomorrow ok!

Posted on 02-07-2012 16:50 | By PLONKER

testing will not fix the problem, so what are they going to do if the test is positive? Are they going to then stop paying the benefit?Maybe lock them up on the spot (Jails cost more than a benefit) there is no explanation of what happens next after the test results are in?

Posted on 02-07-2012 12:24 | By gabigarate

I think its a good idea. However the government will have to give them a support as treatment to stop it and I think its gonna cost a fortune more than they already cost all of us. But yes I DONT AGREE to be working and paying tax for those who stay at home doing inappropriate things with the money that should go to food and living.

Posted on 02-07-2012 10:50 | By gabigarate

definitely

Posted on 02-07-2012 01:02 | By PLONKER

That is what was there today, not any more, there was a few outriggers that take up more than all the dinghies combined. All of this is a joke beyond belief.

Posted on 01-07-2012 18:17 | By Indian Scout

What are they trying to do? Sounds to me like they’re trying to induce the prophetic. Or is it that the time is indeed close. ANYWAY WHY? If they do this drug testing to receive the doll they will get 95% and some, test positive for cannibis usage. God only knows how much for ’P’. Anyway next thing you got hundreds on the doll doing anything to survive. Hah! Ask your bloody self John. Freakin idoit even contemplating such a choice

Posted on 30-06-2012 23:47 | By PLONKER

When you test for drugs and 1/2 the WINZ handees are all tanked up, what do you do next? Cut the benefit? Send them to Waiuru Milatary Camp for the winter without ski gear?

Posted on 30-06-2012 22:23 | By dgk

I would fail a drug test, due to the Class C drugs my doctor as me on. But, my employer doesn’t care as they don’t affect the work I do. My old case manager at WINZ didn’t care as they didn’t affect my ability to find a job. And yet, some see the cost of setting up and performing these tests as a good use of taxpayer money....weird.

Posted on 30-06-2012 22:21 | By COCONUTMILK

I am not against drug testing for beneficiaries, because some employers of hardworking taxpayers undergo the exact testing of their employees. What I do question is what happens when the test is returned positive. We already have an out of control DUI toll and rehabilitation programs are not even sufficient to help with reform in this regard.

Posted on 30-06-2012 17:21 | By Hector

With Freedom comes Responsibility, there should be no such thing as a free lunch, we as taxpayers are paying for the benifit system, should we not as a employer, demand they be drug tested,for alcohol, and pokie machine syndrome, as well, any benifit neeeds to be earnt and respected.

Posted on 30-06-2012 16:52 | By Jitter

As it is taxpayers money paying for these benefits it is only right that some sort of testing should be introduced. Whether we agree with it or not I believe it is only a matter of time before compulsory drug testing is introduced not only to benefit applicants but to all work places also. I agree that one or two in parliament would be caught out also.

Posted on 30-06-2012 16:32 | By R1Squid

I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to get that paycheque, in my case, I am required to pass a random urine test (with which I have no problem). What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don’t have to pass a urine test. So, here is my question: Shouldn’t everyone have to pass a urine test to get a welfare payment because I have to pass one to earn it for them? Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sitting on their BUTT----doing drugs while I work. Can you imagine how much money would saved if people had to pass a urine test to get a taxpayer assistance? I guess we could call the program "URINE OR YOU’RE OUT"!

Posted on 30-06-2012 16:07 | By carpedeum

After paying tax for 52 years - the idea of drug testing beneficieries who receive my tax dollars is the best idea yet. I am always happy to assist enyone who cant help themselves, but am appalled to think that it is being used for drugs. Also- how about testing for alcohol and smoking too?? This hand up assistance is for rent,warmth and food isnt it??

Posted on 30-06-2012 15:40 | By AratakiJive

or do drugs but I think that things are getting very very dangerous when the Govt makes drug testing compulsory for beneficiaries. Our freedoms are being eaten away at an alarming pace. Whyt stop at beneficiaries? Why not test every Gay bloke for AIDS?. There is an epidemic of AIDS here in New Zealand ( although it’s not PC to mention) They are costing NZ millions in hospital care, drugs etc etc. Or even every school girl over age 12, just in case she might be preggers and can be whipped off for an abortion before she costs NZ money? I hate the effects of drugs whether illegal or legal, but I also cherish the freedoms that we, as New Zealanders, still have

Posted on 30-06-2012 15:01 | By traceybjammet

I dont see how if you are getting tax-payers money to support you it shouldnt have some obligations that go with it. People can get stuck in a rut staying home and smoking pot or whatever if this helps for a happier and more positive population bring it on As a country we have to start bringing back personal responsibility

Posted on 30-06-2012 13:19 | By PLONKER

Drugs, booze and all, anyone not on them has nothing to fear or worry about, we all know drugs and so on a really bad for Joe Public and the ramificiations are huge for: - the individual, work mates at risk and many a user must get more money from somewhere and that usually ends up as crime. As well there are the health issues that fall on the taxpayer, this is a case of when not if, it is indeed best for the vast majority!

Posted on 30-06-2012 12:51 | By bonner

it should be compulsory in the work sector then there would be plenty of jobs oh hang on there wouldnt be enough workers, there should be iq tests performed at Parliament bet there would be a few vacancies there too

Posted on 30-06-2012 12:01 | By teridon@clear.net.nz

Sure it would cost to set it up but drug testing should be enforced. In the long run money would be saved which the tax payer pays,and the money saved from not paying out benefits could be used elsewhere.