Should welfare recipients be tested for drugs?

Only if they have a criminal history relating to drug abuse, then treatment should be provided for those testing positive

Allow tolerance for cannabis, test and enforce a ban of hard drugs.

Not if your including cannabis as a drug.

Medical drugs and fruads with accountable of actions by legal privilege by legend former US president Donald Trump and former UK prime minister Boris Johnson hoping straight wings body's protection

Yes everyone receiving money from the government including employees and politicians also random testing. If positive then be terminated after a month

Yes, but only for opioids and more problematic drugs. Cannabis and psychedelics are not so bad and shouldnt be illegal.

Yes, only if they have history or speculations by others or some source of evidence regarding drug usage. Provide treatment if tested positive. Otherwise no, it is a waste of time and money

Yes test. Also have a start date and an end date for their welfare period. Discourage this as a way of life!

Food, rent etc directly paid for so that their kids do not miss out, but so they can’t buy drugs etc

Use is ok if it's Dr validated reasons, reduce payment if addicts are not willing to receive help offered

Be more strict on the conditions of benefits, eg if they're using the money for drugs, reduce the amount they're paid and if they keep using then stop the payments.

Yes, positive results would trigger a process that covers addiction treatments, parenting assessments and education, employment opportunities and training, social support and comuselling and ends in receiving less or no welfare b depending on the results of this process. marijuana should not be considered necessary for this full process if there is an addiction noticed, high thc levels or high consumption that is impacting ability to contribute to the economy

Only those deemed both physically and mentally capable of working (but might be unemployed) and above the age of 16

Absolutely - I have to be drug tested in my place of employment. If you are on a benefit then don't sit around taking drugs on my money. However, it could be replaced with your rent and amenites are paid for, and food grants given to ensure children are not impacted. If you have no dependents, a positive test is end of entitlements to welfare support.

No, but screening/background family checks could help with finding people who are abusing the welfare system for drug money

Yes but with a three strikes and you're out for a certain amount of time, also when tested positive give them lots of advice and options on ways to get clean

yes, and if tested positive, the money they are given shouldn't be taken away, rather things should be bought for them such as food.

Yes, with the precautions that they will take their money and use it on drugs. This would usually occur because of addictions.

Income from benefits should have a compulsory food portion.

yes, and terminate their allowance but provide treatment

Yes but only if they have not been actively seeking work for more than 6 months while being able to work

Yes and provide treatment and rehab for those testing positive. Test employees, employers and politicians and remove from office and sort out their own treatment.

Yes, but only for destructive drugs.

Only test if there is history of the person using drugs or if they have been on welfare for longer than 6 months and are not attempting to find work.

Yes but only if there are kids involved. If testing positive, encourage rehabilitation, education and support for those involved rather than just decreasing or removing the benefit.

Yes but provide treatment if tested positive but if they fail to maintain it they lose their benefits

Yes, not terminate, but to pause benefits for those who are not willingly to attend to drug rehab programs where it should be monitored on a weekly basis.

Why would we punish the whanau that do drugs, when we should be helping them to control and end the use. More programs are needed to support the whole nation. VERY ANGRY AT THIS QUESTION!!!

Yes, provide treatment for those testing positive and if bad enough include charges and criminal consequences

Circumstantial ie. medical or potentially medical marijuana use should be allowed based on individual Class a excluding medicinal Marijuana oils from dispensary should be tested

How about putting more money into community services who can help and support families they suffer from addiction, drug and alcohol use. Majority of these people suffer from a number of complex issues, trauma from childhood or even adulthood, domestic violence, being disconnected from family and society. If someone uses drugs there is always a reason ! Find the reason and pump resources into places whi can provide supports and make it that if you receive a benefit and meet criteria to get further support on some areas then they have to engage in those supports !! The outcomes will be far better and will help future generations to come !!

No, only if they have a criminal history related to drug abuse (especially class A drugs) (Should NOT include the use of cannabis)

Yes test everyone receiving money from government including employees and politicians. And if they test positive terminate any benifits for those testing positive.

No, but welfare for single parents should be reduced. Instead, childcare should be free or heavily subsidised, and the minimum wage increased.

No, just offer it as a service alongside free counseling and addiction services but don't force it on people as a requirement of having a benefit as that will negatively effect children of beneficiaries.

yes, provide treatment on those testing positive, and there benefit becomes a voucher system, food/rent/power,

Yes, and use testing as an incentive to reduce the use of recreational drugs.

Yes, and there should be a support system and help put in place to provide resources to help them with their situation

Depends on the drugs and what welfare they are on. Ie a sickness benefit, and smoking weed MAY be okay. Never having worked and smoking weed- absolutely no

No. Drug use, so says the science, is best treated as a health issue. Addiction needs to be treated yes, but making life harder for people will not remove their dependency or its effects on them and their families. If "drugs are a crutch", who are you to take a person's crutch? Such questions are too often left to public opinion - what does the general public know or care about such things?

Depends on why they’re on welfare. If they seem to only be on it to avoid work and do drugs instead then yes test them but if they genuinely can’t work for whatever reason then don’t test them. Because the only reason for testing would be to see if they’re exploiting welfare

Yes and manage their funding if positive

No, only if we are helping them quit.

yes, but provide treatment options and education to positive tests and require a certain time frame for them to test negative depending amount of drugs consumed, otherwise terminate their welfare.

Yes, all persons receiving taxpayer money should be tested and treatment compulsory for those testing positive.

Yes. Should be randomised testing

Yes to provide treatment

No, people should not be singled out.. but health and education should be offered.

This is a medical issue