WELFARE DRUG PLAN IS SOCIAL ENGINEERING

'The government wants to provide supports to people on social assistance to
realize the dignity that comes with a job, the pride that comes with
independence. We want to provide that help in whatever form it can be ...'
Who uttered that quote? You might guess it came from Alexa McDonough, or
some other politician of the left, to whom social engineering is in keeping
with the philosophy that the state should play an activist role in society,
getting directly involved as much as it needs to benefit all citizens.

But the speaker wasn't a social democrat. It was Ontario's Minister of
Community and Social Services, John Baird, who works in a government that
claims to emphasize individual rights and responsibilities, including
privacy. This is the same government that scrapped photo radar because it
impinged on privacy?

We find it hard to get outraged about this. The Ontario Conservative
government has always talked about being less intrusive, but in reality has
done more to centralize control and authority than its immediate
predecessors. The latest initiative from Queen's Park, which would require
all welfare recipients to submit to mandatory drug testing, is no exception.

This idea is unappealing in many ways, but since it won't survive a
constitutional challenge in court, its chances of becoming law are small.

Just imagine: The government has the authority to do what the law has
already said employers cannot. Notwithstanding Baird's earthy sentiments
about the state improving the lives of welfare recipients, they are not the
people who will benefit from this gimmick. But the civil liberties lawyers
who take Queen's Park to court for violating individual constitutional
rights will have a field day.

The Constitution says everyone is equal under the law. So if it's
acceptable to force welfare recipients to undergo drug testing, it's
acceptable for the government to make the same demand of anyone, certainly
of anyone who receives government assistance of some sort.

So, might we next see mandatory alcohol and tobacco blood tests for welfare
recipients? Following the reasoning that the government is only offering a
hand up to the downtrodden, shouldn't Queen's Park make sure they're not
drinking or smoking to excess? And what about healthy eating? A simple
cholesterol test would ensure welfare recipients aren't spending public
money on junk food.

What about people who get provincial disability pensions? Are they any more
or less likely to consume drugs than people receiving welfare? Shouldn't
they also be tested?

Don't worry, none of this is likely. There are no details about the
drug-testing plan, because it's not designed to become public policy. The
Conservatives are just sending a signal that they haven't drifted too far
to the centre. But the signal has no substance.

- -- Howard Elliott