THE Department for Work and Pensions has recently announced two proposals which the Tories intend to implement if they win the General Election.

The first is to reward unemployed benefit claimants, who gain employment for a year or more, with ownership of their homes if they are social tenants. The second is to deny or reduce benefits to drug addicts and obese people if those issues are preventing them finding work and they refuse to accept medical help.

My understanding is that the Government itself doesn’t own any social housing.

It is owned by councils, housing associations and charitable trusts.

So Iain Duncan Smith appears to be advocating the appropriation of other people’s property.

Whatever you may think of his welfare reforms, you should ask yourself whether or not you support the idea of seizing private property.

If you still think it’s a good idea, then take away the claimant angle and consider how you’d feel if the state took your stuff away.

The second plan is likely to elicit more support.

However, leaving aside the ethical problems with forcing people to accept medical treatment, the important question is how much control the state should have on your life?

What if the DWP expanded the idea to include tattoos?

NAME AND ADDRESS SUPPLIED