It was announced this week that the government wants to test Newstart and Youth Allowance recipients for illicit substances, and quarantine payments for those who test positive, replacing their obligation to find work with drug counselling sessions.

But if the government wants to curb rampant drug use in the community, coming down hard on some of society's most marginalised people isn't the right way to go about it.

The bill had already stalled twice in the senate, due to concerns about its unfairness and the possibility of further demonising people on the Newstart allowance.

Given the narrative that has proliferated in recent months around the difficulty of surviving on Newstart, and the rationale behind keeping the allowance as low possible, these concerns are hardly unfounded.

They could even be regarded as a deliberate distraction from the larger issue of needing to life the Newstart allowance, which hasn't seen an increase for 25 years.

Social services minister Anne Ruston has said those on welfare who take illicit drugs are denying themselves the opportunity to join the workforce.

But those who are already struggling to pay for the basic necessities of life will hardly benefit from further punishment.

And while Senator Ruston maintains that the measure is designed to "identify people who need our help", the process by which that help may or may not arrive is lengthy and intrusive.

If passed, a two-year testing trial will be rolled out in three locations in Queensland, NSW and WA. About 5000 new recipients of Newstart Allowance and Youth Allowance will be tested for ice, ecstasy, marijuana, cocaine and heroin. Those who test positive will be placed on cashless welfare cards for the duration of the trial. A second drug test will be scheduled within 25 working days of a positive result, and after a second positive test, the job seeker will be referred to a doctor who will identify treatment options.

Layers of bureaucracy - better known in this context as jumping through hoops - will inevitably add more stress and hardship for many who already exist on the fringes of society.

Included in the announcement was a $10 million treatment fund to boost drug treatment services in trial sites.

But that money could well be used to help those in the grip of drug addiction in a more targeted - and less convoluted - way.

Research shows the unemployed are greater than three times more likely to use amphetamines, and one-and-a-half times more likely to use cannabis than the employed.

The problem is already apparent and prevalent, but expands far wider than just welfare recipients. Drug addiction is a health issue first and foremost.

Indeed, Tasmanian senator Jacqui Lambie has already suggested that Members of Parliament - also remunerated through taxpayer funds - be subjected to random drug tests as they enter their own workplace.

The prime minister himself has taken to social media to agree with this kind of thinking in principle, but maintains that testing welfare recipients would be designed as an incentive to get "off welfare, off the dole and into work".

But this rhetoric is disingenuous at best, and cynical at worst, ignoring, as it does, the very real plight of those struggling to keep their heads above water.