ALTHOUGH he dismissed the Opposition's Parliamentary drug testing programme as no more than a political ploy, Government backbencher Derrick Burgess said he believed such screening would be embraced by his party if done for the right reasons and conducted in the proper fashion.

"What does drug testing really do?" he asked. "It's not taking the drugs off the street - which is what we should really be looking to do. I don't think any of our politicians use drugs. I don't think the Progressive Labour Party (PLP) has a problem with drug testing.

"But to do it the way UBP (United Bermuda Party) is doing it, I don't see the point. If they want to test, why not do random testing? A planned thing doesn't serve any purpose. They know that on any given day, any one of them could be called to be tested. It doesn't really prove anything. It seems to me that they're doing it for political purposes. I say, do it because we mean it."

Opposition Party MPs underwent the first in a series of random drug tests last week. Following that, in a speech on the floor of the House of Assembly, Mr. Burgess (pictured right), who is also president of the Bermuda Industrial Union, questioned the rationale behind the move.

"Drug testing won't solve anything," he said. "You've got to put something in place to help those people" who are on drugs.

The backbencher went on to question the difference "between someone going to lunch and having two scotches and someone having a little marijuana", if impairment were really the issue at hand.

This week, the BIU head - whose organisation has practised drug testing for more than ten years - embellished on his statement.

"I don't condone drug use on the job or anywhere," he toldthe Mid-Ocean News. "We've had testing (with BIU members) for over ten years, but the other party's drug testing is not going to prove anything. My interpretation of what (the UBP) is doing is that they're trying to set an example for testing."

In an interview with this newspaper earlier this week, managing director of Benedict Associates, Vaughn Mosher, said his company had worked alongside the BIU for many years, co-authoring drug screening initiatives and establishing zero drug tolerance policies in unionised businesses.

"Every policy that has been put in place where there's unionised labour has been co-opted by the BIU and management," he said. "It's a jointly offered arrangement. And in many cases, it's been unanimously accepted by labour. And it makes sense. In North America, it's the labour force that has driven the establishment of drug-free workplaces.

"It hasn't worked that way here but labour leaders in the States, for instance, have acknowledged that such programmes not only save jobs, but they save lives. It's hard for us in this community to understand this - you get to the same end, but it comes from a different angle entirely.

"Labour leaders have driven to have (drug screening) included in the benefits package because if an employer knows that there is suspected drug abuse and doesn't do anything about it as a responsible employer, then they can't fire that person.

"So it saves jobs that way and it forces the employer to be more responsible; not only to make an intervention but then offer a treatment for that person to turn their behaviour around."

Benedict's partnership with the BIU, said Mr. Mosher, began at a stage when testing for illicit drugs on the island was in its infacy.

"We started out in 1996. (Former BIU secretary) Dr. (Barbara) Ball and I went to a lot of the hotels because the National Drug Commission felt it was important we do that as most of our local labour was employed in the hospitality industry. Over a two-and-a-half-year period, we installed 13 programmes. Unfortunately, a lot of those hotels are no longer with us. A lot of the bigger ones have closed. But those that started and are still in operation, have a drug-free workplace.

"And, of course, that's what labour wants as well - to save jobs and have the worker have a healthy life. And labour, a lot of people don't see this side of it, but labour also wants what's best for the workplace; for the employer.

"We don't often hear about that part but (the idea is) get it right for the employee and by definition, get it right for the employer in terms of productivity. So it makes sense all the way around. And every programme we've put in place with the BIU has been jointly offered."

Mr. Burgess said it was time for MPs to speak out against the harmful effects of abusing any substance, rather than merely targeting those which were illicit.

"(People) are placing a lot of emphasis on drugs, but, from what I understand, alcohol has done a lot of harm to families. There's a lot of harm that has been done through drinking and driving. We've all seen the wrecks - to families, to individuals, to society - caused by alcohol.

"I'm not a drug user and I don't drink. You can test me any day. Testing for me is not a problem. All it will prove is that I'm clean. The point I was making is that someone who comes back from lunch having smoked marijuana is just as impaired as someone drinking over lunch - the only difference is that one is legal."

See also Insight on page 5