Would proposals to cut benefits to those addicted to alcohol or drugs, and refuse to enter into treatment have the desired effect of encouraging them to 'kick' the habit? Or, would a cut in benefits lead users to commit crime to further fund habits, thereby increasing conviction rates and prison numbers?
People can not be forced into quitting an addiction, they have to want to do it for themselves and not because the government or a judge say they should. Personal determination is the key to their strength.
For anyone not ready to make the change, I doubt that the threat of loosing benefits has an impact. Some addicts, may have either committed a crime or thought about committing a crime in order to fund their habit and supplement their primary income.
By removing benefits, addicts will surely be forced to find ever more activities to fund habits. I wonder what is more cost effective, paying benefits to an individual, drug treatment services for those that want to change or paying for extra police time, as well as courts and prison costs.