Social programs a low priority for government

Re: “PEERS deserves share of funding,” editorial, May 27.

The sad truth is that any program that succeeds in reducing societal harm — as in working with people in the sex trade, to help them escape that life or protect those who do wish to remain — is not one that can attract government funding, particularly from a government whose primary outlook is judgmental and controlling.

Getting people out of the sex trade does not elect members. It does not provide attractive, glittering photo-ops or grabby quotes for a sycophantic press. It does not build mega-projects, to which people can point and say: “I built that!”

No, it is dull, unattractive work, depressing and relentless, as economic reality grinds people down to the point where the only thing they have to trade is their bodies. It is much easier to point fingers, and tell the world how wicked these people are, than help them get cleaned up and get training, so they can get jobs that are less demeaning and invasive.

Addicts, we will always have — no matter the addiction. That policy should be to treat the addiction as a disease (as it is) and prevent others from making it a lucrative trade, is just too simple and common-sense. No wonder it is unacceptable in government circles. It’s not difficult enough; they “need” a difficult problem to justify their work.

Perhaps our worst addiction is to government. There are certainly enough people who want to tell us how to live, whether or not we wish to listen. John A. Laidlaw Victoria