1. Egalitarianism
2. Pro-Democracy
3. Non-Discrimination

The bill should be supported because it establishes a framework for addressing systemic poverty in a structured and transparent manner. By creating an independent body that draws on the experiences of those living in poverty, it ensures that the most affected voices are part of the decision-making process. This aligns with egalitarian values by aiming to elevate the standard of living for all citizens and reduce inequalities.^[1] The requirement for the government to respond publicly to the Commission’s recommendations promotes democratic accountability and transparency, reinforcing public trust in governance. Furthermore, considering the needs of marginalized groups aligns with principles of non-discrimination, ensuring policies do not disproportionately affect disadvantaged communities.

1. ^{^}

   See the explanatory memorandum for details on the Commission's structure and function.

1. Propertarianism
2. Value-Neutral / Epistemic Objection

The bill should be opposed because it may lead to increased government interference in social welfare systems, potentially infringing on individual property rights and freedoms. By establishing a new bureaucratic body, the bill could result in increased government spending and taxation, which may burden taxpayers and limit economic growth [Judgment]. Additionally, the effectiveness of such a commission in reducing poverty is uncertain, as poverty is a complex issue that may not be fully addressed through government intervention alone. Furthermore, there is a risk that the recommendations of the Commission could lead to policies that prioritize certain groups over others, challenging the principle of equality before the law [Judgment].