Wellbeing of Future Generations Bill 2025

High-Level Summary
The bill proposes to establish a legislative framework to ensure that the wellbeing of future generations is considered in Australian government decision-making. It aims to embed long-term considerations and intergenerational equity into policy-making processes.

Summary
The Wellbeing of Future Generations Bill 2025 introduces several measures to enhance long-term policymaking in Australia. It establishes a federal framework that mandates public bodies to consider the long-term impacts of their decisions on the wellbeing of current and future Australians. The bill also creates an independent Commissioner for Future Generations, responsible for advocating for the interests of future Australians and ensuring that intergenerational fairness is integrated into governmental processes. Furthermore, it requires a National Conversation on Future Generations to engage the public in shaping Australia's long-term vision. From the explanatory memo:
The Bill introduces four measures: 1. A federal legislative framework for the wellbeing of future generations. 2. Impose a positive duty on public bodies to take into account the long-term impact of their decisions. 3. Establish an independent, statutory Commissioner for Future Generations. 4. Require a National Conversation on Future Generations.

Argument For
Normative Bases
  1. Pro-Democracy
  2. Environmentalism
  3. Egalitarianism

The bill should be supported because it addresses the urgent need to consider the long-term impacts of today's policy decisions on future generations. By establishing a framework that prioritizes intergenerational equity and sustainability, the bill promotes a more responsible and forward-looking approach to governance. This is crucial for tackling complex challenges like climate change, social inequality, and economic instability, which disproportionately affect younger and future generations [Judgment]. Furthermore, involving the public in a National Conversation fosters greater democratic engagement and inclusivity in shaping Australia's future.


Argument Against
Normative Bases
  1. Propertarianism
  2. Hobbesianism

The bill should be opposed because it could lead to increased bureaucracy and regulatory burdens that may stifle economic growth and innovation. Establishing a new Commissioner and requiring public bodies to consider long-term impacts could slow down decision-making processes and create additional costs for taxpayers [Judgment]. Moreover, the bill's emphasis on future generations might undermine the immediate needs and rights of current citizens, potentially leading to conflicts between present and future interests.


Date:

2025-02-10

Status:

Not Proceeding

Sponsor:

SCAMPS, Sophie, MP

Portfolio:

Unspecified

Categories:

Civics, Climate Change / Environment, Democratic Institutions

Timeline:
10/02/2025
28/03/2025

Comments (0)