INTERGENERATIONAL JUSTICE: GIVE THE KIDS A SAY

“In the future, will we all be stuck in tiny apartments with no outside space?” This was the opening question to me in a recent interview with a group of primary school children. No, I said, slightly taken aback. Grim apartments aren’t the only option. We have a choice. Carefully I painted a picture of the middle way - delightful apartments with rooms and corridors, big windows and balconies, fresh air, sunshine and courtyards.

But that was just the start. What, they wanted to know, would future cities be like? Would they, as adults, be able to buy a house? Was politics hopelessly corrupt and self-serving? Would there be runaway climate change?

I framed my answers with care, trying to offer at least the possibility of hope. But when, at the end, we reversed roles and I got to ask what they thought the future held, these bright-eyed kids were bleak indeed.

With the unswerving clarity of childhood they described a future dominated by climate change, extreme weather, pandemic, pollution, sea-level rise, cramped apartments and depleted biodiversity. I was overwhelmed with sorrow and, yes, with guilt. Is this what we’ve done with all our wealth and freedom? Steal a generation’s hope?

Of course, it’s not only children who suffer. But already children are bearing the brunt. Our cities are increasingly unequal, not only in income but in their distribution of and access to public resources. Between 1950 and 1960, 96% of Australia’s economic growth went to the bottom 90% of Australians. Between 2009 and 2019, however, it plummeted to a mere 7%. That means that almost all the wealth increase went to the ultra-wealthy few.

This dramatic inequality reflects in every aspect of our city – heat, health, air quality and access. The billionaires, broadly speaking, have small families near the cleansing coast. Meanwhile large families with lower incomes are, indeed, stuck increasingly in small, depressing apartments disproportionately affected by urban heat, air pollution, travel costs and chronic disease. The same inequity applies through time, disadvantaging future generations.

So when, finally, the kids asked me if children should have the vote, I was given pause. Normally I’d say no. Children need guidance from experience, from those able to see the bigger picture. But on this huge, bleeping-red question of our time - the shaping of the future - it's impossible to argue either that adults are doing it better or that those most affected should be excluded.

This is yet another argument in favour of a diverse, deliberative and randomly selected means of collective decision making. It may not be practical to include children as Citizen Jurors but they must be given voice, included in the array of expert witnesses invited to address the jury.

Children understand a lot more than we think. They know the difference between a long, boring drive to school and a gentle, tree-shaded walk. They see the news and understand that the future is in jeopardy. They know that these are problems that can only be solved together, collaboratively. To lock them into a backseat bubble of happy-toons and social media is to do them a gross disservice.

The Better Cities Initiative, in using the Citizens’ Jury to create a Citizens Charter for planning and city-making, works to restore equity and sustainability and rebalance resource distribution for both current and future generations. I say, give the kids a say!