Australia's legislation, regulation and policy overload: why a national, state and local government reviews are urgently needed

Australia is facing a growing governance challenge that can no longer be ignored: an overwhelming and rapidly expanding body of legislation, regulation and policy across federal, state and local governments. As the attached document notes, "Australia is drowning in legislation, regulation and policy… far beyond what many citizens consider reasonable, practical or economically sustainable." This regulatory expansion, often unreviewed, inconsistent and poorly coordinated, has created a system that burdens the nation rather than building it.

A comprehensive, independent review of all legislation and regulatory frameworks is urgently needed. Such a review must be evidence based, scientifically grounded and free from political or activist influence. The stakes are high, including in relation to productivity, national resilience, cost of living, the future of key industries all depend on a more coherent and efficient regulatory environment and disaster preparedness.

The cost of regulation

The economic burden of regulation has grown at an alarming rate. Mandala Partners (2025) estimates that federal regulation alone now costs Australian businesses $160 billion annually-"a significant increase from the $65 billion estimated in 2013." This represents 5.8% of GDP, a drag on productivity and a major deterrent to investment. Company boards now spend more than half their time on compliance, and the volume of federal legislation has increased by 142% since 2000.

These costs flow directly to consumers through higher prices, reduced competition and slower economic growth. The review document highlights that legislation often "increases cost of living, drives up inflation or imposes greater administration costs and fees on families and businesses." In a period of rising household pressures, these regulatory costs deserve far greater scrutiny.

Productivity and industry impacts

Australia's productivity performance has been deteriorating for decades and excessive regulation is a major contributor. The Productivity Commission (2025) reports that housing construction productivity has fallen dramatically, with "dwellings completed per hour worked… declining by 53% over 30 years." Meanwhile, labour productivity in the broader economy has risen by 49%.

Primary industries including agriculture, forestry, fisheries and mining have been particularly affected, in some cases by policy shaped by ideology rather than practicality. The document notes that "serious damage to Australia's primary industry sector" has occurred through closures, lost opportunities and regulatory overreach.

Manufacturing has also suffered. Australia's manufacturing share of GDP has fallen to just 5.1%, a decline accelerated by regulatory burdens that make domestic production uncompetitive.

Regulatory creep, duplication and poor policy development

One of the most persistent problems is regulatory creep, the steady accumulation of new rules layered on top of old ones, with little review or consolidation. Duplication between federal, state and local jurisdictions compounds the problem, creating delays, uncertainty and unnecessary costs.

Environmental regulation is a key area where regulatory creep has become particularly contentious. While well intentioned, many frameworks have evolved into rigid systems that delay projects, reduce landholder autonomy and sometimes fail to deliver scientifically sound outcomes. The document warns of "regulatory creep concerning biodiversity, conservation lock ups and associated impacts on communities."

A major concern is the lack of rigorous science checking. Productivity Commissions and Audit Offices currently lack formal scienceâ€'verification processes, a gap that undermines policy credibility.

Disaster management, a missed opportunity area

Few areas illustrate the consequences of poor regulatory design more starkly than disaster management. Australia continues to spend disproportionately on disaster recovery rather than mitigation, despite overwhelming evidence that early investment saves lives and money. As the document notes, "Each $1 invested in disaster preparation saves $13 on average in economic costs."

Bushfire management is a prime example. Decades of inadequate fuel reduction and restrictive landâ€'use policies have contributed to increasingly severe fires. Boer et al. (2009) demonstrated that prescribed burning "significantly reduced the incidence and extent of unplanned bushfires." Yet current laws often hinder proactive active land and fire management.