An excellent article Dr Woldring.

I would add to the list of reforms:

1. Scrapping the Westminster system in its present form; or at least incorporating Citizen Initiated Referenda.
2. Changing our adversarial legal system to something which benefits someone other than just the legal fraternity.
3. Enacting a Bill of Rights, with real power, as part of a determined shift in constitutional reform.

I fear, however, that the general public is all to happy with their McJobs which allows them to buy cheap Chinese consumables for their McMansions to concern themselves with any of this stuff.

Dr. Woldring, that is by far the best article I've read on OLO in a very long time. I feel quite refreshed for having read it through. We've had a tired and stale old political system in place in this beautiful country for far too long. A system that is crying out for change. Whether or not Kevin Rudd takes on board any of the changes you propose remains to be seen, but many Australians are begining to stir and look for political leadership that will provide solutions to future problems and maximise opportunity for their children and grandchildren.
The trouble is, and I hate to put a negative spin on my post, FU2 is unfortunately most likely correct. The economy looks good on the surface, but at the cost of enormous personal debt. Because the economy gives the impression of 'sailing along nicely' people are generally happy with their lot in life not realising, or afraid to admit, that the present economy of the Western World is, as somebody put it, "like a deck of cards." At present they have a wide choice of employment opportunities thanks to Australia's current prosperity, mostly due to mining exports, but at the same time, I sense an undercurrent of fear. Anyone with an once of intelligence must realise that we can't keep going on the way we are in a country run by an old man with outdated ideas tied to his hero Prime Minister of a bygone era. This country needs vision and leadership, especially as we move towards a future of climate change and less (probably forced) reliance on fossil fuels. It doesn't matter who is in power, but they must hasten to stop the downward spiral of inventivness that once saw Australia as a World leader in science, technology and education.

O please, the politicians as the bastions of reaction exclaiming "the revolution we have to have." It was not that long ago that they called for "the war we had to have" which we are still paying for. Mr.Rudd is expressing rhetoric to dress up further inroads into privatising the public schools with new spin. Both Labor and Liberal have gone to great lengths to carry out a wrecking operation in the public school system and to turn education into a big money maker for their cronies. This grasping layer with their politics of 'me first' or 'you voted for us and we are going to make you pay'for it views parliament as a 'help themselves candy store' where everything is for sale including national treasures and resources. And they all have their snouts in the trough.
What still counts is not what people say but what they do - particularly what is their historical record? For instance, you can imagine what is in store for the majority of the population if the governments are putting the boot into the disabled, the pensioners, hospital patients, university students, medicare and childcare. O childcare doesn't exist it is in the hands of the profiteers. And who has forgotten both Liberal and Labor carrying out massive job destruction called privatisation and then at the dole office the same government rogues saying "why haven't you got a job?"

I really like this article - between this, and the recent article on income equality:

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=5424

We begin to see the realistic alternatives for the Australian economy.
For too long, the Left has been languishing in Western society - Nick Cohen recently wrote a good piece in the Guardian lamenting the fact that the left had been left without a compass, due to the success of capitalism.

He's right. Capitalism has more than proved it's superiority over other market systems, though this has meant that the modern economic intellectuals have swooned. We haven't seen such devotion to a market system since Adam Smith first penned the basic overview of the free market economy.

Few seem to acknowledge that perhaps the best way is to embrace the capitalist system, but perhaps not take it to extremes - there is a third way.

I think these two articles point the way, with the changes suggested here to be followed by a economic model mirroring that of Scandinavia as the best outcome for the maximum number of Australians.

Klaas, you failed to mention whether Rudd can get us out of the net or political doctrine that Bob Hawke got us into. The classical term is economic rationalism which the Libs are now at full bore, paying homage to American industrial racketeering creating a marketing and political system which robs the poor to pay for the follies of the rich.

Even though it is a fact that economic rationalism does in fact mean economic common sense, similar to liberty and freedom, these terms have been abused so much in modern marketing lingo, that our public has been deliberately dumbed down regarding their true identity.

As Adam Smith might say, it is all to do with management. The need for a very discreet government with the understanding that though a free market does mean letting go the human shackles that hold back needed competition, the government must be conscious that to its detriment, competition is based on the greed to beat others, or the urge to win a medallion that might prove useless in the end.

Could believe that the populous right now, with the failures in Iraq of modern military means against more primitive means, might prefer for us to return for a time to the grass roots.

We thus might add that the global consensus at present might be better to be one of a search for better understanding

Reckon Kevin Rudd might have that in mind also. Let's hope so

Dr Woldring. Interesting read. You didn't seem to appear to include your explanation on Education.

Poor education, as well as not providing us with the skills to evolve and move forward, produces some real social and financial problems.

Education is a, if not the, key area to be focused on. Without education people wont have the understanding and skill to identify and solve all the other problems.

Integrity, transparancy and excellence in education should form the foundations on which to build on.

Re “That can be a quite peaceful, democratic process provided that there is (1) a government that is committed to fundamental change (2) a population that is ready to accept and participate in implementing fundamental change.”

Never have “political revolutions” produced equal to their disruption and alienation.

A government committed to fundamental change but through “democratic means” sounds like the incumbent.

Labor simply want to turn back the clock and re-establish the status-quo of the 1980’s, when unions held sway over government and raped the public purse with their standover tactics.

The population has participated in fundamental change, all things done by the incumbent government have been approved or endorsed through re-election of the liberal-national coalition.

This article is just the pretentious pseudo-babble of academia through the eyes of someone who sees all before him as precious, yet sits well out of reach from the vagaries of real life, a bystander overseeing all from the cloistered comfort of academic tenure.

Oh, Krudd has about as much “revolutionary zeal” as a hamster has “murderous intent” (and the comparisons do not end there).

In reality, the “revolution we have to have” is as genuine a call as Keatings “the recession we have to have”, being completely bogus, merely a cynical catch phrase to coverup socialist incompetence and corruption.

FU2 “I fear, however, that the general public is all to happy with their McJobs which allows them to buy cheap Chinese consumables for their McMansions to concern themselves with any of this stuff.”

Oh that terrible “majority” they do not deserve democracy!

As Lenin said “It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed.”

He also said “a lie told often enough becomes the truth”

Ah well, back to watering the garden in the McMansion, no time to concern myself with the “drivel of the ingrates” from the left.

Col - it's no secret the Labor party has always been the stooge of the unions, but that needn't always been the case. Rudd isn't exactly the favourite of the unions. If there's ever been a chance of the labor party separating from the unions, it's now.

Unfortunately, so much of the campaign funding of the labor party is reliant on union contributions. This of course, makes it incredibly difficult for them to do so.

But no more difficult than for the Liberal party, who has the same issues with contributions from the big business end of town...

"The Revolution We Have To Have!" please can it start with every Australian state that appears to have terrible problems with health,hospitals, schools, transport,housing, crime? You name it , it is in trouble.
Who is in charge of the states?Why! it is the very same party who are hoping to run the country next election.
Remember that.

Mickljo perhaps the reason that "every Australian state that appears to have terrible problems with health,hospitals, schools, transport,housing, crime? You name it , it is in trouble." is because revenue is raised by the Commonwealth in the form of taxation and GST and is doled out to the states in the form of grants with very tight provisos placed on the spending.

As an example - at the moment the Victorian government is unable to upgrade the water infrastructure because one of the five federal authorities that oversee water hasn't approved the spending. Those of us who have been watching have noticed Malcolm Turnbull has returned submissions to Victoria and NSW with a brief note to redo the costings. Sounds fairly incompetent of the state government hired consultant not to have got on the phone to the authoriser in Canberra and find out what format they wanted the results in, even I know how to do that! It sounds more like the bastard management style observed in some of our largest ASX listed companies of query the report into oblivion whilst loudly complaining that the report doesn't meet requirements.

Well said and well argued Klaas.
After lobbying hard on water for the past two weeks, I have been left with this niggling and nagging question ; who minds the minders? The New Rudd Labor Party has some very polite,very pleasant but somewhat naive,inexperienced and unworldly minders.I doubt if many have looked upon the murky waters of the Murray or into the dark vacuum that is public policy.
Klaas, could you run an intensive seminar for them,in Canberra over a weekend,before too much more mud oozes under the bridge?
Bruce Haigh

The "New Rudd Party" is composed of all the same old flops. How are the tired old hacks going to create a new revolution?
I wouldn't trust them to run a chook raffle let alone a country.

Billie “As an example - at the moment the Victorian government is unable to upgrade the water infrastructure because one of the five federal authorities that oversee water hasn't approved the spending.”

If the state labor government had not diverted $100 million + a year from the available funds by imposing a “special dividend” on the water companies they own to collect our water rates (check the public accounts available from state treasury), there would be monies available to “upgrade the infrastructure” you speak of.

Blaming federal government for state labor political corruption in the area of financial management of water rates income is a lamentable and pathetic line of reasoning.

I look forward to your challenge to my point billie!

TRTL Crean tried and failed. Krudd will do no better. As for the big business end of town, they have a bet each way anyway, liberal or labor and maybe a dollar on the greens for all I know :-).

If the ALP promoted the “revolution” advocated in Klass Woldring's article, it would snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Kevin Rudd (along with just about everyone else in the Labor Party) is too clever and too sensible to campaign for a revolution across government, the economy and everything else on the wish list. It's not 1972!

He is staking out a moderate reformist position, and that is why the government is so worried. If you put up a referendum to abolish the states, it would be defeated in every part of the country. Despite the problems of federalism, people would not want to hand even more power to the federal government. Similarly, a referendum to abolish the Westminster system would be overwhelmingly rejected.

Australia has one of the best systems of democracy in the world - a federal balance of power (weakened though it has been by the current Liberals), a strong connection between the executive and the legislature which holds the government accountable, stable government based on a House of Representatives, a Senate elected by PR and thus representative of minorities and normally not controlled by the government of the day, an independent public service and an independent judiciary.

Labor knows all this and it will campaign on reforms to IR, education and the environment, and they will be reforms that make sense to the average person, not a revolution that will drive moderate voters back into the arms of John Howard. One of Labor's biggest problems is a small group of extremists who, objectively speaking, keep working to keep him in power.

"Australia has one of the best systems of democracy in the world"
How so? Isn't democratic rights under attack and being eroded? How much say do people get in their everyday lives, their working life or the social conditions and social safety net? Who speaks for the masses in parliament - no one! Who votes for the downgrading of emergency services and treatment to hospital patients in a system that is already struggling to cope with demands. Nor do we vote for the destruction of essential services and jobs. Nor the destruction of the schools, dental services(what is now left of them)and privatisation of the ambulance system, the cuts to the fire brigades.Whilst taxes have been steadily rising. How is it democratic to drive the majority of the population towards increasing poverty? Whilst the politicians have their pockets in overflow mode.

Whilst reports point to global cancer rates on the increase, the governments move in to privatise and capitalise on chemo-therapy treatments that will bring in big bucks. This entails holding back or denying chemo-therapy treatment in the hospitals. Apart from the government who voted to put the boot into the disabled? Who voted for the loss of lives taking place because of the cuts in hospital wards and specialized staff? Or the many hospitals that have been closed down and given over to the private medical sector or to the real estate operaters. The governments have a strategy and that is to implement a crisis in the health system so they can privatise the health system and keep the taxes. A market is created by a long waiting list and then big money charged. It wasn't so long ago that the mental homes and asylums were closed down and many of the patients thrown onto the streets.
No these attacks are not democratic but authoritarian and take place through a welter of lies designed to cover up precisely, the criminality and disasterous repercussions that are not always immediately apparent! It is not for nothing that the politicians employ those soothing liars known as spin doctors.

Hi there,

Thank you for all your contributions! Just one response to Chris C's concern about putting up reformist proposals that would/might scare off the electorate which he/she assumes to be very cautious and conservative. I do not think that the electorate is that cautious or conservative but it may not be well informed. However, while an electoral strategy to win the election is one aspect of new policies the biggest question after winning the election should surely be: Let us tackle the very many shortcomings of public policy and the constitution robustly. If the ALP wants to win any more elections after the next the range of changes briefly discussed in my article, and more, should be taken up and fast. The piecemeal tinkering should stop. The ALP would have to show that the reformist spirit has recaptured the party. A substantial election victory, a real possibility, would provide the required mandate.

Klaas Woldring

Klaas,

I apologise for misspelling your name in my previous post.

I do think Australians are naturally cautious, and I think that makes sense. That is why the overwhelming majority of referenda to change the constitution have been defeated. Those who want change have to make the argument. Though, with the High Court's interpretation of the external affairs power and the corporations power, we do not need a referendum to alter the constitution any more.

I would like to see Labor adopt some new ideas too (e.g., a referendum instead of a double dissolution to break deadlocks between the Houses, indexing the lower tax thresholds and welfare phase-out thresholds to movements in the minimum wage, works councils), but if it hits the public with The Big List, it will lose. The argument has to be made over time.

Look at the madness of Julie Bishop's proposal for increasing the power of principals to bully, exploit and victimise independent thinkers while paying off the most sycophantic members of staff. This is not a new idea at all. It has been around a long time and has been drip-fed for years. That is why it is being taken seriously, even by the Labor Party. The fact that it has failed is irrelevant. Similarly, good ideas need some time to be accepted.

I do not include the end of federalism and the Westminster system as a good idea.

Johncee 1945,

People get what they vote for. If they don't like it, they can always form their own party and see how many others will vote for them.