I agree with the gist of this article. In fact I think that most people would agree that the current system is untenable. However I am afraid that it might, in the minds of many, be untimely.

Approaching the upcoming elections what the community, with Pavlovian efficacy, has been trained to expect is instant solutions. This after all is how voters are traditionally swayed.

All the shortcomings in education, dental and mental health will be immediately taken care of if only the right party is voted in. Given Australia's apathy in this area simply getting to the polls is about as far as many are prepared to go in order to exercise their democratic rights or community spirit.

If the chosen Government then renegs on their proposed instant fix-its the public settles down to comfortable private wrangling secure in the knowledge that they have done their utmost to effect change.

I fear that the pragmatic proposal of long-term solutions to produce realistic outcomes is far too prosaic for many. Media hype: saturation by an extensive television campaign, hysterical outpouring on talk-back radio and a few footie personalities or minor actors vapidly giving public support - that is what really works.

The only hope of stirring up public support for the proposals contained in this article perhaps is to play the money angle. Forget about peoples inaliable rights in a democratic society - keep telling 'em how much money its costing them individually.

This is after all a proven strategy - it's what won the last two elections. Well-being, a productive society, entitlements under UN charters? Mere bagatelles. But money? Ah that's a different matter, that'll get 'em every time.

The purpose of federalism is to divide power between polities, and a principal motivation for it is to ensure that no government has a monopoly in any area of legislative discourse.

Work Choices is a classic example of anti-federal thinking driven by a (wrong) belief that the separate governments in a policy should have different, rather than concurrent, responsibilities.

George Williams opposed Work Choices because he is a member of the ALP, actively seeking preselection for the ALP. Now he advocates streamlining federalism, which is exactly what delivered us Work Choices.

Leave federalism alone.

It's time (thanks Gough) to dump state governments. One federal government is more than enough for 20 million Australians.

Is the Constitution the play thing of our business elites ? Our American cousins seem to have less trouble with their 18th century Consititution than we do with ours, they even interpret it in the way it was written whereas our judges decide ours is old fashioned.

I have doubts about the $9 billion in savings. The claim comes from the following:
http://www.bca.com.au/DownloadFile.aspx?FileName=Appendix%5F2%5FThe%5FCosts%5Fof%5FFederalism%5FFINAL%5F28%2E10%2E2006%2Epdf

however when reading it, it appears that savings are repeated multiple times. For example, the BCA report says that 16% of the $16 B in minor state taxes could be saved by 'efficient' federal taxes. Where does this $2.8 B saving come from?

Well the actual elimination of state tax offices is listed separately saving an additional $150 million. And the transfer of grant money to the states is regarded as 'inefficient' costing $215 million.

The other line item savings are very vague eg "lack of coordination and/or inadequacies in Commonwealth oversight and accountabilities". This $2,296 million lost is probably dwarfed by the lack of co-ordination and accountability within government.

I'd want to see a more robust explanation of the $9 billion.

An excellent article George. Twenty million Australians want value for their tax dollar and your solution will deliver it. Best of all it is an achievable plan to have just one legislature giving Australians one body of law.

I expect the real savings to be closer to $50 Billion a year based on economic modelling done by Mark Drummond. I understand that's made up of direct and indirect savings. For example, look at the efficiency gains of one ciminal law for all - ending the red tape and expense of inter-state extraditions. It saves money and time. Likewise in other areas. An Australian standard for education is overdue. And one local government Act for the entire country will rocket the delivery of local services and infrastructure from their current woeful state of disrepair.

A nationally regulated health care system, delivered locally would help redress decades of blame and neglect in this and many other sectors.

Transport and resource management also need a national vision and funding to match. The checks and balances arguement put up by states rights groups has long proven to be a theory with no substance, particularly the way politics plays out between the current 3 tiers of government. Strengthened local government working with a national parliament is definitely the way ahead.