I suppose it may have been wishful thinking to expect a discussion that actually related to the question, and didn't include rants on a favourite hobby horse and counter rants, or comments suggesting that it's all a waste of time.
However, if there IS actually anyone who is interested in a discussion and not a rant, then I'd still like to read what people think about this matter.
Thanks

Yes ConsRmad there is someone here with a sensible comment.

I am generally of the mind that if it isn't broke don't fix it.
However what is broke is the states.
The states should be deleted and the responsibilities and rights that
are held by the state governments should be divided between local
government and the Commonwealth government.

The states were necessary in 1901 whe a trip to WA took two weeks at
a minimum. These days with teleconferencing and air travel all those
reasons are long gone. The parochialism of those times has almost
gone except in WA.

We have too much conflicting legislation, different road rules even.
Ever notice the Victorians making U turns at traffic lights ?
Different building standards etc etc etc.

To say nothing of hundreds of unnecessary politicians.
Now that should stir up some activity and comment.

I feel that it would be rather healthy to
have a discussion on the benefits of a new
Constitution in Australia. There are questions
that I'd like to see answered, for example:

1) Should the Australian Constitution have an
entrenched Bill of Rights?

2) What kind of Federal model or arrangement
between the national and regional entities is
desirable for the country?

3) Why are judges selected in their current
particular manner?

4) Does Australia need a monarch and particularly
a British monarch as Head of State?

5) Does Australia need a Governor-General?

Just to name a few...

My understanding is that any changes to the Constitution have to be approved by the people.

I wonder how many powers have been transferred between the States and the Commonwealth (one way or the other) directly contravening the Constitution over the past century.

There is room for improvement in the separation of powers between the states and the Commonwealth. As Bazz pointed out there is much confusion in the lack of uniformity even in the most basic of regulations - road rules, actions that would constitute a criminal offence, school regulations, transfer of qualifications in some areas like trades, entitlements for pensioners, business regulatory regimes and the list could go on forever.

Not to mention duplication of processes in some areas.

The Australian Constitution was put together as a Commonwealth of States, so first we must get all States to agree to be abolished. That if we want to abolish State Governments. The only other way to have all States agree is a civil war where State Parliaments are overthrown and the military seize power and write a new Constitution. You tell me when State Parliaments are willing to relinquish their powers?

The Constitution of Australia Act was passed by a Parliament which prohibited women.

No woman spoke or voted on the Bill.

It is preposterous to assert that the Parliament which passed the Constitution of Australia Act was comprised of anything other than men's legislatures.

Or that the legislatures the Act enables are anything other than men's legislatures, to which women have become acquainted.

A Convention in the Parliament with the Senate a Women's Caucus and the House of Representatives a Men's Caucus should resolve the situation of the States.