Hazza,
what is HOS?

Sense,
We should drop states and replace with 'Regions' made up of six federal electorates and having less responsibilly in matters like tax collection, health, police, transport and other items of national importance.
Local counceils only to act as a consultancy group with minium staff.
[governor/'n'. A person who governs] this is what the GG does, to oversee the actions of the executive as chair of the Executive Council who brings into law legislation passed by parliament, calls elections having checked the validity of such a request from a PM.

Pericles- good point, unfortunately; But on the note of a leader, it really boils down to the same problem that it will still be an issue not everyone can agree with (ie his/her views)- what we really need is a large open debate.

Sense- fair enough to separate the issues, although I think the Republic issue is probably the best point to make these changes.

JMCC- HOS = "Head of State" (GG or President).
Like your points;
By the way- when you mean six regions are you referring to per-state or nation? Personally I think we'd need many more regions (due to wide variety of climate, communities, indigenous land claim and other political and social issues that would likely vary considerably across each present state).

Hazza,

what I am saying is we should have single house regonal governments in lue of the current states each made up of 5 adjoining electorates, which could overlap current boundries, e.g;
NEW ENGLAND - Page, Parks, New England, Cowper & Lyne
ILLAWARRA - Hughes, Macarthur, Cunningham, Throsby & Gilmore
CARPENTARIA - Solomian (NT), Lingiani (NT), Lichhart (Q), Kennedy (Q)
and area north of Kalgooelie (WA)
MORTON - Petrie, Lilley, Brisbane & Bonner
etc;
each regon would contain 500 - 600,000 voters and the total would be
33 regonal governments.
ALL taxation would be the responsibillty of the commonwealth

Aye JMCC, that makes sense. I agree.
Especially that taxation should be handled solely by federal, along with multi-state affairs (roads, etc) with local/regional government/councils having similar share of authority as local councils share between the state government.

the only govt reform that will swork
is getting rid of states...
just fed overrseeing local school district/'size areas

run council/police/hospitals...all govt services out of the schools
decentralise...this too big too fail govt

minesters oversee the council
thats it

deal making is treason

then we sell off the state assets
[first to local councils...
non transpherable..non a-lienable

more consumer protections against frauds

One under God,

For heavens sake!

Most of the work done by government in Australia is done at the State level. The Federal government employs only 230,000 people, the NSW government employs over 300,000 people, thus the NSW government is actually larger than the Federal government of Australia.

In total, the States employ 1.2 Million people, therefore if the Federal government were to take over the States you would have to increase the size of the Canberra public service by 6 times!

Under the current constitution you break the States up to as many as you like.

What need in Australia is local government reform, for instance in Sydney there are 39 mayor and 500 councillors, compared to Brisbane Sydney has at least 36 mayors and 400 councillors too many! All up NSW has 7,000 councillors.

What Australia needs is for local government in the larger cities to take responsiblities off the States, like buses, water sewerage, main roads etc. Otherwise a state like NSW will forever be nicknamed, Newcastle,Sydney, Woollongong.