Debate needed on effective decentralisation

There are a number of commentators who (1) strongly condemn the aspirational nationalist moves by the PM which they regard as undermining traditional federalism; (2) agree that federal-state relations are at all time low; (3) argue that the situation can be repaired thereby restoring the original benefits of the original contract; and (4) argue that abolishing the states would result in "centralisation" and a huge bureaucracy.

It is essential to expose the serious flaws in this reasoning.

While the antics of the PM to bypass the states with opportunistic electoral stunts should be condemned by most, the notion that the failing federal system can be repaired is fundamentally illogical and impractical.

All this has been tried before but it doesn't work on account of the gradual shift of financial powers to the Commonwealth with the growing relentless fiscal imbalance, the two-party system, the current electoral system, compulsory voting and the fact that constitutional amendments can only be initiated by the Federal politicians themselves.

There are no effective mechanisms to turn the clock back.

Sure, we do need more effective decentralisation, badly.

But centralism has been the eternal problem of the states, aggravated seriously by their deteriorating financial capacity.

When the states are abolished, the local government level can finally be strengthened considerably as can the existing generally effective voluntary regional organisation of councils.

Furthermore city government can be introduced for the metropolitan areas.

Large service departments, like health and education, should become national concerns but not with a massive bureaucracy in Canberra.

They can have their own semi-autonomous regional organisations as already exists at the state levels.

So please can Australia start a meaningful debate about alternatives and effective decentralisation rather trying to put Humpty Dumpty together again?

Klaas Woldring Pearl Beach