Messers Albanese and Chalmers are now talking about taking actions based on evolving community consensus. They must clarify how the community consensuses are to be achieved. Our electorate is rightly cynical about decisions taken by the government based on polls that can be manipulated or through discussion with unions and some of the supposed great and good from our institutions. True consensus will only come from drawing the broader community into awareness of the issues and the potential solutions through transparent dialogue, including people they can relate to and trust. Our politicians must get real on consensus building!

For too long now our politicians have dodged bringing the community into the discussion of our wicked budget dilemmas: 1. Community expectations for government-supplied services and support are greater than our potential to raise revenue and 2. Our taxation system is too dependent on personal taxes and puts an unfair load on working Australians. The avoidance is due to fear of electoral backlash.Experience elsewhere suggests that the best way to resolve such wicked problems is to effectively draw the community into the deliberations. A citizens jury is one such approach.Mr Chalmers and Albanese - why not?https://ideaspies.com/posts/an-interactive-budget-that-shows-alternatives-to-planned-tax-cuts 

"Naked Australian Constitution" by Dr Killey is an examination of the flaws in the origin, design, application and operation of the Australian Constitution.    Although the Australian Constitution is one of the most stable - since its commencement in 1901, it has become fatally flawed. There are several serious errors, including 1. The racial basis of its origin, 2. Many implied vs explicit concepts in the text, 3. Some poorly designed provisions, 4. Several High Court rulings undermining the Constitution’s operation, and 5. The unforeseen domination of the federal government.

Prof George Williams has called for “a narrowly drawn law for truth in political advertising” and for “greater penalties, including criminal sanctions, in extreme cases of flouting the law”.   Is this enough? Our politicians expect professionals and businesspeople to act more responsibly than that. They should be held to the same standards as they endorsed for bankers from the Hayne Royal Commission principles:   Obey the law; do not mislead or deceive; be fair; provide services that are fit for purpose; deliver services with reasonable care and skill; and when acting for another, act in the best interests of that other. 

Australians face many issues today, and we can take action to impact some more than others.   Action on climate change is essential, but the impact of our contribution to the global challenge is minimal.     Things are different regarding the economy and opportunities for coming generations. We can re-set our taxation framework and government spending patterns to reduce debt and boost chances for all.   We need a community-wide deliberation on how to share the load in building a more robust economy and ladder of opportunity for future generations.

It is concerning to see the push by the PM to have a referendum on the Indigenous Voice before broad and inclusive community deliberation has been completed.   There is pressure to act quickly by some groups in the community; this risks either a failed referendum or people becoming frustrated when the implementation consequences become apparent.   Many wise indigenous voices, including Tom Calma, Marcia Langton, Pat Turner and Linda Burney, have endorsed the need “to build consensus” before moving to Constitutional Recognition.   Our community comprises many “voices” from many backgrounds – and they all deserve to be listened to.