Would you like wedges with that?

The document then praises “congestion pricing for infrastructure services”. This would have you paying more to drive through Brisbane or commute to the Sunshine or Gold Coasts, especially at peak hour. And if commonsense and overseas experience is anything to go by, congestion would be cut. This will save your precious time and temper in traffic jams and generate revenue from which could be funded reduced imposts on car registration or better infrastructure.

I’ve been advocating this for decades so it’s music to my ears. As well as improving our environment, it would slash our infrastructure shortfall both by increasing its supply and reducing demands on it. After its successful trial in London, Tony Blair has just promised this for Britain’s roads, helping Britain move into the position we once proudly occupied as one of the world’s pre-eminent economic reformers.

However, though congestion charging is electorally popular, that’s only after it’s implemented. Beforehand people think of it about as favourably as a few unexplained kilos of luggage on their way through customs at Bali.

So through the Budget Papers, the Federal Government endorses a bold new approach to reform. But it’s floated, safe in the knowledge that other governments will have to implement it.

The contrast with previous “infrastructure reform” could hardly be starker. With National Competition Policy, the Federal Government took policy leadership, most of the political flak and added substantial bribes to get the States on board.

Those bribes were summarily removed by the Howard Government to fund its water reform during the last election campaign. I think the technical term for that is “welshing on a deal”. More to the point, to reinvigorate reform throughout our wide, brown, and infrastructure, skill, and export starved land, we need national leadership - not buck-passing.