Australia has everything to play for, and every advantage it could hope for, but it also has every chance of blowing its future prospects. So says a 16-page special report in the May 2011 issue of the internationally recognised journal, The Economist.

The problem lies not in its people or their abilities, but its leaders, says the report. And it's hard not to agree.

A strong, active leadership must present a vision, not to be popular and score well in polls but to pull people together to prepare for the long term future of the nation. There has been no expression of a vision for Australia by its leaders, and especially its politicians.

The report argues there is tremendous opportunity in Australia. We have a tolerant, optimistic society and an economy that can prosper beyond the resources sector, but it's time now to work out what Australia really wants to be. That is an appropriate question given that Australia, compared with other developed countries, is very young.

But what is the vision for Australia? And if there is a vision, has it been communicated to the population? We exist in a bubble of petty, squabbling politics, and we're in danger of losing sight of the bigger picture, if indeed we ever had one.

There comes a time when we have to clearly define what our 50-year plan is − where we want the nation to be, and the contribution Australia wants to make on a global stage. The onus of responsibility for the nation that Australia will be in decades to come is actually with the people, right now. That's exciting, but also challenging, and time is of the essence.

We are presently witnessing uprisings in Arab nations, the "Arab Spring", of people making brave decisions about their future, and taking dangerous steps to make their vision come true.

But in Australia there is a dearth of vision. A 49/51 split in political allegiances is a clear representation of the fact that we don't have a leader who inspires the majority of people.

The leaders of both major political parties have some of the qualities required but their rhetoric is neither inspirational nor aspirational. The Coalition's main objectives are ending or stopping initiatives, which is not aspirational, and in fact creates fear. Labor uses rhetoric which has worn threadbare, and is unable to communicate a clear message. Neither leader has asked us where we want Australia to be in 50 years.

We are obsessed about good governance, but we're in danger of seeing that as visionary when it is in fact just basic hygiene. We deserve good governance in this country but that shouldn't be our aspiration. Our aspiration must address building a sustainable future and maximising the talent of our youth. We have a golden opportunity to create a wonderful future, far beyond the next three-year political cycle.

But what we get is a lot of fighting down in the weeds, which doesn't generate the appropriate level of discourse, nor does it tease out convergence towards a longer term goal. It's a gladiatorial approach to government which leaves us in a stalemate.

The news media are both proactive and reactive, and can be seen as part villain in this. Our politicians are savvy at feeding the daily news cycle - fertilising the weeds - while many of us are slaves to it, constantly clamouring for new and exciting tidbits.

With the speed at which we live our lives it's difficult to stop and think about the larger picture. It takes real courage to build and express a vision, and inspire a people to desire what they can become. To climb out of the daily slingshot aggression of our politics and express a clear long-term vision is no easy matter. The public will lose respect for both party leaders because they will eventually wish to be led to a higher ideal.

When Anna Bligh stood up and led Queensland through the floods she was admired in all quarters. We like that kind of leadership, but will we have to wait for another crisis for that kind of leadership to occur again?

Australians last stood proud as a nation for the Sydney Olympics. That was 11 years ago. It occurs now only when there's a crisis, but it doesn't need to be so.

The current debate about climate change and carbon taxes is not really about where we are today but where we'll be in 50 years, and whether the nation will be able to sustain itself. Yet much of the commentary is mired in petty arguments about minor adjustments in the cost of living now.

Our wake-up call would ring loud and clear if we examined the cost of not having a vision -- the cost of what would happen to this nation if we slip into mediocrity and we miss our opportunities.

Current parliamentary debate is draining the energy out of us as a nation, and that's dangerous. We as individuals, and together as a nation, must decide what legacy we want to leave for future generations. This is not about government, but the nation of people, clearly articulating our desires.

But it takes genuine leadership to enable that.