The Grattan Institute has given us a much more sensible list of budget proposals than the Commission of Audit, and best of all, it hasn't cost taxpayers a thing, writes Greg Jericho.

For a report on ways to cut government waste, the one written by the Commission of Audit was really about 1200 pages too long. Given the exercise was meant to cost $1 million but ended up costing us $2.5 million, surely the commission's report should have consisted of "sack us and instead use some of the other many, and much more sensible, reports from think tanks".

One of the more ironic aspects of the reporting on the Commission of Audit is that no one seems at all fussed that many of its recommendations are so politically suicidal as to be rendered straight for the scrap heap. It's bizarre for a report notionally about government waste to waste so much space recommending things it knows the government will not do.

A much more efficient (a word the commission was very keen on) exercise would be to instead consider the views contained in reports by think tanks such as the Centre for Policy Development, Per Capita, Australia Institute or Centre for Independent Studies.

One such think tank, the Grattan Institute, this week released its report "Budget pressures on Australian Governments 2014". The report is in many ways a sequel and update of its report from last year: "Balancing Budgets: tough choices we need."

The report last year got most focus for its recommendation to increase the pension age to 70 years by 2025. The Commission of Audit argued for the same measure, but for it only to be introduced by 2053. As Michael Janda noted, that would be after most of the Baby Boomer generation have passed away, and thus would be a rather pointless policy shift.

And seniors are the big issue of welfare. The Grattan Institute looked at growth in expenditure compared to GDP growth:

It found that among welfare payments, only expenditure for seniors and carers significantly outgrew GDP. Both are linked, given the greater need for the aged to be cared for by family members.

The Grattan Institute's recommendations on the pension thus might be more politically difficult, but at least they have sense of logic.

But while welfare and the ageing population remains a big issue, it was not the biggest growth area in the government budget over the past decade. Welfare spending has actually grown slower than GDP in that time due mostly to decline in unemployment benefit expenditure. But health expenditure has definitely outstripped GDP growth:

The Grattan Institute noted last year, however, that contrary to popular belief, "the primary driver of increasing health costs over the last decade was not an ageing population, but rather increased services for all ages".

The 2014 report also knocks down some policy myths in other areas.

Take for example the discussion on infrastructure. Everyone seems to love infrastructure: Tony Abbott wants to be known as the Infrastructure Prime Minister. But infrastructure spending has actually grown considerably in the past decade:

And the Grattan Institute notes that most of the increase has come from the states - especially NSW and Queensland:

Now this is no bad thing, but as the Grattan Institute notes, investing in infrastructure is in some ways an easy option for governments - the justification of running deficits because they are funding infrastructure sounds smart. Indeed, Joe Hockey would like to see the state governments sell public assets to build more infrastructure rather than pay off debt.

But the Grattan Institute notes "governments may not be getting particularly good value from the significant increase in infrastructure spending". It notes that the benefits of most infrastructure are over-valued, and that it's not a one-off cost either - infrastructure such as roads, bridges and the like has a great deal of ongoing expenditure.

The report notes that "given the other pressures on state budgets, there is little room to fund new infrastructure. Sustainable spending on infrastructure will require improved recurrent budget balances, either through reduced spending in other areas, or higher taxes and charges."

The report when addressing the budget not only shows more rigour and sensibility than the Commission of Audit - it also does more than half the job. It notes that "budgets can only be balanced by looking at both expenditure and revenue".

And it found that growth in income tax, GST and the fuel excise were the areas of revenue that had fallen behind GDP growth:

The report also in its recommendations noted the masses of tax expenditures such as superannuation concessions, and argued that superannuation tax concessions be limited so that "only $10,000 a year can be contributed before tax, and those over 60 years old pay 15 per cent rather than no tax on earnings".

It also recommends broadening the GST to include food, health and education spending.

Certainly little of the report's recommendations are easy "low hanging fruit" that people suggest the budget is full of. It noted that changes to "middle-class welfare" would actually produce much lower savings than other measures.

And finally the report acknowledges the difficulties and impacts of its proposed cuts or increases to revenue, noting that "big and difficult reforms may be best introduced in a package" as this would enable the government to show the problem and also that "the burden is widely shared" while also including some measures to mitigate "the impacts on those worst off and least able to absorb adverse change".

All in all, the report offers a much more sensible view of the Australian economy than present in the Commission of Audit. It also did not require the government having to spend $2.5m to get it.

Perhaps the next time a government wants to "fix the budget" instead of commissioning an audit whose main purpose seems to be just to help frame the budget and blame the previous government, perhaps they can cut some waste by just having a look around and use some of the much better advice that is already available.

Greg Jericho writes weekly for The Drum. He tweets at @GrogsGamut. View his full profile here.