So, who’s for Chairman Rudd’s Australia 2020 Summit?

I’m actually quite excited about this. Yes, it could be just a talkfest, but at least we would be talking about things that have simply not been up for discussion for a long time, and I do think that’s the first step for making changes.

You’re exactly the kind of person I’d like to see on this, so I’m very happy to nominate you once the process is made clear.

I agree that there shouldn’t be quotas — I think that if we look at people who can address the issues, particularly with the people who are working in the fields now, we’ll get a good balance of gender ethnicity etc. I’m less concerned about age, although I do think there needs to be a balance there. I’d like to see a reasonable sprinkling of academics in the mix, because, despite the perjorative use of the term in Australia, these are the people who think about these things. I’d recommend someone from the ‘Cosmopolitan Civil Societies’ research team at UTS — they have a lot of innovative ideas about how we live in communities.

Stilmeister — definitely from the floor!

I would love to have nominated PPMcG, but he has already gone to the perma-crem below. Bugger it.

Dick Quan is not one whom I would nominate — nothing against him and heaps of my friends have been his patients — but A/Prof Linday Dyan or Prof Michael Kidd (both med profs in Clinical GP practice) OR A/Prof Merrilyn Walton a clinical practice ethicist who has seen the best and worst (more often the worst) as foundation commissioner of the Health Care Complaints Committee

Under 40’s could be tricky top nominate… Being a gerontophile its hard for me to think terribly seriously abouut younguns, but a suggestion that I would have to make is a colleague in NGO governance roles Jason Appleby. His day job is a policy analyst at the Aus Fed of Aids Orgs, he is a geek, he is muzikal, he thinks outside the 5th dimension, and has a delicious sense of irony for an under 30thing.

And of course, I have to nominate the Dep Vice Chancellor (Research) of Sydney Uni. Professor Merlin Crossley

Sorry for no hyped-up-links, a bit busy and wont have a chance to do later.

Now, if my peridontist gives me PCA for my root planing this PM another nomination will be flowing in once I regain consciousness!

‘No-one anywhere in the selection process should ever starting thinking about quotas. None of this 1970s crap about “we must have equal numbers of men and women,” or “make sure there’s a few Asian faces in each group.” The selection should be on talent alone.’

That’s very subjective, and isn’t likely to give us a representative sample of people. One logical step from your argument is that most of these ‘talented’ people are going to be white and male anyway, so they shouldn’t be held back. I can’t agree with that, because it means they’ll mostly be representing that part of society — not others. Also, last time I checked, there were plenty of people out there who thought having a representative sample of sexes, races and all the other parts of society was actually a good way of representing everyone in society… not ‘1970s crap’.

I notice the list doesn’t list any gender issues. All of those issues mentioned affect women and men, girls and boys differently. Somebody — male and female somebodies — should be up there noting that.

And, you know what, it’s a good thing to measure gender and ethnicity… because these issues affect different genders and different ethnicities differently.

*makes a face* I just don’t agree, sorry. My viewpoint comes from having worked in development, where you’re constantly asking the target group what they want and need. It’s been consistently shown (to me) that even if you select ‘the best and brightest’, those best and brightest tends to miss the concerns of all people, and often forward their own agenda. Top-down just doesn’t cut it.

I like your optimism that those best and brightest will think of everyone’s needs, but again, it’s so easy for it not to happen. Also, give people in those ‘isms’ some credit — just because one happens to have dark skin or a vagina, doesn’t mean that person won’t talk about the issues for everyone who doesn’t. They just have a point of reference which allows them to understand issues from a further angle.

I don’t know about the illiterates. You made your example in jest, but it actually highlights a greater issue in our society — that in such a highly educated country we still have many people who are functionally illiterate. Why shouldn’t their views be represented, perhaps not by 50 people, but certainly by someone who gets it at least?

Another interesting point, one I got from Crikey today I admit. Apparently the conference is going to be pay-your-own-way — effectively excluding anyone who can’t afford it. So now we’re cutting out anyone who’s poor who has an excellent viewpoint from which to tell us what needs to be done about poverty in Australia. Is that right?

Okay, here goes’

i. You [category 9]

- because you asked so nicely and deserve to go.

ii. Graham Bell [categories 1 and 10 - and 4 too]
- because nobody knows me and I’ve never been on “Lateline”. I am OVER 60 and intend living past 2020 – out of unbounded curiosity and a keen desire to get back some of what I’ve paid in taxes.

Besides, I do
– ask awkward questions.
– have radical but attainable visions for the future.
– know what doesn’t work and WHY it doesn’t work.
– live in the Other Australia – free of the usual “essential” services.
– understand a bit about the visions for the future of our international competitors, partners and potential conquerors.
– have great, if cautious, optimism.
– want to see Australia become a great prosperous country.

Nominating myself isn’t cheeky. If I don’t do it, who else will?

Thanks. Toothbrush, razor, change of underwear and a spare pen packed already.

For all those not invited to the Summit (yet), I’ve created an online forum to list your best ideas and vote on others. It’s at http://ozideas.wetpaint.com. Please check it out and submit your ideas.

Ahhhh, Mr Stilg, 1 in 20 Australians are functionally illiterate? Make that 9.2 out of every 20 being functionally illiterate and innumerate. The ABS Adult Literacy and Lifeskills Survey completed in 2006 found that 46% of Australian adults (not including identified Indigenous people as they were outside the scope) are functionally illiterate.

Ten years previously the figure stood at 47%, so in ten years we made a 1% improvement in adult rates; although PISA reading and writing results against set benchmarks for school students have been in decline over the same period (a 3% or so drop in 9 years).

The Survey results are freely available on the ABS website, just search for ALLS.

So make that 460 illiterates at the Summit…

Stilgherrian [@4:51pm].

Okay. You’ve convinced me: I’ll Third or Fourth your nomination, if you like .

And if I win Lotto or find out that Kerry Packer was a long-lost uncle who included me in his Will, I’ll see you in Canberra.

Anyway. Good hunting.

Their nomination form surprised, perhaps alarmed, me. This is a forum/ summit about the future yet their nomination form has the Dead Hand Of The Past written all over it. Could have been worse, of course; they didn’t have questions like – “Wife’s name?”. “Religion?”. “Schools attended?” [to confirm previous question]. “Society and Lodge membership?”. “References?” “Father’s business or occupation?”

b.t.w., As a matter of courtesy, I tried to email the Australia 2020 Summit at their site and kept getting delivery-failure notification. Wonder how many others experienced the same level of customer service?

Stilgherrian:

What would I say? Don’t know you from a bar of soap but so far as I know, you were never on the HIH or Ansett boards…. nor involved with Treasury or Defence Procurement or Immigration policy making …. two things that would get you in the door for sure. Seriously though, if you did put my name down, it would be very informative to see what happened next.

Asking for referees is definitely a Blast From The Past – strange indeed. My own problem is that I’m of an age where many who knew well my abilities and experience are now dead – offering to hold a seance for the selection panel to speak with them would go over like a lead balloon.

Yes that is strange too. A workshop/summit about The Future and they ask for pen-and-paper stuff. It may be that speech and hand-written communication is much better for making very subtle assessments about the nominees [if I were running the show, I might have done the same] …. or …. given the way Australia’s moribund “elite”[??] behaves, it’s more likely to be sheer control freakery plus ignorance of modern technology.

Theres a stench of game-playing about the way the whole show is running so far – the apparent minimizing of women participants for a start. And who said social darwinism was dead?

Apart from not being able to afford to go to Canberra for a dirty weekend – even if I had written a nomination, there is no guarantee it would have got there in time [we have standard snail-mail out here in the bush - not a yellow postbox within a bull's roar - that they haven't considered that issue is strange as well].

Why don’t you put in a nomination over the phone today [with a paper backup], explain what you have done and what your own vision is for policy making and just see what happens. [If you do get to the Grand Summit, bring us back a doggie-bag from the banquet, please].

Harking back to Pseud’s and your comments on 5th February. I would be tempted to omit gender or sexuality or ethnicity issues from my list too because, by now in the year 2008, these SHOULD no longer be areas causing great concern. [That they still are is quite another issue].

Wonder if this whole show might be to set up a Bunyip Aristocracy? [How's that one to keep the conspiracy theorists happy? ].

Stilgherrian:
Good one!

Might be many months before I get to civilization again – but thanks.

Real world needs keep intruding so the Counter Summit blog won’t be finished until next weekend.

Stilgherrian:
True.

Hope it is useful anyway.