Tag: australia 2020

Posted on

Well, I wanted some profile before Australia 2020…

[Update 10 March, 1030 AEDT: I’ve written a follow-up article which, while bound to piss off a few people, explains precisely why I’m so concerned about this issue.]

…but I don’t know whether this was exactly what I had in mind. Calling a high-profile Internet entrepreneur a prick, and then being referenced by some of the highest-traffic tech blogs on the planet.

Screenshot from Techmeme showing my article in the top story listings

OK, I participated in the discussion at TechCrunch and the 37signals blog Signal vs Noise, as I should. But then it was picked up by Mashable and then TechMeme (see screenshot). And now I’m seeing inbound from TechCrunch Japan and Colbert Low’s technology blog and who knows where else to come.

Continue reading “Well, I wanted some profile before Australia 2020…”

Posted on

Post 1010: Half-way to Australia 2020

A witty headline, eh? OK, well, only a little bit witty. But I missed marking the major milestone of Post 1000 on this website, so I thought this would be the next best thing.

The annoying thing is, I don’t have anything to say about the Australia 2020 Summit right now, and I have plenty of other things to write about. So let’s pretend you didn’t see this post, and I’ll write the update later, OK?

Posted on

Saturday Reading, 8 March 2008

I think I might make this a regular feature? Should I just use some automated social bookmarking tool to generate the page?

Four pieces feels about right for today.

Posted on

Australia 2020 brings out the whingers

Another day, another lobbyist for one specific community sector fails to understand what the Australia 2020 Summit means. This time it’s Professor Warren Hogan whingeing that “the ageing population” isn’t mentioned enough.

As reported in that august journal Australian Ageing Agenda, Hogan reckons the “omission” of aged care from the Summit agenda is “inexplicable”.

“An immediate worry with the new Government comes from the failure to address any issues in aged care for the 2020 summit,” he said.

No, Professor Hogan, what’s really “inexplicable” are:

  1. Why you haven’t bothered looking at the list of topics at the Summit website, which clearly says: “Health — a long-term national health strategy — including the challenges of preventative health, workforce planning and the ageing population.” [my emphasis]
  2. How you reckon the Summit fails to address this issue when it hasn’t even happened yet.

I’m getting pretty goddam sick of the narrow-mindedness and short-term thinking shown by so many of the commentators so far.

Continue reading “Australia 2020 brings out the whingers”

Posted on

What happens after Australia 2020?

Chairman Rudd has already said he wants a bunch of good ideas to come out of the Australia 2020 Summit. In a wide-ranging interview for The Age he explained what’ll happen to those ideas.

Rudd: I think engaging the public service with something like the 2020 summit is a good thing because you have people who are mutually engaged, against not a completely free-ranging discussion, because we’ve set a policy objective for the nation which we intend to work towards. We’ve said here are the questions that we would like answers to but in terms of the menu of answers and recommendations we are completely open-minded about that. As I’ve said consistently, we’ll accept or reject what’s put forward. But the idea is to shake the tree both within government and beyond government to get people into a much more open engagement about the country’s future. I think that’s healthy.

Q: What’s the mechanism for accepting or rejecting ideas?

Rudd: We, the elected government, will do that. But what is put forward by the 2020 Summit will be their agreed recommendations, each of these ten working groups. And what we’ve indicated is by year’s end, that is within a six-month frame we will develop a formal response to what has been put forward by way of acceptance or rejection and the reasons why. I think that is a fair way to go.

In other words, the Summit is the start of a debate. After that one weekend in April it’s up to us — yeah, us Australians — to convince the government they’re worthwhile ideas (or not).

Posted on

So who’s ready for the future? Who’s not?

Maxine McKew and I aren’t the only ones who think Australia is ready to start a new conversation about our identity. The Australia 2020 Summit secretariat received 7251 nominations for the 1000 spots. I wish them well with the winnowing — and wish myself good luck with my own application.

The real fun now is seeing who’s actually ready for the future, and who just wants to stifle discussion.

Human rights lobbyist Howard Glenn puts it well, and shows that he’s ready:

Why am I enthusiastic about a relatively small two-day conference in April? Because it is a big gesture which says clearly that we have permission to start thinking about the future again. The flow-on effects are already starting. Schools want to have their own future summits, difficult long term issues are emerging for community debate. And that’s before it’s all really started.

It’s only two days and 1,000 people. Who gets to go is not as important as the fact that it is occurring at all, and that there’s such media attention to the attendance. Some will see it as a revival of the mythical Keating elites; the start of European-style social planning; a talk fest. I see it as the start of a restoration of confidence in Australian culture, identity and ingenuity, and a faith that we can think about future challenges, and find what we need to face them.

So what about everyone else?

Continue reading “So who’s ready for the future? Who’s not?”