Rainier, I just gotta be cynical about this. Welcome to the next installment of the Culture Wars, wherein 'consensus' is achieved for collectivist solutions to social questions that will become reference points repeatedly referred to for the next 20 years.

Good will come of it, as well as bad. It's a lucky dip.

Foxy said:

"For too long Australian policymaking has been focused on short-term outcomes dictated by the electoral cycle."

How true this is. Probably the biggest single weakness of democracies.
Regretably, I think the only answer to this is a combination of strict control of electioneering such that we have a chance to reallllly assess the 'real' agenda's of parties and longer terms in office.

If a party is in office for longer, it gives lobby groups a better chance to change things mid term.

At the moment.. it is the best time of all to actually try to DO something as Rudd appears to be doing.. he has the most time to absorb it, translate it into policy and fine tune it over the next 3 yrs.

IF..however, they came up with something like this in the last 6months of a term.. the cynicism and cries of "Its just playing politics" would be very loud.(and believable)

YVONNE.. r u there....cooooeeeee ? :)

Thanks all for your contributions, keep them coming.

How will they distill and create consensus?

I've been informed that they will create groups of 25 people - with a facilitator and lots of buthcers papers and crayons.

I imagine they will simply create statements that are then sent onto the steering committee who will then release these 'solutions' or 'ideas' to the media.

What happens next is anyone's guess.

How will it inform policy?

I agree that this has all the hallmarks of creating another culture war.

If you've ever facilitated a group discussion you would know that its not easy to reach consensus - either about the accuracy of the problem posed - or the solutions being put forward.

More soon...

Dear Rainier,

Participants will be selected by a 10 member non-government Steering Committee. The Summit will be co-chaired by the Prime Minister and Professor Glyn Davis, Vice Chancellor of the University of Melbourne.

This Steering Committee will select up to 100 participants in each of the Summit areas who will attend in a voluntary capacity. The participants will be drawn from business, academia, community and industrial organisations, the media and include a number of individual eminent Australians.

Summit participants will be invited in their own right rather than as institutional representatives from any particular organisation. Each of the 10 Summit areas will be co-chaired by a Federal Government Minister and a member of the Steering Committee.

The Summit will have set objectives.

The Government has no interest in a talkfest, as I've stated previously. The Government's interest is in harnessing and harvesting ideas from the Community that are capable of being shaped into concrete policy actions.

Again, as I've stated previously, for too long Australian policymaking has been focused on short-term outcomes dictated by the electoral cycle.

If Australia is to effectively confront the challenges of the future, it needs to develop an agreed national direction that looks at the next ten years and beyond.

The PM is trying to do just that.

Rainier

I share Foxy's optimism as well, although I didn't at first. But the list of invitees is broadening, for example in my email today from ANTaR:

"ANTaR's National Director, Gary Highland, has been selected to be part of the Australia 2020 summit being organised by the Federal Government on 19 & 20 April in Canberra. The Summit aims to bring together some of the best and brightest brains from across the country to tackle the long term challenges confronting Australia’s future –challenges which require long-term responses from the nation beyond the usual three year electoral cycle. Gary will have the opportunity to discuss some of the key issues on Indigenous rights on behalf of ANTaR."

I don't agree with all the choices, but this Summit doesn't look anything like the one Howard set up to discuss the Republic.

If it was a Labor Party love in why was Miranda Devine invited? If it was about the culture wars why isn't Keith Windschuttle on the list?

I tend towards optimism with reservations on the actual summit, but if you've ever attended anything like this you'll know that the most useful and interesting things happen in the less formal bits. People from different interest areas and backgrounds gasbagging over coffee is often far more productive than the main event. They often form partnerships and go off afterwards to produce something new. Those kinds of networks are the more promising aspect in my view, bringing together people who might not otherwise meet