Did the 2020 Summit produce any new ideas or big ideas?
Was it merely an ALP talkfest with a (very small) minority representation from the rest of the community to counter claims of bias? Do the results give the PM a mandate for change or are they merely a tired old wish-list?
I was always concerned about the real agenda behind the 2020 Summit. That concern grew with the withdrawal of two former High Court judges who indicated that they did not wish to be politically manipulated into supporting that agenda. It has grown still more after the reports in the media of a standing ovation for the Prime Minister and the way in which the outcomes are being presented as a mandate for the future.
This is not democracy Australian style. The vast majority of delegates are known ALP supporters and already had the ear of government in other ways.
So, what good came of the Summit apart from allowing supporters of a lesser democracy to push their agenda further faster?

Didnt hear of a Holy Spirit-filled Christian pastor with a Holy Bible is his or her hand being invited there to preach Christian revival as the answer to a moral decline.
LOVE THAT CHRISTIAN REVIVAL!
Maybe Kevin Rudd is not as Christian as we think.
One-fire for Jesus people talk about Him and The Word all day when with others.
Maybe the old Red thing still hangs on with Labor.
The communists in the unions/old Labor didnt have much time for God. Got to have Christian revival to save the nation from its own death.

I was hoping the Summit might produce some good ideas and I think it has in some areas (eg. Health, Environment and Governance). One major leap forward was in the area of Environment - sustainable populations which has been previously ignored by governments in the climate debate.

Communicat, you make a good point about mandates. The Summit (in my humble view) is about ideas and possible solutions but not all of the ideas raised in the Summit will be embraced by all Australians. A Summit 'suggestion' ideally should be used as a basis for further consultation and investigation and not taken as a blueprint for implementation.

In the interests of participatory democracy many of the issues raised chould be put to referendum so that all Australians can have their say (eg. Republic, some aspects of Federalism and voting age just for starters).

Dear communicat,

Have patience, and wait for the PM's report on the summit due in a month's time.

Don't contribute to the typically negative 'panic merchandising' that we see when something new is attempted in this country.

Nothing will ever be achieved if such attitudes continue to be maintained.

The Liberals were invited to participate but some chose not to.
Perhaps the reason the two High Court Judges chose not to get involved
was politically motivated.

Remember - the 'tall poppy' syndrome. Unfortunately, it seems to be
a trait in this country. However, when you cut down the tall poppies, only the weeds remain.

It's time that we moved out of the nineteeth century and into the 21st century.

Foxy

I agree with you - too early to know for sure.

And a couple more points:

1. Thus far, we only what the media has presented, and the media has tended to focus on the more 'glamorous' attendees (such as Kate Blanchett, Hugh Jackman etc). And there may well be ideas we have yet to hear about.

2. An idea may very well be brilliant, but may take time for development for purely pragmatic reasons.

Finally, I am quietly optimistic, this summit is completely different to the Republic Summit engineered by Howard. That was limited from the outset because there was only a single 'idea': type of republic. Whereas, the 2020 has been far more open, lateral and inclusive.

We are simply going to have to be patient.

Hmmm, I watched it on ABC2 and three Foxtel channels and now I have
read the report from the website.

The summit failed dismally in that just about every proposal will
fail as the one thing that they did not take into account is the
depletion of oil by 2020. The economic impact that will have on
the amount of money to be expended on these proposals will also be
depleted. The proposals rely on economic growth.

Any funds that the government has to spare will be applied to
whatever infrastructure is necessary to mitigate the effects of
the power down which will be underway by 2020.

One example; the proposal that fresh vegetables be delivered to
aboriginal settlements on a regular basis.

What on earth makes them think that anyone will want to use up their
diesel or petrol ration to deliver vegetables over perhaps 100 Kms ?

One worthwhile proposal was for the construction of an extended
rail network, but no suggestion that it will have to be electrified.
The report nowhere contains the words Oil, Petrol or diesel.
The future supply of oil was just not on the agenda despite there
being a Senate report into Future Oil Supply for Australia.

There is great suspicion that the whole event was stage managed.
Example in the Governance group of 100, 98 voted for a republic,
one, the Governor General abstained and one voted against.

That alone makes one suspicious, so was the mention of peak oil
banned as was the Assoc Study of Peak Oil nominated delegate ?