By Nicholas Gruen

It's not just bad politics to turn up somewhere in a powerful position and tell the locals that they don't quite measure up to standards back home.

I haven't paid much attention to Telstra's participation in the public policy debate. It usually manages to get itself seen in a fairly poor light at least if one is not paying much attention as I haven't been. Even so, I've just read this speech by Phil Burgess, and I'm impressed. I'm impressed with it because its argument is interesting, and quite persuasive - except for one thing. He outlines some differences between Australian and American political culture. He does so in a very informed and perceptive way (at least for someone who's only been here a while - and I presume he had some decent research assistance, and indeed wonder whether, as such leaders often do he's passing off research assistance as his own wide reading. But I may be being ungenerous.)

In any event, Phil thinks that Australian debate is not vigorous enough. That people defer too much to what the government and senior government figures think...

Australia needs a permanent, highly visible and accessible repository for ideas.

In 1988 I wrote to the then Minister for Science, Barry Jones and advocated the concept of a centralised ideas database. I envisaged a system where members of the public could submit ideas for inventions, models for governance, infrastructure improvements, etc. via phone, fax, mail or even the newfangled "email".  

My envisaged model was a system administered by universities who were probably the only bodies at that time with enough computing power to handle the influx of data. Since then, of course, there have been massive advances in internet technologies making such a system not only feasible but, I believe, imperative. It is sad to contemplate that there have doubtless been many creative ideas formulated by ordinary people which have withered and died for want of an avenue for expression.

A World Economic Forum report predicts multinational corporations and individuals will exercise more power than governments by 2030...  

Government bureaucracies have been the main mechanism for supporting government since the late 18th Century and the French Revolution. By virtue of their gatekeeper position between decision makers and the community, public service agencies have wielded significant power in advising government on the development and implementation of policies and services.

Consultation with business, NGOs and citizens has always played a part in developing government initiatives, but the decisions about whether and how to involve the community have been ad hoc, and the bureaucratic hierarchy involved can sometimes make the whole process cumbersome and slow.

Since the early 1990s, the environment in which the government must respond to change has been transformed by the rapid development of the Internet and the accelerating pace of globalisation. Many activities to meet community needs, which were once only within the ambit or capacity of government, have now moved into the domain of people and in many ways have become self-regulatory.

Some thoughts on Rudd's '1,000 Great Minds' initiative and what might need to happen to improve its chances of success

Because of the holistic nature of the approach being advocated, all of these areas overlap and are highly interactive and interrelated.

1. Getting the usual ‘experts' together, to then plan for a better future. This always leads to tinkering with existing (flawed) plans, and excludes those most affected by such plans.

2. Taking problem-solving (back-end, reactive/responsive, curative) approaches. These tend to focus on symptom management and neglect the need to address the underlying maldesign and mismanagement roots of the problems. They typically over-focus on measuring problems (a prime strategy for postponing action - by those who benefit from the status quo), and on efficiency and substitution strategies (eg, improved application of pesticide and on finding less disruptive [but still purchased] substitutes, such as biological controls and genetically modified organisms - same story in other areas, such as medicine and energy).