Ruddocracy, Power of 1000
If you're new here at 2thinknow, and you're interested in the latest ideas on trends, companies and innovation, subscribe to our RSS feed. Thanks for your visit!
COMMENT, Australia — Much has been made in Australia of Rudd bringing together 1000 bright minds to challenge social issues.
This will be co-chaired in April by Kevin Rudd, and the Vice-Chancellor of Melbourne University, Glyn Davis. Attendees will pay their way and give their time.
Davis is one of the men who 2thinknow believe are a true innovator in the university system in Australia, with the Melbourne model.
First the Positives of National Conversation
Conversation is a good thing. For a long while this is what many people yearned for under Howard. Including me, and many others I spoke with.
The key thing is that it is a chance to input into the national debate.
The sense of ‘exclusion’ explained to me globally in my travels, is why the ‘Global Innovation Conversation’ was started in the first instance.
The main purpose of 2thinknow is a global exchange of ideas and innovation across cultures, so as to create positive social change.
To a large extent Rudd’s dialogue is an Australian conversation.
A dialogue is a method that 2thinknow strongly recommend to cities or regions looking to become innovative. In this case, Australia should learn from Germany, France, USA, Canada … and also, China, Finland, Switzerland, Korea and other nations. And it’s own citizens who represent many nationalities.
Rudd with the Zeitgeist
Rudd, as Australia’s PM, and his advisors, have the finger on the pulse here.
The main driver of disillusionment in the electorate, and democracy worldwide, has been ‘exclusion’. A sense that whatever voters do, you or I do, it doesn’t matter.
This is profitable for conservative ‘preserve-the-status-quo’ groups in society. So for those whose major, or sole, motivation is economics and profit-maximization.
But for those who see society as more a cultural exercise, disillusionment is a powerful negative.
Rudd is engaging with Australian citizens. Which can only be positive.
Possible risks
‘Closet conservatives’ have such a powerful interest in the status quo for wealth or job reasons that they will act against the national interest.
Ideas need to consider practicalities and implementation. But their needs to be a chance for the idea to grow, not be ‘cut-down’ so as to endorse (rubber stamp style), existing measures.
And at Symposiums many of the usual suspects show up, and they cut out any new or innovative ideas. The ACS Symposium in Geelong was a proto-typical example. (I chaired a session of very negative professors).
I believe Rudd and Davis want this to work, and hope they will select well. So,I hope Rudd and Davis bring in a true cross-section. Commercial. Arts. Cultural. Social. And new people.
New people bring new ideas.
It should be a positive outcome for Australians, and an example of ‘engagement democracy’ that can be applied globally.
Professionally, I believe it will work. And ‘Go Global’.
Speaker. Author. Editor-In-Chief. Executive Director of Innovation, 2thinknow.
One Response to “Ruddocracy, Power of 1000”
What's your View?
Or Follow us on Twitter or StumbleUpon
An innovation summit. Those three words are extremely wide ranging. They give the idea that any and all innovation is on the table. Any and all by defininition means any and all.
By invitation only contradicts any to mean onlt those innovations and persons selected. (so much for honesty upon coming to office)
One Australian innovation that shall not be selected for the summit is the means by which base load electricity is generated at power stations using half the Coal and zero water, whilste generating the same power output.
This been personaly known to Mr Rudd and many of his Ministers now in office for some time.
Despite many a letter and even an offer to forgoe Patemt and Intellectual Property to any Australian power producer wishing to convert to half the Coal consumption ans zero water consumption emitting half the Co2.
Mr Rudd and his now Ministers have refused it any consideration on the reason that such would decrease the amount of Coal burnt and not waste any water. This in turn would decrease Government revenue from sale in both Coal and Water.
Such decrease in sales would effect *Australian prosperity.
(*one beleives an honest statement would be affects the prosperity of a limited number of Australians especialy those involved in Coal mining)
The company that perfected the innovation described would like to attend and bring first hand experience of the Government supression of new energy as outlined in Government ABARE report September 2007.
Cutting energy consumption in half, reducing water needs to zero and halfing Co2 emissions would lower electricity tariff’s.
The running costs of the innovation are the same as for a hydro turbine supplied from a hydro, which is much lower than the costs asociated with any form of Steam/gas turbine.
The cost of conversion is the cost of the hydro turbine and the gas/water energy converter. The durability of said is the same as for any hydro turbine fead from a hydro dam.
Lower electricity tariff to both business and domestic puts more money in the pocket of a good many people, and may be the difference between saving their home or seeing it sold at mortgagee auction, not to mention the rises cost of food.
By not having power stations evaporate millions of litres from our dams each day both business and domestic are left with more water. The more water the less the treatment cost.
Bty halving the Co2 emissions future costs for Carbon sequestration are halved.
The list just keeps going.