The State of the Nation

GLF 2014 participant David Coombe reflects on the first seminar of the Governor’s Leadership Foundation program – The State of the Nation. Throughout the year various GLF participants will contribute to a series of blog posts about their experiences and insights of the GLF program.

The State of the Nation…

Such a phrase I feel invokes many thoughts and ideas when circulated in our communities. This seminar of the Governor’s Leadership Foundation Program focused on an overview of the debates related to our economy, population, environment and social issues that are facing Australia and South Australia, both domestically and abroad. With such a diverse array of matters that are touched by these topics and how they have and may impact the state of our nation now and into the future I felt ‘although I have my own thoughts and ideas, I am only scratching at the surface’. I’m curious to learn more from my fellow GLFers and speakers, acknowledged as experts in their field.

“Although I have my own thoughts and ideas, I am only scratching at the surface.”

I was interested to hear speakers advocate passionately for their point of view. Throughout the event some guests sought to connect their view point with those of the others, cross pollinating ideas and demonstrating that they are all interlinked. I saw where this did not happen a view point was not socialised, which meant that only ideas that were openly discussed could be aired and considered.

Speakers panel during Seminar State of the Nation, GLF 2014. Photo credit: Michelle Holland FGLF13

Reflecting on the seminar I am left pondering ‘what do we want our nation to look like tomorrow?’ What needs to be done today in order for our society to get there? And what may we have to go without in order for our society, our children and grandchildren to be custodians of a society we are proud to leave to them? It was interesting to note the phrase “we are too Adelaide-centric” appear in the conversation. This is a phrase I have used and heard time and again, but are we acting on our recognition of this?

I was surprised we did not delve into ‘what is the role of government, private business, not for profits, communities, families and individuals?’ Has one gone too far to dilute the role of another? Consider working hours and the move to a two income family – yet house prices are not what they used to be in relative terms and in essential services such as electricity and health. The latter have been taken from government hands where the focus was previously on social inclusion, and placed into the private sector where economic profits are the measure of success.

A highlight for me was the notion that we are seeking happiness. Why? In essence it brought home to me that whilst we may all be seeking the same thing – whether it be happiness, prosperity etc. – we seek to achieve this in different ways. For example, if we have economic wealth and social inclusion for ourselves we will not want to see our economic wealth and influence taken away through a government policy or a change in community attitude because we already have what we want in the current ‘environment’. On the other hand, those who do not have, or who are advocating for wealth and social inclusion, want to see a change such that wealth and social inclusion is spread to those without. For leaders, the question is raised ‘how to make gold from this?’ How far should this gold be spread at a local, regional, state, national, or global level?

“A highlight for me was the notion that we are seeking happiness. Why? In essence it brought home to me that whilst we may all be seeking the same thing – whether it be happiness, prosperity etc. – we seek to achieve this in different ways.”

The biggest learning for me was how Australia is seen as a resource nation while our future lies in a service based economy concentrating on the services and manufacturing that we do best; not underpinning our national economy or indeed that of our communities on services and manufacturing where we are not able to effectively compete. Yet how do we get there? How do we influence our political system which is focused on short term 3 to 4 year cycles; companies who are thriving in today’s Australia who have a vested interest to seek the status quo; our tax system which is geared such that some research and development cannot occur; and our laws and regulations including that of a Minster’s Determination that prohibits some research e.g. stem cells? We discussed energy production from fossil fuels, renewable energies and nuclear and how these had reshaped the emissions profile of countries around the globe. We touched briefly on how these impact our society through job creation and economic wealth, yet I see these as the defaults we keep returning to as a nation. Where is the discussion on thorium-based molten salt reactor systems, a technology not well socialised in Australian society?

Photo credits: Michelle Holland FGLF13

My biggest ‘aha’ moment came from a conversation around the Swiss political system. Would we want such a system? Is Australian society politically astute enough to effectively operationalise such a system? It was the language used here that caused the ‘aha’. I think we were being questioned rhetorically, yet steered to maintain the system we have. I feel that yes we need a politically astute community to effectively run citizen initiated referendums and other aspects of the Swiss system that we feel would bring value to Australian society, but to not start somewhere is to shirk our responsibilities as Australians. If we were to start tomorrow the role of the media, experts from different fields, and politicians would need to be changed to educate the community on the issues they are facing.

“What are our nations underlying morals and ethics and are they reflected in our actions and conversations?”

Question I am currently pondering are, what would our society look like if we were to adopt the Finnish approach to fines? Tying them to annual income for an individual or company. What influence would this have on our communities and our businesses? What changes in behaviour would be seen? What are our nations underlying morals and ethics and are they reflected in our actions and conversations? Finally do we take the time to diagnose or are we all compelled to action? Actions I feel that are born from our defaults, as we do not take time to get to the heart of an issue, to socialise it and seek to place responsibility for it with the stakeholders.

Photo credits: Michelle Holland FGLF13

My experiences and insight born through the seminar and the GLF to date touches my work, family, volunteer and community lives through having a wider appreciation for my actions and words and how these may influence seemingly unrelated aspects. Like the tides they will pull and push the people and systems I interact with in a multitude of ways.

The seminar challenged me to be open to view points that I may disagree with as I will have something to learn. Conversations and relationships will be fostered that will enable appreciative enquiry, innovative thoughts, ideas, and experiments to take place.

David is the Geographical Information Systems Service (GIS) Delivery Manager for the Department of Communities and Social Inclusion South Australia and in a voluntary capacity, Team Leader for the South Australian State Emergency Service (SES). David is the proud father of newborn Gabriel James and he enjoys strolling through SA, whether it be by the beach, the bush or attending a cultural event.