Tony Abbott  problem is that he has lost touch with the Medical community in general and the research that the Gov funds ( or doesn't in most cases).

It is as obvious as the egg on his face that one discovery is going to lead to another and possibly more explosive in subject matter.

Abbott is totally afraid of having the portfolio taken from him , he is blantantly only looking after his insecure career. - clutching at straws comes to mind.

Maybe he should contact DR (sic) Jayant Patel and arrange a grey matter install.

You know what the scary thing is? All the religous fundies will agree with him. I say, lets open up a medical institution that does not cater to these people. See how many of them cry foul then. They don't believe in all the new medical research, but they are the first one in line for a cure....

Carr slams Abbott on stem cells
Thursday Aug 24 08:16 AEST

Federal Health Minister Tony Abbott is imposing his "tortured theological conceit" in the debate about expanding stem cell research, former NSW premier Bob Carr says.

At the weekend, Mr Abbott, a devout Catholic, accused scientists of peddling false hope to sufferers of serious diseases in their zeal to overturn the current ban on therapeutic cloning - creating embryos to produce stem cells.

Prime Minister John Howard has promised MPs a conscience vote on the issue, with private members' bills seeking to expand the research being prepared by Liberal senator Kay Patterson, a former health minister, and Australian Democrats senator Natasha Stott Despoja.

Supporters of the research say it could help find cures for conditions such as spinal injuries and motor neurone disease.

Mr Carr championed the cause for embryonic stem cell research in 2002 when he brought the late actor Christopher Reeve, a quadriplegic, to Sydney for a forum on the science.

The former premier said people with views like those held by Mr Abbott should not be allowed to hijack the debate.

"We cannot allow people who hold pretty tortured theological conceit to stand in the way of research that can help us beat and beat faster than we otherwise would, diseases like motor neurone disease," Mr Carr told ABC radio.

"I'm referring to all people, Tony Abbott's one of them. I respect Tony Abbott but he's terribly wrong about this matter and resorting to scaremongering, talking about human-animal hybrids - no one is advocating that.

"All legislation in Australia prohibits it, the Lockhart committee didn't even contemplate that.

"The Lockhart formula and existing legislation combines to prevent, to outlaw, reproductive cloning in any form - that was pure scaremongering."

The Lockhart committee - a panel of scientists - reviewed the legislation which prohibits therapeutic cloning and recommended the ban be overturned.

Cabinet rejected the committee's recommendation in June, but Mr Howard bowed to backbench pressure and promised a free vote a fortnight ago.

Mr Abbott has argued that allowing therapeutic cloning would put Australia on the "slippery slope" to the reproductive cloning of humans, and could even open the door to creating human-animal hybrids.

Mr Carr said Mr Abbott was "absolutely entitled" to argue his case.

"It's just that I disagree with him," he said.

"He's entitled to participate in the debate, but I'm pointing out that no one in Australia, no researcher, no government, no one in the parliament, is advocating lifting the ban on reproductive cloning."

Mr Carr will discuss stem cell research with members of the Lockhart committee and Senator Stott Despoja, who said her private member's bill would be ready by September.

As Mr Carr weighed into the controversy, a US biotechnology announced it had developed a new way of creating stem cells without destroying human embryos, billing it as a potential solution to the political and ethical debate.

©AAP 2006

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=74235

I am merging an old stem cell research thread with this newer one. I expect the 'old' thread will appear prior to the newer one.

Stem cell method avoids killing embryos
August 24, 2006 - 9:10AM

A US biotechnology company has developed a new way of creating stem cells without destroying human embryos, billing it as a potential solution to a contentious political and ethical debate.

"This will make it far more difficult to oppose this research," said Robert Lanza of Advanced Cell Technology, the Alameda, California, company that reported the new method.

Stem cell researchers were impressed by the new technique's ability to produce two robust lines of stem cells without requiring the destruction of embryos, and a White House spokeswoman called it encouraging.

However, few on either side believe the new procedure would end the long-running bitter impasse over the science.

Stem cells have become a sort of holy grail for advocates of patients with a wide variety of illnesses because of the cells' potential to transform into any type of human tissue.

But the Vatican, US President George W Bush and others have argued that the promise of stem cells should not be realised at the expense of human life, even in its most nascent stages.

"The science is interesting and important," said John Harris, a professor of bioethics at the University of Manchester in Great Britain, commenting on the biotech company's efforts.

But a representative of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops rejected the method as "gravely unethical."

A number of stem cell researchers and bioethicists dismissed it as scientifically suboptimal and politically ill-advised.

"This will please no one," predicted a longtime critic of the company, Glenn McGee, director of the Alden March Bioethics Institute in Albany, New York.

The new technique takes just a single cell from an early-stage embryo and uses it to seed a line of stem cells. The rest of the embryo retains the potential to develop into a healthy human.

A paper describing the method is being published online today by the British journal Nature. The journal published a similar paper by Advanced Cell Technology researchers last year demonstrating the technique's viability in mice.

Stem cell researchers complain that the new approach, though it may hold future promise, simply is not as efficient as their current method of creating stem cells. That procedure involves the destruction of embryos after about five days of development, when they consist of about 100 cells.

Those who oppose any research that destroys a biological entity with the potential for human life argue that the new procedure solves nothing, because even the single cell removed in the technique could theoretically grow into a full-fledged human.

"It is widely believed that one cell of a very early embryo may separate and become a new embryo, an identical twin," said Richard Doerflinger of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops.

US law currently bans federal funding of any research that harms human embryos. A White House spokeswoman said the new method's eligibility for funding could not yet be determined, "but it is encouraging to see scientists at least making serious efforts to move away from research that involves the destruction of embryos."

Scientists at Advanced Cell devised a clever means of piggybacking on existing fertility treatments to avoid the creation, manipulation or destruction of embryos specifically for the production of stem cells.

The fertility procedure, known as preimplantation genetic diagnosis, or PGD, is used when parents want to avoid having a child with a lethal or severely debilitating birth defect. About 1,000 such procedures are performed each year in the United States.

PGD begins with in vitro fertilisation to produce numerous embryos. At a very early stage of development, when the embryos are no more than a ball of eight to 10 cells, a technician extracts a single cell from each one. The extracted cells are tested for genetic disorders, and those free of defect are then implanted in the mother in the hope that will develop.

The new stem cell production method takes a cell extracted during PGD and allows it to divide. One of the two resulting cells is genetically tested as in normal PGD; the other is cultured to encourage the development of stem cells.

"It's nothing revolutionary," said Yury Verlinsky, a Chicago physician who specialises in PGD.

Advanced Cell Technology was able to produce two viable stem cell lines from a total of 16 embryos. The lines appeared to exhibit the full potential of embryonic stem cells to develop into any type of human tissue, the researchers reported, but additional study is needed to verify that.

"I think this will become a standard way of producing stem cell lines," said Ronald M. Green, a Dartmouth College professor of religion who is an unpaid bioethics adviser to Advanced Cell Technology.

Embryonic stem cells have great medical potential because of their ability to transform themselves into virtually any human tissue. With further research, they might one day be used to treat patients with cancer, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease, stroke, diabetes, arthritis, spinal cord injuries and other ailments.

AP

http://www.smh.com.au/news/wor.....ullpage#contentSwap1

Also the thing that quite a few people in charge of this world (like Abbott) seem to be missing is that we throw away stem cell rich blood everyday (without one embryo being harmed):

Quoted Text

Link to Article: Umbilical Cord Blood:

Following the birth of a baby, the umbilical cord usually is discarded along with the placenta. However, it is now known that blood retrieved from the umbilical cord is a rich source of stem cells. Stem cells are unspecialized blood cells that produce all other blood cells, including blood-clotting platelets and red and white blood cells. Like donated bone marrow, umbilical cord blood can be used to treat various genetic disorders that affect the blood and immune system, leukemia and certain cancers, and some inherited disorders of body chemistry.

To date, more than 45 disorders can be treated with stem cells from umbilical cord blood.

Currently, commercial companies provide services to parents to store their newborn baby’s cord blood. Prospective parents who are considering this option should have as much information as possible to make an informed decision.


What are stem cells and why are they valuable?


Blood stem cells, most often found deep in bone marrow, are the factory of the blood system. They continually make new copies of themselves and produce cells that make every other type of blood cell. Stem cells are the key to successful bone marrow transplantations (BMTs) because they continue to manufacture blood cells indefinitely.

Bone marrow transplants can be lifesaving for people with leukemia (cancer of the white blood cells) and other cancers, or for those with serious blood disorders, such as aplastic anemia, in which the body does not produce enough blood cells. Stem cells can help enhance a person’s blood producing capability and immune system that are impaired through an inherited (genetic) defect or that have been severely damaged or deliberately destroyed by cancer treatments.

At present, donated bone marrow is the most common source of stem cells.


What are the advantages of stem cells from cord blood?

Studies suggest that stem cells from cord blood offer some important advantages over those retrieved from bone marrow.

For one thing, stem cells from cord blood are much easier to get because they are readily obtained from the placenta at the time of delivery.

Harvesting stem cells from bone marrow requires a surgical procedure, usually under general anesthesia, that can cause post-operative pain and poses a small risk to the donor.

A broader range of recipients may benefit from cord blood stem cells. These can be stored and transplanted back into the donor, to a family member or to an unrelated recipient. For a bone marrow transplant to succeed, there must be a nearly perfect match of certain tissue proteins between the donor and the recipient. When stem cells from cord blood are used, the donor cells appear more likely to “take” or engraft, even when there are partial tissue mismatches.

A potentially fatal complication called graft versus host disease (GVHD), in which donor cells can attack the recipient’s tissues, appears to occur less frequently with cord blood than with bone marrow. This may be because cord blood has a muted immune system and certain cells, usually active in an immune reaction, are not yet educated to attack the recipient.


A 2000 study found that children who received a cord blood transplant from a closely matched sibling were 59 percent less likely to develop GVHD than children who received a bone marrow transplant from a closely matched sibling.

The use of cord blood may make blood stem cell transplants available more quickly for people who need them. About 30,000 individuals each year are diagnosed with conditions that could be treated with a bone marrow transplant. Approximately 25 percent of these individuals have a relative who is an appropriate tissue match. While suitable donors can be located for many through national bone marrow registries, the process can take months. Donors can be located within 4 months for about 50 percent of patients.

It often is more difficult to find a bone marrow match for members of non-white ethnic and racial groups; transplants from cord blood may make timely treatment available for more of these individuals. Banked stem cells from cord blood can be more readily available, and this can be especially crucial for patients with severe cases of leukaemia, anaemia or immune deficiency who would, otherwise, die before a match can be found.

Cord blood also is less likely to contain certain infectious agents, like some viruses, that can pose a risk to transplant recipients.

And on that article goes from there ... so imagine how much Stem Cell goes to waste from just births alone  (think on a World Scale), and the blood that can be used from cord blood obtained from the placenta ... instead of arguing about whether embryo's should be harvested ... all this people should look a way of setting up a Cord Blood Bank on  a national scale ... much like our normal Blood Banks.

Like the article says, we use Stem Cells now from Bone Marrow which has to be a great match ... imagine a data bank of available Umbilical Cord Stem Cell Rich Blood on tap ... we would hardly be arguing about the embryo problem at all ... as it would not be needed much ... at Birth each and every one of us could have our own Stem Cells stored if we wanted to (a bank for our future health).

Abbott 'scaremongering' on therapeutic cloning

A member of the committee which reported to the Federal Government on stem cell research says Health Minister Tony Abbott is using "scaremongering" tactics to discourage support for therapeutic cloning.

Therapeutic cloning is when the nucleus is removed from an unfertilised egg and replaced with the cells from another person's body.

The Lockhart Committee - a panel of scientists - reviewed the legislation which prohibits therapeutic cloning and recommended the Government lift the current ban.

Professor Loane Skene, the deputy chair of the committee, has told ABC radio's Sunday Profile that Mr Abbott is incorrectly suggesting Australia is heading down the path to reproductive cloning.

Reproductive cloning is making a person genetically identical to an existing person.

"Reproductive cloning is prohibited by the legislation," she said.

"We have recommended, in the Lockhart Committee's report, that it should continue to be prohibited.

"It seems to be that it is scaremongering to say that if the Lockhart Committee's report is accepted then the next step will be reproductive cloning."

Professor Skene also says she has not been invited to brief the Mr Abbott on the committee's findings.

"I haven't been invited to talk to Mr Abbott himself, but if I were invited to talk to him, I would say that reproductive cloning, which is making a person who is genetically identical to an existing person, is prohibited by legislation," she said.

Sunday Profile airs at 9.05 tonight on ABC local radio.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200608/s1725076.htm

Well the Vatican says NO.  

Vatican rejects 'ethical' stem cell breakthrough

The Catholic Church has rejected claims a new technique to create stem cells does not harm embryos, pouring cold water on hopes by many scientists of ending ethical uproar over their research.

A US company says it has developed a way to create the stem cells without harming the original embryo, which the Vatican holds is a fully-fledged human life.

The breakthrough technique was meant to answer critics at the papal palace, the White House and beyond, who have long argued that it was ethically reproachable to attempt to save one life by taking another.

The head of the Vatican's Pontifical Academy for Life, Bishop Elio Sgreccia, says the new method by Advanced Cell Technology fails to overcome the Church's many moral concerns.

Bishop Sgreccia says the procedure is wrong-footed from the start - experimenting with embryos is reprehensible, as is use of "unnatural" in-vitro embryos created at fertility clinics, like the ones the US scientists employed in their research.

He says Advanced Cell Technology then made things worse by extracting what could be a "totipotent" cell.

"This is not just any cell, but a cell capable of reproducing a human embryo," he said. He added that, in effect: "a second embryo is being destroyed".

Across the Atlantic, Richard Doerflinger, a bioethics expert with the US Conference of Bishops, has accused the scientists of "killing" 16 embryos during their research.

Since stem cells can develop into any kind of body tissue, medical researchers believe they can lead to tailored treatments for diseases, including cancer and diabetes.

The Advanced Cell scientists, led by Dr Robert Lanza, let its embryos grow to the 8 to 10 cell stage before removing one cell. They then grew stem cells from that single cell.

Dr Lanza says the embryos, after such a procedure, still can be implanted in women with the potential to develop normally.

"For most rational people, this removes the last rational objection for opposing this research," Dr Lanza said.

Bishop Sgreccia say there is no way that Dr Lanza can ensure that embryos which had cells extracted could later go on to develop normally.

He urged them to look into other promising avenues, including adult stem cell research, accepted by the Church.

"Even if it didn't damage the embryo, it's still an issue of an invasive, unjustified operation on a human being ... You're going in, taking a piece of a embryo's organism to use for yourself," he said.

-Reuters

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200608/s1725151.htm

IS NOW.... Opposition Leader

During his short time as Leader of the Opposition he has put a lot of people, especially women offside, with his brazenly chauvinist views and his strict Catholic Ideals.

The following websites are a great way to update the Abbott experience.

For quotes:
http://news.google.com.au/news/quote?um=1&cf=q&ned=au&hl=en&qsid=X2HyLlQcZASd1M

Conroy to Abbott: please explain
February 21, 2010
Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has challenged Opposition Leader Tony Abbott to explain how he only objected to moves to cut $250 million from TV network licence fees after meeting News Corp chief Rupert Murdoch.

Senator Conroy said News Ltd, with its 25 per cent stake in subscription TV provider Foxtel, was clearly very unhappy with the government's decision to slash licence fees for the free-to-air networks.

for more...
http://www.smh.com.au/national/conroy---to-abbott-please-explain-20100221-on5q.html

Tony Abbott wants to scrap penalty rates
MALCOLM FARR From: The Daily Telegraph February 16, 2010 6:38am


FEDERAL Opposition Leader Tony Abbott wants to scrap penalty rates -- to protect the Australian weekend.

He is also claiming the Federal Government's employment laws were taking Australia back 40 years to when shops closed at noon on Saturday.

Mr Abbott believes businesses such as pharmacies will not open on Saturday and Sunday because of the higher wage bills caused by penalty rates.

The no-penalties policy is the first major employment law overhaul Mr Abbott has argued for since becoming Liberal leader, along with his call for a new set of unfair dismissal provisions.

He said he does not want the return of WorkChoices, saying it "went too far" and "it went fundamentally further than we had promised" in government.

For more: http://www.news.com.au/busines.....frfm1i-1225830734775

Tony Abbott's made a world of change in 80 days

By Ross Fitzgerald From: The Daily Telegraph February 23, 2010 12:00AM

THE adventures of Phileas Fogg in Jules Verne's 1873 novel Around The World In Eighty Days, remind us of the epic journey that lies ahead for Opposition Leader Tony Abbott. Fogg accepted a wager that required him to circumnavigate the globe, by whatever transport means then available, in a seemingly impossible 80 days.

Fogg and his valet, Passepartout, set off from London on an improbable adventure overcoming all manner of obstacles to arrive back home with just minutes to spare to collect on the bet.

As Abbott and Julie Bishop notch up their first 80 days as the new Opposition leadership team, the odds that they can pull off an election win are shortening. As unlikely as it seemed only two months ago, they may get there in time.

Abbott and Bishop know this is their chance to make history. They have at best a few months to convince the public that the Rudd Government has not earned a second term.

Since Abbott assumed the leadership from Malcolm Turnbull last December, the Opposition Leader and his deputy have criss-crossed the country to reinvigorate the Liberal Party base and sell the Coalition message.

For more: http://www.dailytelegraph.com......frezz0-1225833175913

Tony Abbott overtakes Malcolm Turnbull as most popular Opposition Leader
From: AAP February 22, 2010 8:29pm

TONY Abbott is closing the gap with Kevin Rudd in the latest Essential Research poll on the leaders' respective approval ratings.

According to the Essential poll, the Opposition Leader now commands a 45 per cent total approval rating, up from 34 per cent in mid-December.

His approval rating is higher than any scored by his predecessor Malcolm Turnbull in his 15 months as Liberal leader.

Mr Abbott's disapproval rating was 36 per cent, one point below Mr Rudd's at 37 per cent.

The Prime Minister's approval rating was 52 per cent, down three points on a month ago and 19 points lower than his 71 per cent approval rating of March 30 last year.

The poll, based on 1019 responses collected online between February 16 and 21, showed support for the Coalition inching up one point on a two-party preferred basis to 46 per cent.

Labor remained in an election-winning position of 54 per cent, down one point from a week ago.

for more: http://www.news.com.au/breakin.....frfku0-1225833183030

Abbott near-miss highlights road danger
Matthew Franklin, Chief political correspondent From: The Australian February 18, 2010 12:00AM

A photo opportunity for the Opposition Leader almost turned into a disaster

AN attempt by Tony Abbott to publicise a traffic black spot in Victoria yesterday almost turned to tragedy when a semi-trailer nearly wiped out his car as he arrived for a press conference.

The drama unfolded when the Opposition Leader's vehicle stopped to make a right turn on the Princes Highway, near Winchelsea. Truck driver Luke McRae, travelling behind Mr Abbott's car, said he saw the stationary vehicle but had no time to stop, instead veering off the road to avoid hitting the Comcar and a minibus which also had to overtake Mr Abbott's car on the left.

"My life didn't flash before my eyes," Mr Abbott, a devout Catholic, said. "I think the only word that passed my lips was a short one beginning with F as I saw the truck go past."

The owner of the semi-trailer attacked the Opposition Leader's driver for carelessness. Ryan's Freighters managing director Graham Ryan also told the Geelong Advertiser Mr Abbott needed "a kick in the bum" for staging a photo opportunity in such a dangerous place.

"The car has stopped first, the van's tried stopping behind the car but couldn't, so it's pulled to the left-hand side of the car . . . The truck couldn't stop for either of them, so he's had to go further to the left into the scrub," Mr Ryan said. "When you're turning right on a road like that, you should pull left first, wait for all traffic to pass, look for a clearance and turn."

Liberal candidate for Corangamite Sarah Henderson had invited Mr Abbott to the section of the highway to highlight the need for a duplication. Coincidentally, the media opportunity was set up underneath a billboard which read, "Choose a car that could save your life".

http://www.theaustralian.com.a.....frg6nf-1225831585880

TV networks slam Tony Abbott over license fee bribe claim
Geoff Elliott, Media editor From: The Australian February 17, 2010 6:45PM

THE Rudd Government’s controversial decision to slash license fees for commercial television network went prime time tonight as network news stations attacked opposition leader Tony Abbott for suggesting the government’s decision amounted to a bribe for favourable coverage in an election year.

Veteran Canberra journalist Laurie Oakes weighed in a personal editorial on Channel Nine news saying: “My message to Tony Abbott is this: when Kerry Packer owned the Nine Network he knew he couldn’t tell me what to say so the bunch of private equity investors who own it now have no chance."

Nine Network boss David Gyngell hit out at Mr Abbott’s comments this week in which he said the license fee decision looked “dodgy”, saying “maybe there is more to this, which the government hasn’t told us about, but … it looks like they’re buying favourable coverage.’’

Gyngell said: “we show no fear no favour at Channel Nine we will never do that and to suggest that is an insult to our journalists."

For more: http://www.theaustralian.com.a.....frgczf-1225831522577

My 2020 summit will be much better than Rudd's, says Abbott

From: AAP February 25, 2010 1:24PM

OPPOSITION Leader Tony Abbott will hold an ideas forum tomorrow in much the same vein as Kevin Rudd's famed 2020 summit.

But he insists it will be more than a glorified photo opportunity.

The roundtable is set to feature some high-profile Australians, such as former defence boss Peter Cosgrove and indigenous leader Noel Pearson, who will lend their views on future public policy.

Mr Abbott wants to take on the Government intellectually and told Coalition colleagues they must be willing to fight the "battle of ideas".

Each contributor has been asked to come up with no more than five big ideas to shape Australia in the medium- to long-term.

There will be fewer people than at the Prime Minister's talkfest of 2008 and, consequently, Mr Abbott said it would be much better.

"It will be much more focused," he told ABC Radio today.

"The Coalition is the party of ideas, ideas that make a difference, not just ideas that will bring in a whole lot of A-list celebrities."

Mr Rudd's 2020 summit included Hollywood stars Hugh Jackman and Cate Blanchett.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/ne.....frf7jx-1225834325761

Sky's the limit for Abbott
Mungo MacCallum | 25th February 2010

As if his election year was not already fraught enough, Tony Abbott has opened up a new front by involving himself in the media wars.

In announcing that the government’s $250 million rebate to the commercial TV networks looks like a bribe to ensure favourable election coverage, the opposition leader has aligned himself firmly with the moguls who run Pay TV in their ongoing battle with their free-to-air rivals.

He has already been firmly slapped down by the heavies on channels Seven, Nine and Ten; he must be hoping that the support of the others, and particularly Rupert Murdoch, whose News Ltd owns 39% of Sky News. So far it seems to be working; Murdoch’s tabloid attack dogs have become even shriller about the awfulness of Kevin Rudd and Abbott has had a very smooth run.

But the strategy remains high risk; the Dirty Digger’s favours are notoriously fickle and he does not like losers. If Abbott is seen to be unelectable, he will be cast aside like a burnt sausage at a barbecue.

It may be significant that Abbott waited a fortnight before entering the fray, and only did so after a private breakfast with Murdoch. A News Ltd spokeslackey says that media policy was not discussed at the meeting, but the News Ltd campaign against the rebate was well under way by then. The spokeslackey made the position clear: “We’ve never asked the government – or oppositions before they become governments – for any money. But we don’t like them giving money to our competitors with no strings attached.”

Fair enough, but there are various favours Pay TV has asked for: access to major sporting events presently confined to free-to-air under the anti-siphoning provisions and the ability to tender for the new Asia-Pacific TV network. The stakes are pretty high and each side is accusing the other of attempting to duchess the relevant minister, Stephen Conroy. Conroy appears to have been even-handed, accepting every invitation that is offered and indulging in as much hospitality as is available.

But his justifications for the $250 million handout have been less than convincing. He has cited the cost of changing to digital; but way back in 2000 the Howard government kicked in $260 million for just that purpose. Then there is the expense of providing the statutory 55% local content; but the commercial networks fill it up with quiz shows and so-called “reality” TV, cheap as chips and far less nourishing. There is no suggestion that any of the $250 million might be spent on improving the quality.

for more:
http://www.echonews.com.au/story/2010/02/25/skys-the-limit-for-abbotts-media-policy/

Use your brains at policy roundtable, Abbott tells Coalition
Christian Kerr From: The Australian February 24, 2010 12:00AM

TONY Abbott has told his Coalition colleagues not to shy away from intellectual debate ahead of a policy roundtable in Canberra this Friday hosted by the Liberal Party's think tank, the Menzies Research Centre.

A string of thinkers and public figures, including Noel Pearson, Peter Cosgrove, Alan Dupont and Ian Harper, as well as the former head of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, Peter Shergold, will take part in the meeting, convened at the Liberal leader's request.

"We have to be more prepared to take the battle to the Labor Party intellectually and fight the battle of ideas," Mr Abbott warned the opposition partyroom yesterday. He told the meeting "some of the smartest and deepest thinkers in Australia" would attend the meeting, while making a gibe at Kevin Rudd's 2020 Summit, convened in April 2008.

"This is going to be our own mini-summit, but there's not going to be a thousand people who have come along to agree with each other," he said.

MRC director Julian Leeser said the roundtable would "shake the tree" and build on the work of the opposition's policy review process: "It's a way of hearing from some great minds and test the ideas they've been developing."

Mr Leeser denied the roundtable was designed to float potentially problematic policy proposals at arm's length from the party. "The purpose is just to debate some of the ideas," he said.

"Tony likes vigorous debate. That's what he's brought to his role. He would like to see people genuinely toss around some of the difficult questions." Mr Leeser said the roundtable allowed figures from outside the opposition to become involved in policy formulation.

"We think that's where the centre can provide real value, bringing people who have significant standing in the community.

"We can bring them . . . into the practical policy debate and provide an interface between the party and substantial thinkers."

He took a shot of his own at Labor's summit. "The very fact that they had that 2020 Summit when they came to power was indicative that they used their time in opposition very poorly."

Frontbencher Andrew Robb said the opposition's policy development was "well advanced".

"We'll be ready for whenever they drop the flag," he said, adding the roundtable would help the opposition "test our thoughts".

http://www.theaustralian.com.a.....frgczf-1225833629997

I am so glad he's not in my electorate; I'd hate to have to vote for him!  Wait!  I don't vote Liberal anymore!