1.0 INTRODUCTION Just over a month after the Australia 2020 Summit an extraordinary 'first' was reported in the Australian media. Two Australian women, Cheryl and Nikki Bart, became the first mother and daughter team to scale the summit of Mt Everest, having climbed the tallest peak on every other continent.1 Well, I thought, from my vantage point of a month's contemplation since the excitement of being a summiteer: That's one way of getting women on to a summit!' The media interest in the Bart story suggests at least two things; women can do anything, as we have been saying for years, but we are still doing 'firsts' because women still experience many barriers as they try to do everything. And while Cheryl and Nikki were toiling up that awesome mountain, 1,000 people met in Canberra at that other Summit 'to explore the challenges facing Australia over the next decade and beyond'.2 Part of the purpose of this article is to provide a narrative - a personal story of attending and participating in the Summit. However, another purpose is to explore the way in which women were included in and excluded from the processes, content and discussions of that event, in the hope that the analysis may assist in formulating ways to enhance effective strategic thinking, policy development and service delivery which specifically addresses the needs of and opportunities for women in Australia over the next decade and beyond. 1.1 I'm Going! At about 9.30am on the morning of Saturday 29 March, 2008 my friend Danielle rang me to ask: 'So are you going? I saw outside a newsagent that the list has been published.' It was only three weeks before the Australia 2020 Summit would commence in Canberra and four weeks after the closure date for nominations. This pace of process is a feature of the Summit to which I will return. I had actually opened The Weekend Australian by the time of the phone call but had missed the smallish notice on the front page that advised that the 1,000 selected participants were named in the Inquirer? I expected not to find my name because I had not heard anything since submitting my nomination on 29 February, but I scanned through the list, noting its break up into the ten discussion areas or 'steams' to be covered, and the further break up into states and territories. And there amongst the twelve Queenslanders in the 'Strengthening communities, supporting families and social inclusion' stream list, I found my name! To my surprise, despite working in the community sector in Queensland in various ways for over twenty years, I did not personally know any of the other eleven co-summiteers in this group.4 I learned at the Summit that many summiteers had a similar experience. The Steering Committee certainly chose many people who were outside of the 'usual suspects' in terms of government consultation - and the diversity and freshness created by these groupings of people who did not have a long history with each other was one of the strengths of the Summit.5 Further nearly all 1,000 people were given the same space in the published list. Whoever it was, however well known - everyone was just in the list - in about size 6 font! There were nine photographs of some particularly distinguished participants, but I felt that the equalitarian way of recording us boded well for the Summit. Twenty years in the community legal centre sector has left me a little cynical about governments and process, so I was a bit surprised at the genuine sense of honour and pride I felt to be selected. I considered soberly that, having nominated myself (at the instigation of others), I now had an obligation to contribute to making this event positive, to be part of something energising and exciting for Australia. I also knew that there would be criticism and that we would have to be robust about that. As Professor Michael Wesley said in his opening address: In our conversations this weekend we will discuss major challenges and worrying problems, aspirations and comparisons. …