One is a group advising UNAIDS, the joint UN agency that co-ordinates the worldwide efforts to reduce the spread of the human immuno-deficiency virus (HIV) that causes AIDS. In early 2010, I went to a conference in the Netherlands with religious leaders from around the world that was aimed at promoting dialogue between experts engaged in reducing the incidence of HIV infections. The three days of exchanges were far from useless. We took away ideas and memories of human faces to connect to the explanations of where we were all coming from. But the going really got tough towards the end of the meeting when the generalities were dropped. The AIDS experts demonstrated the urgency of the challenge. Still no cure or vaccine, 25 years into the epidemic. Still 2.6 million people annually becoming infected. Many of the religious participants could agree on bland generalities and pleasantries. But when I urged the necessity to specifically mention specially vulnerable groups, there was strong resistance or silence. ''It would be shocking to people of my religion,'' said one irate participant. In January, I attended a meeting of the Eminent Persons Group, a body examining the future of the Commonwealth. It will report for the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Perth in October. The group was established to breathe new life into the Commonwealth. In front of the group was clear evidence that rates of HIV infection in Commonwealth countries are twice that of the rest of the world. Why? In more than 40 of the 54 nations of the Commonwealth, homosexual activity is illegal, even when conducted in private between consenting adults. The ''white'' dominions and a few others have got rid of these laws, and many of the attitudes they reinforce. But in the ''new'' Commonwealth, they remain resolutely in place. Likewise, laws and policies on prostitution. Getting fresh thinking on these topics is very hard.

Recently, Australia tried to put repeal of the colonial laws against gays on the agenda for the Law Ministers, who will meet in July 2011, in the run-up to CHOGM. Now Australian Attorney-General Robert McClelland has notified that he has taken the topic off the agenda. There is no consensus, he says, to even have discussion about it. Last week in Bangkok, I joined in a consultation with participants from the Asia-Pacific region, held under the auspices of the new Global Commission on HIV and the Law to which I have been appointed. It has been created by the United Nations Development Program to stimulate fresh thinking about law, as it interferes with a successful response to the spread of HIV. This is a worldwide problem. Globally, the big challenges concern the laws on pharmaceutical patents that increase the costs of HIV therapies. But there are also our old friends, the laws on gay sex, drug use and sex work. Upon these, civil society generally says one thing. But the rulers cling to the current laws. One exception is Fernando Henrique Cardoso, former president of Brazil. He has been leading efforts to ensure access by the poor in Latin America to HIV therapies and the replacement of prohibitionist laws on personal drug use and sex work. Getting dialogue between people who have completely different starting points is a major challenge. We are thrown together by jumbo jets, the internet, iPads, Twitter and Facebook. But we still have difficulty in talking the same language, especially to our leaders. On the issues of AIDS, those leaders all too often listen to religious prelates in gorgeous attire, who are long on condemnation and short on practical, workable solutions. There is no point in banging the table. Denouncing those who will not listen to rational arguments rarely makes things any better. People like me have to learn where those who resist fresh thinking are coming from. Finding common language and exploring common ground is the immediate challenge. In the case of AIDS, this involves exploration of the central message of love for one another that exists in all of the world's leading religions. Many of them play important roles in delivering healthcare services and education. If they can be won over, even partly, they will be important allies. Yet, with funds for the global response to AIDS diminished by the global financial crisis, and 2.6 million people becoming infected every year, there is no time for delay. The challenge is urgent. That is why effective dialogue across borders and cultures is imperative.

In 2005, La Trobe University established a Centre for Dialogue. Already it has engaged in international exchanges over the common problems presented by global media and technology. It has organised a regional dialogue between leaders of the multiple religions in Australia and its region. The new technology of the world links our minds. We see and hear the necessary words. But are we understanding what the words say? Do we appreciate the urgency of the ideas they promote? Can we turn communication into genuine dialogue? These are challenges worthy for an Australian university to tackle and to help resolve. And all Australians must join in the dialogue. Michael Kirby, a former High Court judge, will be receiving an honorary doctorate today from La Trobe University. Follow the National Times on Twitter: @NationalTimesAU