Like it or not, these are vital hours - the critical early period in the trajectory of a policy challenge where public calls are made, options are either embraced or ruled out and positions get locked in. 
Long-term policy responses within our adversarial system are frequently decided by this sub-optimal tussle of bravado and pride.
You can see it happening as our imperfect political machine wrestles with the correct Australian response to the Syrian humanitarian crisis.
For Prime Minister Tony Abbott this is a major moment. It is his chance to prove that his harsh policy tomahawk evangelised as "stop the boats", was not the heartless piece of small-minded "fortress Australia" it appeared to be.
Abbott has always defended the moral dimension of saving lives through his policy and ending people smuggling. Indeed, he says, it is precisely because Australia has addressed these problems that it is better positioned to help more people in desperate need.
Already, though, positions are ossifying in another direction. While Labor and the Greens, along with a growing number of compassionately minded Liberals, are calling for a serious lift in our overall refugee and humanitarian intake - after the remarkable examples set by Germany, Austria, et al - Abbott is sending out mixed messages.
Encouragingly, he talks of Australia's big heart, its proud record as an international citizen, and our commitment to do what we can to help in the extreme circumstances. Australia is part of the solution, he flags, sending Immigration Minister Peter Dutton to Geneva on Sunday night for crisis talks with refugee agency UNHCR.
But when pressed on what form our "extra" intake of Syrians could take, Abbott seems to equivocate, raising fears he is already of a mind to rule out increasing the aggregate number.
What is going on? Presumably, Dutton is not travelling to Europe simply to restate that while Australia does what it can, we were already doing it and that there will be no increase in our 13,500 intake (rising to 18,000 eventually) - in which 4400 places have been earmarked for Syrians.
Beyond the moral imperative of responding to the Syrian disaster with material assistance rather than government double-speak, there is an opportunity for Abbott.
It is to demonstrate through his response to the crisis that stopping the boats was never intended to be the end of Australia's humanitarian response to displaced persons but, rather, a new beginning.
The alternative is that he will lock in behind his defence of existing policy settings, and view any calls for a change as tantamount to advocating retreat.