For the 100 or so people who filed into yesterday’s suicide prevention forum in Albury, there was never any expectation this day would deliver a one-size-fits-all quick fix.

Those who came — the families and friends who have lost loved ones, the teachers, counsellors, clergy and community groups and the government and non-government service providers who turned out en masse — came to talk and to listen.

From the start, forum convenor Sebastian Rosenberg had questions of his audience that in many cases delivered still more questions than answers.

But this wasn’t to be a stand-and-deliver Powerpoint presentation, a sermon from on high with a neat and tidy conclusion.

Suicide does not work that way.

It has broad and complicated parameters and those affected do not fit into easily defined categories.

And therein lies the difficulty in tackling this unwieldy beast with its countless tentacles.

Even the statistics are hard to quantify.

We know that more people die from suicide than in road accidents.

Figures state men are four times more likely to die from suicide, indigenous people are four times more likely to die from suicide than non-indigenous people and there is a suicide attempt every 10 minutes.

We are told mental illness is a factor in 90 per cent of all suicides.

But we are also told suicide is under-reported and there is an extremely convoluted process by which a coroner can even classify a death as suicide.

We conclude suicide is more prevalent than reported. This just makes the burden of responsibility that much heavier.

Forum participants were asked what programs and services were working well, what could be improved and how do you measure “success”.

As someone personally touched by suicide, I have to confess to a degree of cynicism as the first question was posed.

Surely, we wouldn’t be here if things were working well.

And, judging by the response of some of the participants, I was not alone.

A certain weariness descended as service provider after service provider stood and delivered their particular running list of credentials and the programs they had “facilitated”, often prefaced by complicated acronyms relating to the organisation they represented.

As one person in the audience quietly remarked, “Yes, but is any of this going to save one life?”

The thought had also crossed my mind.

In one sense this forum was already preaching to the converted.

There is no doubt all were well-intentioned.

Ultimately, though, the real question is how do we ensure those at risk do not get lost in the system and how do we ensure there is adequate and meaningful support for those who do lose a loved one to suicide?

How do we ensure the services and programs already in place, adequate or not, are accessed by those they are meant to target?

And then how do we fill the gaps?

What is clear is the first step has to be a willingness to connect with the community and to “normalise” the discussion about suicide.

The fact more than 100 people turned up to yesterday’s forum is a clear indication that willingness is already there.

As Mr Rosenberg pointed out: “Suicide is everybody’s business”.

And that business extends beyond the walls of a doctor’s waiting room, a psychologist’s office or even a hospital ward.

It needs to transcend funding constraints, the vagaries of politics and the tyranny of distance.

It needs to be taken to the footy field, the paddock and the playground.

The door has been opened, the conversation has begun.

And, if The Border Mail campaign of the past week is anything to go by, people want to talk about this.

And they need to.

Now it’s time to put those words into actions that save lives in our community.