ETHNIC CLEANSING - BY STEALTH?

I was cautious about using the term "ethnic cleansing", because I did not want to belittle the very real physical suffering, homelessness and alienation that has been experienced by hundreds of thousands of people in places like the Sudan and other countries in Africa, the Balkans, the Middle East, and in Germany during World War 11. No doubt almost every Australian would wish to dissociate themselves from any attitude or value system that would make the rights of one ethnic group of less importance than another.
There is also a recognition of the fact that, although it was the Bounty descendants from Pitcairn Island who were given Norfolk Island as their homeland, there has been a continual process of new people joining the community since 1856. Some have married into Island families, others have come to enjoy the special character and lifestyle of the place, still others have seeking business and economic activities, or opportunities to utilise and exercise special skills not available in the local community. Many of these people have burned their bridges behind them, become very much a part of the community, and there are a number of non-Pitcairn families who have been here for some generations.
For this reason, I try to avoid using the words "Norfolk Islander" and try to say "Norfolker", and refer to that special Norfolk Island character and culture as "the Norfolk identity" or "the Norfolk way"( a term we hear quite a bit now.) That is not to say that the very special Pitcairn heritage, and the attitudes and values that have come with it are not still responsible for much of what makes this island unique.
Over the past couple of decades, we have seen an erosion and watering down of this Norfolk identity. I do not mean the changes that have come with more intermarriage with non-Norfolk Islanders, or the changes that have come about with improved transport and communication links with "the mainland." I refer rather the steady and insidious "Australianisation" that has been forced on us over a period of time.
No doubt, border control issues played a part(and still do), and in the early Eighties, many Norfolk Islanders were forced to face the fact, for the first time, that if they were to apply for a passport, it must be an Australian one. Many older islanders were born citizens of Norfolk Island, and had no concept of being anything else, although they valued their close association with Australia..and New Zealand too, for that matter. When passports became necessary, and no Norfolk Island passport was possible, many became Australian citizens almost "by default." There were also a number of Norfolk Islanders and Norfolk people who held New Zealand citizenship, and at first this was no problem. A smaller group of Norfolk people held citizenship in other places, such as Great Britain and the United States. Indeed, many had migrated to Norfolk Island direct from those places, and had not even considered they were migrating to Australia.
Then there came a requirement from Canberra that enfranchisement and voting rights should only apply to people from the British Commonwealth, and our American friends at least needed to consider taking out dual citizenship.
Then more and more frequently, we began hearing from Commonwealth officials and government representatives the line about Norfolk people deserving to enjoy the same rights as all other Australians. It seemed to mark a definite trend and shift in official policy, and it led to several undesirable things
1. A move by Australia to bring us into their electoral system. A local referendum made it clear that we did not desire this. Nevertheless, we given an optional right to vote either in a Canberra electorate, or in an electorate with which we had a close association (the latter applying mainly to people here for a short term.)
2.Moves to give any Australians who were residing on Norfolk Island the same electoral rights on the island as they would enjoy back in Australia. Once again against the expressed wishes of the Norfolk people it was decided that any Australian residing on the island would be entitled to vote in local elections after just 6 months. Not only was this a far shorter period of qualification than would apply to any immigrant into Australia, but it threatened to cause a shift in the delicate balance of views and voting on local issues, because these people had not had nearly enough time to understand local issues or the candidates standing for election.
3.Disenfranchisement of any resident who did not hold Australian citizenship. It is true that no one already on the electoral roll would be taken off, but any non-Australian citizen was disqualified from standing for election, and thus became a second-class citizen of Norfolk Island. At the time, even some of our Legislative Assembly members were non-Australians, and had to take out citizenship to stand for re-election! In some cases this affected people who had lived on the island for decades, and some who had been born here. Even some Norfolk Islanders, who perhaps held New Zealand citizenship, and had lived away from the island for some years, returned home to find they had no right to participate in the local electoral process.

Meanwhile, there were increasing numbers of visits from Canberra officials, bureaucrats, and government ministers paying lipservice to their respect for our local culture and heritage. However, it became clearer and clearer that they merely regarded us as another part of "multicultural Australia." They had, and still have, no concept of Norfolkers as being a people with a completely separate history, a people who had never chosen to migrate to or settle in Australia. We did not want them to include us into their patronising welcome to other ethnic groups to become a part of their Australian melting pot of cultures. I recall one occasion when representatives of the Maori people returned the island to receive back the "patu" that had been given to Gidley King by their predecessors. It was a very special dawn ceremony at Kingston. The then Parliamentary Secretary in the Dept. of Territories, Warren Snowdon, spoke most condescendingly about Australia respecting and wanting to preserve our culture in the same way as it did the Aborigines. A bit of a worry.
Now in more recent times, there has developed another trend in Canberra's tactics. This has come with a steady and consistent undermining and criticism of the ability of our government to provide the sort of infrastructure, services and facilities "that should be enjoyed by Australians." For instance, more than one Inquiry (and there have been plenty recently) has referred to our hospital as "third world." They know that mentioning health is sure have an emotional appeal. True third world communities would be staggered! In fact, prior to the South Pacific Mini-games, which the island hosted in 1999(?), our medical facilities were inspected by officials from other Pacific islands, and they regarded them as a whole as far superior to those they enjoyed back in their own home islands.
This current Canberra plan, if allowed to be carried out, will almost complete our "homogenisation" into the Australian scene. Even if it does bring economic and material benefits...and we doubt that it will.... it will lead to the erosion, even loss of a very special identity and way of life, and threaten the spirit of a unique community that Canberra obviously regards as an irritating anomaly.
Do Australians really think that their culture, their heritage, their "way" is superior to that of the people of Norfolk Island?
If they only thought about it, we could hold us up to the world as the "jewel in their crown" instead regarding us as a thorn in their side!!

GOOD INTENTIONS?

I am sorry this the only picture I could find of Hon. Robert Ellicott on the web. He is a man for whom I have enormous admiration and respect. A truly honourable man.
Back in the 1970's, the then Labor Government commissioned a Royal Commission into Norfolk Island Affairs. Sir John Nimmo was put in charge of this Royal Commission. This method of inquiring into the island was perhaps a better way than the Senate Standing Committees to which we have been subjected recently, as hopefully, the Commissioner did not have a bias and an "agenda", and hopefully was less influenced by the Canberra bureaucracy and Government policies.
Nevertheless, Sir John Nimmo did recommend that Norfolk Island be absorbed into Australia, with even less of a say in their own affairs than they had already been enjoying...and that was only an Advisory Council, presided over by an Australian appointed Administrator.
By the time the Nimmo Report was being considered, there was a change of Government in Australia, with the dismissal of the Whitlam Government and the election of a Liberal Government under Malcolm Fraser. There was certainly a big break in continuity of governance and policy on the Federal level.
This gave some hope to Norfolk Island, where a strong grass-roots movement had begun among the Norfolk Islanders in reaction to the threat to their heritage and identity as a separate people.
Canberra adopted a somewhat cautious approach, and the new Minister for Territories, (Sir) Robert Ellicott, when speaking to Norfolk Island people about their aspirations would always preface his remarks with "My government believes.." or "My government's policy is..."
It soon became apparent that when you heard these words, you knew that his private view differed somewhat from the official one. Even then, he personally felt that Norfolk Island, historically, morally and constitutionally, had a greater right to a say in its own affairs, and that government at the hands of a Canberra bureaucracy was inappropriate for a small island with a unique and separate heritage, history and culture.
Sir Robert Ellicot has made it clear that he still holds this view.
To his credit, back in the latter part of the 1970's, Sir Robert began a process of intensive, open and productive consultations with the people of Norfolk Island and other interested parties, resulting in the Norfolk Island Act of 1979. The Act gave the island an elected Legislative Assembly of 9 members, and a tiered arrangement of powers.
There some areas where the Norfolk Island Government was to have complete control, some areas which were to be decided by Norfolk Island, with Australia having powers of veto, and some areas where the Commonwealth would retain control. The plan was to gradually increase the area of responsibility that were placed in the hands of the Norfolk Islanders....or so we believed.
The plan was accepted and acted upon in good faith. It would be true to say that the grass-roots movement fighting for self-determination, mainly in the form of the Society of the Descendants of the Pitcairn Settlers, had encountered a degree of local opposition, and there was some polarisation of pro-Australia/pro-Norfolk Island feeling, many feeling the two could not be reconciled, a perception persisting to this day. There was, however, a general acknowledgement that the views of the Norfolk Islanders and Bounty descendants should, as a matter of principle, hold more weight and command more respect than those of shorter term residents, with loyalties to Australia and New Zealand.
Even though there were some who desired a closer relationship with Australia, there was a reasonable level of optimism about the island's ability to gradually assume more self-government, fuelled no doubt by the goodwill, integrity and encouragement shown by the truly honourable Sir Robert. We also believed that Canberra was ready and willing to support us along the path, in no lesser way than they would be advising and supporting their Pacific neighbours.
We were wrong.
If only we had a crystal ball at the time, we would have gone about it differently, and ensured that there were safeguards, and that the Commonwealth could not act unilaterally to alter the arrangements and block the continuity of the progression towards greater self-determination.
Even as little as two years ago, celebrating the 25th anniversary of self-government, the Australian representatives were paying lip-service to the concept, but it was starting to become very apparent that they were only waiting for the right opportunity and time to "move in for the kill", as it were.
That time is now.

NOT HAPPY MINISTER

I have some admiration for Minister Jim Lloyd. He did have the courage to come here and face up to this community when he made the announcement about the Commonwealth Government's plans to strip Norfolk Island of self-government, and rule us from Canberra.
Moreover, he stayed for four whole days, and met people, even met with some individuals and groups, attended a number of functions, which were no doubt pleasant and informative.
He seems a reasonably genial man, and is no doubt fairly well-liked. He may even have some very fair and reasonable private views about Norfolk Island, which are not necessarily his government's line.
I suspect he went back to Canberra quite happy with his visit. I suspect he heard what he wanted to hear.
The visit certainly gave him the opportunity to develop skills as a master of spin.
The visit was extremely well orchestrated. I suspect that even the Cabinet leak prior to his visit may have been planned, so that when we did get to hear the announcements, couched in vague and honeyed terms, on the radio, the initial reaction was "Oh, that is not so bad really."
That was how I reacted. Then that night, I woke up suddenly, sat up in bed, and thought "How dare they!" when I realised that the issue was not in the detail of the proposals, which had been couched in vague terms and were to be followed by a "consultation process." The issue is that the Australian government should unilaterally decide to strip us of something that had been established by the Norfolk Island Act 26-7 years ago, and which was meant to allow Norfolk people to decide their destiny for themselves.
Wherever the Minister went, he was friendly and personable. He said what a special place Norfolk Island was and spoke of how this move was designed to keep us as a strong and vibrant community. He made a number of promises, depending on who he was speaking to.......a better health service at the hospital, student allowances at the school, an Aged Care Unit when addressing the Senior citizens. Unashamed bribery really. He was also careful to say what a great reception he had at the venues he had been visiting previously. This was intimidating for anyone who had thought about presenting a negative view.
The minister should realise that Norfolk people are, for the most part, very respectful and polite. They will speak up if they have something to say to you that you will like or find positive. They will not use a pleasant social occasion..and there were plenty of those...to bring up difficult and unpleasant issues.
So he really only got input from those who said want he wanted to hear. Although I know he got a different message from our government. But he dealt with that in his own mind. He told us, at a gathering which I attended, that our own government ministers were not getting out and listening to people like he was.
Which is not only unfair and unethical, it is rubbish. All our MLA's are only a phone call or an email or a short drive away. And many of them we mix with in the community all the time. And if they have not yet had a chance to listen to all the varying views of the community about these proposed changes to our economy and governance, it is because they were dropped like a bombshell less than a week ago.
We have had a number of referenda which have made it quite clear how this community feels about Australian interference. But Canberra ignores and discredits the results.
I would be quite prepared to accept it if a new poll showed an increased acceptance of the idea of being part of Australia. But it appears the Commonwealth Government's stand is non-negotiable, and there are no plans to seek our approval or permission.
Yes, the Minister may be happy, on the basis of some anecdotal evidence, but he can not begin to imagine some of the anger, hurt and sense of betrayal he has left behind.

AT WHAT COST

Australian taxpayers should be very concerned. Taking over Norfolk Island may cost you a great deal of money. If you are concerned about massive amounts of money being poured into Aboriginal affairs, and into Cocos and Christmas Islands territories, without much evidence of improving quality of life and standard of living for those people, then you should be asking questions about this latest turn of events.
We are being promised great improvements in our infrastructure and delivery of services this week, as the Minister seeks to sell his package. Some of these improvements would be nice to have, but they do have to be paid for. No doubt the plan would involve us contributing through Australian taxes. That only makes sense. We are used to paying for what we enjoy. Up until now, we have paid for almost everything. And because we are a small place, with a limited population (fewer than 2000), we have kept our wants modest in accordance with our real needs. We have done our housekeeping, and paid for what we can afford.
The changes will have a massive spiralling inflationary effect, and the Australian Government will receive very little from us in return for what they will need to spend. And we will not necessarily be better off.
Some examples.
Many of our temporary personnel, such as doctors, teachers, bank managers, Administration personnel such as legal counsel, receive a salary somewhat equivalent to what they would get in Australia, but without income tax being deducted on what is earned here. Even allowing for a higher cost of living, it is an attractive package, and enables us to select good candidates by merit. If these people are to be required to pay Australian income tax, we will need to offer extra incentives and perks to attract quality applicants to these positions.
At a senior citizens gathering yesterday, Minister Jim Lloyd promised an up-to-date Aged Care Facility. Our present one, which only has a handful of patients, is part of our 22 bed hospital, and uses the same staff and facilities. It is a very rational and sensible way of doing it. The doctors are always close at hand. The elderly enjoy seeing the comings and goings of people to the doctor, the baby clinic and the dentist, and many call in to the seniors Ward to say hello. The hospital Auxiliary extends its help and assistance to this part of the hospital with various comforts and furnishings.
A new purpose built Aged Care home would probably be in a quieter, but more isolated and lonely place. It would need all its own staff, and catering and cleaning services for a start. It would be far more costly to run, and also costly to those wishing to use the facility. And none of this would necessarily result in a better level of care or caring.
Childcare is another case in point. We have a number of daycare places, small numbers, modest facilities perhaps, but caring, happy, healthy and friendly places. The charges are modest, giv ing greater access to all. Under an Australian Social Services regime, there will be childcare subsidies. The facilities will be required to register, and to do this will no doubt need to carry out massive upgrades to meet mainland standards that are not necessarily appropriate for a small island community. The centres will cost more to run, the government will pay out big amounts of money, and the parents may well still pay out more ...without necessarily getting a better level of real caring for their children.
These are only three scenarios, barely skimming the surface.
Big city and suburban solutions for small island problems can be expensive and ineffective. We know best what we need, and we do not need to be strangled and crippled by demands and policies of big government, who think any need can be met by throwing money at it.
If we are forced to surrender the measure of independence and trust we have enjoyed up until now, you can be sure the feeling of many Norfolkers will be "Let us get everything out of Australia we can, to make up for what we have lost." You see, you will have taken away our pride in managing for ourselves, sorting out our own problems, taking responsibility for our own needs and actions, caring for own own people.
A recent Senate Standing Committee noted that Australia spends more than $60 million on Christmas Island (where there is 60% unemployment) while Norfolk Island has been operating on a self-generated budget of closer to $20 million (with almost no unemployment.) The information was actually used as a criticism that we were not meeting our commitments to our people! No pat on the back for resourcefulness and good management.
The minister's visit, with his entourage, the glossy brochure, the functions held to sell the Commonwealth's proposals.....all this would have been an expensive exercise. But it was nothing to what it may cost Australians in the future.

THE REAL AGENDA

Geese on the Common......quite quaint and charming. Even the idea of a "Common" is something of an anachronism. But Norfolk Island is like that. You simply do not liken it or compare it to other places. It has developed a way of its own in relative isolation...and it works!
Or it has until now.
But Australia would like to see this island "homogenised" into their way of doing things.
Why would they do that?
Well, in recent years, they have been using arguments about us being bound by United Nations Treaties they are party to.
O.K. We can cope with that. We are as fair-minded and just as the next person.
Then we started to get the line about us needing to share the same rights and obligations as other Australians. Except that there are quite a few New Zealanders and other nationalities who have made their home here long-term. And a large proportion of the Australians are only "Australian by default." When they were born, they only regarded themselves as Norfolk Islanders by nationality. They have plenty of goodwill towards Australia, but they do not feel Australian.
So now we are getting the "economic sustainability" message. Suddenly our facilities are substandard, our infrastructure outdated...never mind that it is quite adequate for a small island, and far better than that enjoyed by many Pacific islands and rural areas of Australia.
Currently we are being told that we are heading for financial insolvency. Once again, never mind that for 27 years of managing our affairs, without subsidy from Australia, we have always been in the black (and still are!). And that many local councils in Australia are badly in debt and being "propped up". Even companies face far worse debts than ours, re-organise themselves, and recover!! And haven't we ever heard of Commonwealth Government deficits??
Yes, we would not be too proud to accept a bit of constructive help during what may be a temporary difficulty with our finances. But does Australia have to take us over lock, stock and barrel to help us?
The fact is, our self-government model was doomed to fail, because they wanted it to. It is not even a political issue, in fact. It is about something called "Australia's National Interest". Blind Freddy knows we are strategically important. That is OK....we have been Australia's best allies in the two World Wars.
Our waters and our 200 mile maritime zone would be pretty important to them too. But they are already allowing foreign trawlers to fish within 30 mile limits. Not only will our own fishermen continue to compete with that, but they will probably have to pay for licences to fish our own waters in the future.
Then there is the old bogey about oil and other wealth beneath the sea. When this is mentioned, they raise patronising eyebrows, and act as if we are naive victims of wild conspiracy theories.
But even Dr Keith Sutor, an objective Political Analyst, when being interviewed on Channel 7 last year, said that Australia would be most unlikely to let Norfolk Island move towards any sort of independence, because of the untold wealth under the sea. He told it just like it is.
I don't think we have many friends among the Public servants in the Department of Territories. There is a feeling that they have been consistently and inexorably moving the agenda along over many years...the agenda being to get rid of this Norfolk Island "anomaly"........in Australia's national interest.
Will anyone fight for Norfolk Island's interest??

WHAT DO WE REALLY NEED?

Once again the Commonwealth Government's exquisite sense of timing is displayed, with the announcement that they are giving $38 million in aid to Vanuatu to update their justice system.
Now in the Radio National interview with the Minister yesterday, when the issue of Norfolk Island starting to pay Australian taxes arose, the reporter asked why was it fair that we have not been paying taxes up till now. Mr Lloyd made no attempt to explain that we on Norfolk Island have received nothing from the Commonwealth either....no social services, aid etc. etc.
We pay for everything ourselves from our own locally raised revenues.
O.K....in recent years there have been two or three small loans for infrastructure improvements. Most of these have been directed at areas that they regard as Commonwealth property anyway.
They are currently spending quite a large amount of money on the Kingston pier, which they proudly boast is the oldest facility of its type in this part of the world. We know why this money is being spent, apart from the kudos they gain from it. It is Commonwealth property and there are potential litigation problems if there should be an accident there.
However, our own Cascade Pier(pictured above) is in far worse condition. If they were serious about helping with our transport problems, that is the one they would have been helping with.
Now $38million would go a long way to ensuring our future. We could develop harbour facilities which would slash our freight costs. We could upgrade our airport so that there was more flexibility in the types of aircraft able to fly here. Not that we are asking for that money. But there is a principle here.
If a community lacks clean water, you do not solve the problem by carting water in and selling it to them, and then telling them how they can and cannot use it.
You help them build a well and leave them to manage it!
You see, when they have given help, it is always what they think we need. A sign of things to come when we are totally at their mercy. Just as is the case in their other territories..Christmas and Cocos Islands, there could be massive amounts of money spent and wasted, but not directed at things that will truly improve quality of life.
This community has many ideas of what the Commonwealth can do if they sincerely respect our desire to maintain a very unique island. But nothing of what they propose to do, taking away our self-government, will improve our economic prospects one iota. And it will destroy our very real pride in managing things our way for the good of the people who call this place home.

BETTER OFF???

BETTER OFF???
The Minister for Regional Services and Territories has come to Norfolk Island for four days, along with departmental officials, to outline the Australian Government's plans to largely absorb Norfolk Island into Australia, and take away much of its powers of self-government.
There was no prior consultation or warning of the nature of this announcement, apart from a supposed "Cabinet leak."
The announcement was made to the island by radio at 4 p.m. on Monday, immediately following a meeting with our Legislative Assembly. At the same time, leaflets were placed in every mailbox. The announcement was vague and dipped in honey, made to sound as if the moves were being made out of concern for preserving Norfolk's uniqueness! We were not even given specific details. Therefore I was amazed to hear the Minister, in an interview with Radio National early this morning, tell the reporter that we would be losing our control of our Customs, Immigration and Quarantine. This was the first I had heard of this (apart from rumour) and his speech and leaflet made no mention of it. How demeaning!
One thing I do note in the "glossy" leaflet is the following:
"The Commonwealth has a responsibility to establish a sustainable form of government on Norfolk Island which is able to deliver services to the island of a comparable standard to services delivered to communities elsewhere in Australia."
And this:
"Australian Government financial assistance being extended to Norfolk Island to provide an equitable level of service delivery, compared with other Australian communities of a similar size."
Either the Minister is joking, or he has an appalling sense of timing. The announcement came on the same day as Telecom announced that they would be drastically cutting the number of payphones in rural areas, removing those that did not pay for themselves. We enjoy free local calls, and have a number of public phones. We hear of long delays in fixing phones and communications problems in rural areas on Telecom's part, and of inadequate and unreliable Internet services. We do not have these problems.
The island had the opportunity to install a mobile phone system here, but actually said "No thanks!" in a referendum! There is more to quality of life than pouring money and technology at it! Last week I saw on TV that a rural Shire in NSW was prepared to spend up to a million dollars to attract a doctor to their local area. We can consult with up to three medicos at our local hospital and have a full time dentist, a physiotherapist, and frequent visiting specialists.
I am told that many women in rural Australia need to travel enormous distances to the nearest maternity unit or surgical ward. We have a wonderful 22 bed hospital right here.
Country towns are losing their banks, their ATM's and other facilities. We frequently hear of unemployment and idleness, particularly among youth, leading to crime and other social problems in rural towns. We do not even have the dole here...although an allowance is available to anyone in genuine need. Young people are forced to be resourceful and work, at two or three part-time jobs if necessary. Moreover, people are happy to give them work, because they know they need it.
I could go on.
But please, Minister, and the Government you represent....we have such a good standard of living and quality of life here....please do not reduce us to the level of services you provide to the people of Australia!

ANGELS AND EAGLES

Norfolk Island was discovered by Captain Cook in 1774. In 1788, just days after the first penal settlement was established by Britain in Sydney Cove, Australia, an expedition was sent to the island to establish a small penal colony there. Norfolk Island ....5 miles by 3, and about 1000 miles from Sydney....was strategically and economically important then, and still is!
What that first expedition did not realise at the time was that the island had recently been visited by La Perouse, the French explorer, who, seeing a place surrounded by steep cliffs and heavily wooded by tall Norfolk Island pines, declared it to be fit only for "angels and eagles".
Those poor convicts from Britain, who were forced to spend time here living in harsh conditions, up until the 1850's, may well have thought the island to be inhospitable as well as feeling painfully isolated from their families and homes on the other side of the world.
However, when the penal colony was abandoned and moved to Tasmania, the island was given to the Pitcairn Islanders by Queen Victoria as their new home. Their remote and beloved Pitcairn had become too small, and although they were saddened to leave, they settled on Norfolk Island, put down their roots, built houses, cultivated the soil, and the descendants still call it their home today. Over the years, they have been joined by others who value the peacefulness and beauty, the resourcefulness and hospitality of the people, and the very unique heritage and values of the community.
The history of the people of Norfolk Island is separate from that of Australia and Australians, and indeed of the island itself, because their beginnings go back to the Mutiny of the Bounty, and the intermarriage of those mutineers with the Tahitian women. Nevertheless, in this 150th anniversary year of their arrival here, although they respect the colonial history of the place, this is very much "awus hoem" (our home).
Through various events in British and Australian colonial history, Norfolk Island has been allowed to come under the oversight of Australia, but its people never really thought of themselves as an integral part of mainstream Australia. In recognition of the island's unique heritage and culture, we were granted a measure of self-government in 1978, which was meant to be progressed and developed as time went on, so the island could be governed by Norfolk Islanders for Norfolk Islanders.
With an announcement by the Minister for Territories on Monday, that situation is to change.
We are to be drawn into the Australian system.
The stated reason is to ensure the island's economic sustainability.
They say "the current governance model is unsustainable."
They say this "marks a positive turning point for the future of Norfolk Island and the wellbeing of its people."
I wonder.
More than that, I feel hurt and betrayed on behalf of this island and its people. Everything in my values and beliefs about what is good and right about this place is being turned on its head.
I am married to a Norfolk Islander. I have five adult Norfolk Islander children. I have lived here and loved it for forty years, and have truly burned my bridges behind me. I am deeply concerned for this place that I call my home too.
I will be reflecting more on the situation in future posts. Meanwhile, to find out more about the proposed changes, you can go to
www.dotars.gov/au/terr/norfolk