OPTION THREE

There is no doubt that some hard decisions need to be made on Norfolk Island. The demands of the modern world and a 21st century society, plus the desire of Norfolk Islanders to maintain the good quality of life and reasonably high standard of living they NOW enjoy, means that our N.I. Government needs to re-think its revenue-raising and spending strategies.
This is no different to what every individual, household, small business, corporation, organisation, local council and state or Federal Government needs to do regularly. Sometimes small modifications are needed, and at other times more radical strategies are needed.
Norfolk Island is at the latter stage.
The Commonwealth Government has stepped in, and laid on the table two broad options "for the future governance of Norfolk Island to ensure future sustainability."

OPTION 1 "A modified self-government model with greater powers for Australian Government Involvement."
This model does nothing to address Norfolk's economic situation. In fact, because the Minister has said it will include taking away our control of Customs, it will take away our largest revenue earner. And because it will also include local residents and businesses paying at least some Australian taxation, it is difficult to imagine how we can possibly be better off economically than before!
OPTION 2 " 'A local government model' where the Australian Government could assume responsibility for state-type functions."
Presumably this would losing many of our other current revenue raising methods, and being forced to pay land taxes, something that would be disastrous for a community where many people are asset-rich and cash-poor, and where the ability to pass on land to our children as part of their heritage is extremely important to local families.

Could we please have Option 3?
The detail could be worked out after a sound and thorough process of consultation with Norfolk Island Government and people, but it should at least contain measures to fix the actual problem, without changing our constitutional status and threatening our heritage and way of life.
Among other things, it should include
1. Retaining autonomy at least at current levels.
2. Exploring improved ways of raising revenues on Norfolk Island.
3.Sharing information and expertise as a genuine measure of help to the island e.g in formulating a G.S.T.
4. Dealing with obstacles that Australia constantly places in our way which make it hard for us to "get on with things." e.g. tedious and unproductive Senate inquiries
5. Doing those things which it is in Australia's power to do to help us with the airline problem, something which the Minister recently washed his hands of.
6. Help us to give a boost to our only viable industry...tourism...so we can "help ourselves."
7. Grant us reciprocal Medicare arrangements such as are enjoyed by other non-Australian places.
8. Restore the availability of RAAF Medivac flights.
9. I have not listed grants and loans. We are not asking for handouts, but it would certainly be nice to have access to some of the money that Australia hands out to other Pacific island to buy their goodwill. They could buy our goodwill for far less than it will cost them to annexe us into their tax/welfare system.
If Australia did make some money available, it should be for those things we know we need. Things like an all-weather breakwater or improved wharf facilities at Cascade, or roads which are Commonwealth property. It should not just go to things Australia regards as their heritage and which give them kudos, such as the Kingston penal settlement ruins and the Kingston wharf.

We should all be thinking about OPTION 3.
It is unproductive to focus on the detail of The Minister's two options. The broad principle is wrong. Canberra is forcing constitutional change on us in the guise of assisting our financial sustainability.