THE GREAT EXPERIMENT

Ever since the first discovery of the little community on Pitcairn in 1808, with John Adams, that hardy survivor of the Mutiny on the Bounty, and the Tahitian wives and offspring, the Pitcairn/Norfolk community has been an object of interest in the eyes of the world. Folk back in England in the early 19th century were amazed at the transformation this little group of people had undergone, their piety and godliness, the peace and good order of the community, and their simple survival of a violent period and extreme isolation.
The fact that they had become a "novelty" in the eyes of the world, and that some of the interest was somewhat patronising, fortunately did not trouble them much. They continued their isolated existence, benefitting from the benign assistance from regular visiting ship's captains and friends back in England. However, we know that they captured the interest of those interested in the science of "eugenics"( i.e. the science of choosing parents in order to produce a particular type of offspring (the modern designer babies.), an interest that continued right up until the 1920's when the anthropologist Dr Harry Shapiro, after extensive studies, concluded that the offspring and descendants of the crossing of the Polynesian and the British bloodstock displayed a "physical vigour which equals, if not surpasses, either parent stock."
(Even in recent years, unfriendly journalists have chosen to refer to this community as "inbred.")
When the Pitcairners made their move to Norfolk Island, it is apparent that the outside world, and those in authority continued to view the community very much as an interesting social experiment. In his book "Norfolk Island and the Third Settlement" Ray Nobbs writes that the concept of the move and re-settlement of the Pitcairn community being an experiment occurs frequently in the communications and writings of Governor Denison.
"the Pitcairners...did not realise they were subjects of an experiment, albeit a sincere one, which was open to review and future qualification. Their interpretation was thus misguided on two accounts; the nature of the proposal itself (they regarded Norfolk Island as ceded to them by Queen Victoria) and the permanency of the agreement about exclusive occupancy." (Norfolk Island and the Third Settlement pp47-48)
In our past 150 years, we have been made painfully aware that we continue to be treated like guinea pigs or lab rats. Our methods of governance and constitutional status have been chopped and changed on a regular basis, and rarely has it been done with proper consultation with those involved on this island, except in very minor matters. We have been expected to adapt and make the best of it, which I believe has been done with considerable grace.
We could be forgiven for thinking that in 1979 the experiment was coming to an end, and that finally we had the certainty that at last our future was to be in our own hands. We really thought it was set in cement.
Our hopes have been dashed. The neo-colonial authorities, it seems, were still only viewing it as a trial. They were playing with us once again. In fact, it seems that we were like rats in a maze, trying to find our way through to the cheese. Everytime we were showing signs of success, they would move it, or place obstacles in our path.
Now they are tired of the game. The novelty has well and truly worn off. The subjects of their experiment are to put back into the large cage.....the one where they keep the enormous homogenised mass of all Australian citizens. It is the final solution. In the future, it will be hard to recognise us from any Australian community. That is why we must strongly resist the "Consistency, Uniformity and Control" drive, articulated by the Minister, which I believe is the true reason for Canberra's encroachment on our historic rights and freedoms.
The frightening thing is that what Australia means to do in the name of fixing our economy is the greatest gamble and risk that this community has ever been subjected to. They can send all the number-crunchers here that they like, but they just cannot give any satisfactory evidence that governance changes will stimulate our economy. On the contrary, it will place it at great risk, and probably have an enormous social and cultural impact as well.
But this time it will be too late to reverse the changes. We simply will not be able to go back and start again.