FAIR PLAY

This is the day that many Aussies will be protesting against what they regard as unfairness in the new Industrial Relations laws. Meanwhile, the whole country from the PM down seems to be mourning the elimination of the Socceroos from the World Cup because of a "dodgy" referee's call.
One of our locals was moved to pen the following:

Dear Prime Minister,
Now that, thanks to the Socceroos, all Australia knows what it is like to have an unfair decision made against one, don’t you think it is an appropriate time to re-consider the case for Norfolk Island?
Yours Sincerely,

**********

In case you were wondering if anyone out there is actually listening and actually cares about injustice to Norfolk Island, you may be interested in the fact that the following questions have been tabled to be asked in the British House of Commons by the member for Romford, Mr Andrew Rosindell M.P.

1.Andrew Rosindell (Romford): To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, whether there is a mechanism by which Norfolk Island could petition the Government to secede as a self-governing Australian Territory and become a self-governing British Overseas Territory.
2.Andrew Rosindell (Romford): To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, whether she plans to visit Norfolk Island.
3.Andrew Rosindell (Romford): To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what the Government's policy is on Australia's proposed changes to the governance of Norfolk Island.
4.Andrew Rosindell (Romford): To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, whether the Government has had discussions with the Australian government on the sovereignty of Norfolk Island since 2000.

Now in the past, Norfolk Island has been traditionally regarded as very loyal to the Crown and proud of its British heritage. But I am not sure that goodwill necessarily extends to the British Government. It should be noted that after a period of benevolent paternalism during the earlier Pitcairn/Norfolk days, the British Colonial authorities underwent a gradual change. The quaint "naive novelty" that Norfolk Island represented had become an "annoying anomaly", and they were only too happy to hand Norfolk Island over, firstly to the colony of New South Wales, and from there to the Commonwealth of Australia without any consultation with the Norfolk Island people.

Of course, Britain may have sincerely believed that Australia would act with greater fairness to their new responsibility than has proved to be the case. Meanwhile, at this present time, the Brits are dealing with their own "annoying anomaly" - Pitcairn Island" - and many would say that our Bounty cousins over there are faring no better than us under a modern neo-colonial "normalisation" process at the hands of big remote control government.

Nevertheless, the general view has been that as a very small place, we do need to have a close association with someone bigger than ourselves. Complete independence has never been a very popular concept on this island. However, of late, I frequently hear people ask "Well, could we be any worse off?" At least, if we were to go it alone, we would have have control of our own seas, our fishing and potential mineral resources, and we would not be restricted in efforts to establish an Offshore Finance Centre, Internet facilities and enterprises, external and post graduate Education Centes such as Greenwich University, a Shipping Repair facility, and numerous other potential revenue earners which are currently denied to us because of Aussie red tape. Perhaps we could emulate other Pacific Islands and vie for financial support from nations such as Taiwan and China in return for recognition at the U.N.

If these all seem a bit "pie in the sky", then just consider the possibility of having a share in the amount of around $700 million that is to be distributed in aid (mainly towards governance) to our Pacific neighbours this financial year!! And without all the strings attached that are currently holding us back.

Many people bemoan the fact that New Zealand's push to take on responsibility for Norfolk Island a century or so ago came to nothing. That country seems to exercise a far greater level of respect and cultural sensitivity in its dealings with the Cook Islands and Tokelau.

We cannot turn the clock back. But collective memories endure. Issues from the past remain with us, and modern day policies, masquerading as moves to "ensure a stronger and sustainable future" will only compound the problems of injustice and unfairness that have characterised both Britain's and Australia's dealings with the Norfolk Island people.

Now is the time that we need a genuine and open round table to thrash out these issues. We do not need pre-determined policies or unilateral decisions. We need more than lipservice to the mantras of rights and responsibilities. We need recognition that the Norfolk community is unique - not merely in a quaint cultural sense - but unique in matters that go right to the heart of fair, sound and responsible governance. And in this modern world where globalisation and normalisation dominate policy and action, we need to ensure that the voice of the individual, little person, and the little island -such as Norfolk - is clearly heard and respected.

ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS

The Australian Bureau of Statistics has delivered its figures based on its survey of business on Norfolk Island. I have no doubt about the professionalism of these people, and they have been great guys to deal with.
Statistics is not my favourite subject, but I do know a couple of things about it. One is that the job of the statistician to produce the data, and it is some one else's job to make use (or misuse) of the figures to develop a policy or decide on a course of action. In this case, it will be Government.....our government and the Commonwealth government.
The other thing I know about statistics is that it deals with means and averages, and I suspect that yet again we are going to be averaged out to conform with middle Australia.
I am not really a student of economics either, and this is where I call "Blind Freddy" in to help me. Blind Freddy can tell you, even without seeing the ABS figures, that many areas of business have been doing it somewhat tough in the last year or so, through factors largely beyond our control - but not beyond our ability to "fix". And there has been a flow on effect to government revenues.
But these ABS figures are not altogether glum. It is plain that most of us have been hanging in there and keeping our heads above water. I strongly believe that this is because the way we do things here, within our contained island situation, gives us more flexibility and resilience than we would have under a system other than the one we have developed to suit our needs. We do not have the high overheads and the restrictive and costly regulatory environment that small business on the mainland deals with. Most of us "shop locally" because we just cannot set off down the highway to the nearest big centre. And there are strong loyalty factors in employer/employee relationships and business/client relationships.
Moreover, because we keep things on a small and modest scale as is fitting for a small island with a small population, we do not need to take big risks...and the bigger the risk, the bigger the loss in a downturn.
Now you may hear phrases like "depicting the economy" and "mapping the economy" of the island in relation to the ABS figures, but it does not take much imagination to know that these figures are only part of the story. Brian Finnegan admitted to me that they only describe one sector of the economy. For that matter, they only describe part of the business sector.....business with a turnover of over $3000, on the grounds that surveying businesses operating below this level would not have a significant impact on the results.
I would beg to disagree, and remind our Canberra friends that this is a small island that has developed its own type of economy to suit its small island needs. Even the February 20 booklet acknowledged there was a difference.
There is an enormous amount of economic activity on the island operating on a small scale. Quite apart from the areas where we have bartering and mutual help, just think of those people who fish for their families and friends, and sell the excess to the shops, restaurants and hotels. Or the excess vegetables and seasonal fruit that get sold. Quite important in a place that does not import fresh produce!!Then there are the cattle and pigs that go to the butcher, and the palm seed and the pine seed. There are small agencies and franchises that operate on a modest part-time basis, the market stalls, the artists and craftspeople who producing work for shops or on commission. the "occasional" caterers. You and I all know lots of people carrying on economic activity such as this. Then there are all the people, including school students and senior citizens carrying on business activity part time .... lawn-mowing, grounds maintenance etc. It may be "insignificant" in the Australia with its big government/big business mentality, but it has been keeping this place ticking over in a vibrant and resourceful fashion for decades.
So did the ABS Study ask the right questions?
Well, I am sure they asked the ones that Canberra needed answers to.
The true purpose of this ABS study was to help predict what government could expect to receive in tax revenue from business on this island.
And people with better economic credentials than me say it will not actually amount to very much.
But the high compliance and regulatory system that they will impose in order to collect it will cause enormous damage to the well-balanced mini-economic environment that has been developed to suit our island needs, and has served us well.
It would be far better for Australia to help us re-invigorate our economy, and mind their own business and let us mind ours!!

PAYING FOR WHAT WE GET

I have read and re-read the booklet that Minister Lloyd and his department sent to every resident last week, and I note the range of services provided and the methods of revenue raising used by each level of government in Australia.
We are informed of a wide range of benefits and services available to Australians under Commonwealth Law, in the form of pensions, allowances, subsidies and grants. This includes some forms of assistance that are not currently available under our own local social services regime.
The Minister made some tantalising statements after the last Federal Budget reminding us if what we on Norfolk Island were missing out on...i.e. a share in the great amounts of money that the Commonwealth Government has at its disposal.
But we should not imagine that all this bounty comes from some magic honey/money pot! They do not just print money to enable them to provide all these services and benefits.
No. It has to be paid for - by taxpayers, which will include you and me if they have their way. These things are funded by taxes paid by all except those earning a very small part-time wage. They are paid by everyone running a business, or employing staff. If you buy a car, a new jacket or even a loaf of bread, some of that goes into this magic money pot. If you sell a property, you pay a percentage of any profit you make. Health Services are partly funded by a percentage of what you earn...although it should be pointed out that this will not guarantee you treatment when and where you really need it.
We are told that we may be asked to adopt a Local Government model. Local Government looks after matters such as "sporting grounds, rubbish collection, drains, streets and footpaths, street signs and traffic control, building permits, libraries, pet control etc." All this too has to be paid for, and that is where rates on property and businesses comes in. This is on top of what you pay in your income and business taxes.
Then if Norfolk Island is "allowed" to retain some State functions, you can add in land taxes, payroll taxes, and stamp duties on property transactions.
Now I think you will agree that we enjoy a reasonably good standard of living here on Norfolk Island, as well as a great quality of life. Our isolation presents some difficulties, and many people need to budget carefully and work hard to support their families and provide for their wants and needs...just as people do in Australia. But on the whole, no one could call us a disadvantaged community. In fact, we are very 'blest" - and that is why most of us choose to live here.
Our own government has shown over the years that it can provide for our basic needs, if not all our wants. Our resourcefulness and spirit of enterprise sees us through difficult times, and the strong community spirit provedes a wonderful safety net.
I do not believe we will be materially better off under Australia's system. In many areas, such as health, we could be much worse off. But conservative estimates say that it will cost Australia as much as $65 million to extend those services to us, far more than they will receive back from us in taxes and duties.
Meanwhile, those services provided by our Norfolk Island Government are cost-effective, and easily accessed according to need. We do not pay out massive amounts to consultants, contractors, middlemen and professional bureaucrats. We do not spend millions on advertising (and glossy brochures.) We do not lose millions to those people who rort the social welfare system. Travel allowances to our politicians are on a tight budget and are heavily scrutinised and closely monitored, as is all government spending. What you get in your paypacket is your own...no one has been to it before you for their percentage. We do not have to see big grants being made to "airy fairy" projects and causes, or aid that is poorly targeted. We do not have to witness the massive waste generated by big government.
The booklet says the Australian Government is considering "what precise services and responsibilities should be taken back (from the Norfolk Island Government.)"
Please Minister, let them continue to provide them for all for us in the personal, efficient way that is apprpriate for Norfolk Island and Norfolkers.

HO-HUM

Ho-hum.
This was the response of many of us to the glossy booklet which was placed in our mailboxes this week.
It was very much more of the same. Two options, no third way.
The booklet, from the Australian Government, was designed to explain how governance operates in Australia, (or in the Minister's words"in other parts of Australia"). And what we could expect under either of the two models proposed for Norfolk Island.
My first reaction is to realise that we can expect a considerable waste of money on exercises such as this little booklet, with its pretty, but irrelevant pictures, and its description of how things work for Australians, with a governance system that has evolved in circumstances and an environment that is totally different to that of Norfolk island and the Norfolk Islanders.
The booklet pays mere lipservice to Norfolker's concerns and aspirations, with words and phrases like "input to the development and consultation process" and "input from the Norfolk island Government and community" and "intention to develop and consult with the Norfolk Island community".
However, I am afraid that this publication shows little evidence that they have been listening to us so far, except those things they want to hear. The very strong opposition to their plans that has come from many in this community is trivialised and dismissed by saying "many are understandably nervous about what the changes mean for them personally."
Well Minister, I am not merely worried for me personally. I am not just nervous....I am deeply concerned for this island and this community as a whole, and I am very worried that you are destroying something that is very special and quite unique in today's world. That is, a community and a way of life where individuals matter, where a spirit of self-reliance and resourcefulness keep things ticking over really well, and where there is a standard of living that would be the envy of any community anywhere!!
To date, you seem to have dismissed input from our government, and have even left them out of the loop altogether in some instances. Quite rightly, our government has made it clear that this publication only represents your side of the story. They have a different story to tell about what is needed to fix our problems, and ensure a strong and sustainable future for Norfolk Island and Norfolk Islanders.
We should not be deceived. In spite of its pictures of our children, our Chapel, our historic buildings, our monuments, our landscape...this booklet is not about Norfolk Island, it is about Australia. I suspect we can communicate our concerns, comments, and questions all we like...and we will continue to do so....but the fact is that Australia means to impose on us a system of governance that is not appropriate for the people of this island, and which will cause us to lose far more than we will gain.

WHOSE RIGHTS? WHO'S RIGHT?

It has been a great week to be on Norfolk Island. There has been a wonderful influx of family and friends, not to mention all those Norfolkers-in-exile who have taken the opportunity to come home to share in the festivities, and to feel proud to be part of a very unique race of people, with a distinct identity and a wonderful heritage. All week, Norfolkers have been bumping into other Norfolkers, and recognising their kinship, often just from facial features or an intonation of voice. There has been a marvellous feeling of family pride, good fun and camaraderie.
But no one -not even those Norfolkers who are proud of their Australian citizenship and see Norfolk Island as part of Australia - would claim that this community is just the same as every other part of Australia historically, ethnically and culturally.
But Canberra does not see it that way.
A 1975 Senate Report clearly stated that Norfolk Island's population was ethnically and culturally akin to that of "the mainland".
We are also told that Norfolk Island does not come under the United Nation's definition of a non-self-governing territory, because, according to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission in Australia "that resolution refers to a territory which is geographically separate and is distinct ethnically and/or culturally from the country administering it."(1999) Evidently, in their eyes, this does not describe Norfolk Island.
This statement was made by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission when dealing with four complaints made in 1996-7 about Norfolk Island's Immigration Act.
The Commission found that Norfolk Island's Immigration Act."violates the right of all Australians to liberty of movement and freedom of choice of residence..."
The same Commission also stated that Norfolk Island did not need an Immigration regime separate from that of Australia "because it is not necessary to protect the island's environment or the culture of the Pitcairn descendants."
Sadly, the recommendations of the Commission are shortly to be acted on, if Canberra and the Minister have their way.
I do not know how the powers in Canberra deal with the "geographic" and "ethnic" distinctiveness issue. However, I suspect they are a little touchy about the "culture" bit, and are bending over backwards to assure us they would like to recognise and preserve the Norfolk Island culture. Hence the Family banner project, and the $25 000 grant announced on Bounty Day for an Oral History Project. I am not saying they are not worthwhile activities, although I did overhear someone suggesting they could at least have managed $1000 for each of our 150 years! The point is that the best way of preserving our culture is to give us the freedom to live it out according to the values and traditions and customs that we have developed and built up over 200+ years. Norfolk's culture will not be preserved by this ceaseless "Australianisation" process that is being forced on us.
Now those visitors who "watched on" the week's celebrations and activities knew that the Norfolk Island community was different. The Norfolk Island people feel different. They know their history and beginnings are quite different from that of Australia, and they know that the Norfolk Way is not to be compared to any other.
The view that Norfolk Island is not distinct from mainland Australia and other Australian communities has serious implications:
1. A person's status as a Norfolk Islander, or as a resident or citizen of Norfolk Island (as distinct from their status as an Australian citizen) can receive no recognition or protection in any policy, law or statute.
2. Norfolk Island has almost no access to help from the United Nations except through Australia.
3. Norfolk Island people will no longer properly call Norfolk Island their homeland, nor will they have any say over who shall come here or live here.

Can we challenge the Human Rights Commission, just once, to consider the rights of the Norfolk Island people? Why must our rights always be secondary to those of Australians?

Read the report of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission at:
http://www.humanrights.gov.au/word/human_rights/norfolk_island.doc-

BOUNTY DAY

If you were down at Kingston yesterday, on the occasion of our 150th anniversary of the arrival of the Pitcairners to Norfolk Island, you may well have felt as if you were in another time and place.
And you would be right.
Anyone watching those hundreds of Norfolk Islanders and their families, with a scattering of their Pitcairn and Tahitian cousins, could not fail to notice that this is a separate and distinct people, with their own unique traditions, heritage and history. A people whose culture has developed quite separately from that of Australians, and a people who are very proud of who they are and where they have come from.
It was plainly evident, too, that this was not another ethnic group living in Australia and preserving the culture and ways of their homeland. This was a separate people living out their culture in their homeland itself. And hundreds of Norfolk Islanders living abroad had come home to share in the celebration.
There was much to celebrate....one and a half centuries in a bountiful island, a strong and vibrant community that is rightly proud of its values, its spirit of self-help, its "Inasmuch" principle by which the community chooses to live.
Our Australian friends would be very blinkered and undiscerning if they thought those hundreds of Norfolk Islanders who paraded at Kingston yesterday would sit easily into their one size-fits-all mold.
Our Chief Minister told us:
"Dieh es d'taim orl aklan noe we gat kamfram. Staanap. Miek big faret.........Hoelap a hied en miek shus awas wieh es wathen wi kiip f'aklan."
(Right now, all of us know we have "comefrom" (class, family pride, breeding, roots).... Stand tall. Celebrate it and let the whole world know. Hold your heads high and make sure we hold on to our Norfolk way.)
And then in addressing the Governor-General and other visitors, he said:
"This is a momentous day to celebrate the 150th Anniversary of the arrival of our ancestors in this place, this beautiful and bounteous place, Norfolk Island. The arrival on an Island to nurture us, and we to nurture it and for it to be the home of our people, forever.
"We as the Pitcairn and Norfolk Island people, have grown from a very small number of only 29 in 1790, to almost 1,000 living in Norfolk Island today, with many thousands resident in other parts of the world, principally Australia and New Zealand......
Small groups of people throughout the world are vulnerable; many do not survive as a people.
But over the 150 years in this place we have shown vigour and tenacity, surmounted many difficulties, met many challenges and celebrated not a few milestones. Whilst others may have diminished, it’s quite clear we are not done yet."
What I would like to say to our Canberra politicians and bureaucrats is this:
We hope you enjoyed our celebrations. We know you say you admire our special traditions and heritage. But we need you to understand that our culture is not a performance or a street parade. It is not something we bring out and dust off for special days and events. It is not just something meant to give quaint amusement to spectators, and it is not a mere commercial commodity. It is something we live out every day and we draw strength from it.
Yes, you were in a special time and place yesterday. We were all proud to be a part of it. If you truly respect our cultural identity, please do not destroy our traditional rights and freedoms. Please ensure we survive as a strong, distinct and proud people.

IN THE PINK

"In the Pink or in the Red" was the somewhat facetious title given to the Joint Standing Committee's report into Health Services on Norfolk Island in recent years.
Most would agree that Health and Education are priority areas of spending for any government nowadays, and any attempt to reduce spending or services in either of these areas would bring about a strong community reaction.
Our own Norfolk Island Assembly, faced with the task of reducing spending and costs in the Public Service, has to deal with the reality that the lion's share of these costs is in these two areas of Health and Education.
Despite rumblings from Canberra's representatives and officials about Norfolk Island's hospital being sub-standard, third world, and in need of bulldozing, I have rarely heard any strong complaints about the level of service and care there.
I have certainly never heard anything like the anger, frustration and concern expressed by people interviewed in last Monday's Four Corners program about rural health services in N.S.W.
Allowing for some journalistic licence and editing in the interests of creating a good story, some of the issues raised in the program are quite frightening.
Take Cobar, a country town of 7000 people, almost quadruple Norfolk Island's population. They have one doctor, and their maternity unit has closed down. Expectant mothers need to plan to go and stay with relatives (or a hotel) in a large centre weeks before their baby is due. In the event of premature labour, an air ambulance may be called, but if labour is reasonably advanced, there is a 4 hour road ambulance journey to Dubbo or Bourke, with a change of ambulance along the way.
The program also dealt with the issue of cancer sufferers, who are 35% more likely to die if they live in the bush, because of lack of access to proper treatments. There are also problems with old buildings, outdated or unserviceable equipment, staffing shortages, waiting lists, and enormous difficulties in attracting doctors.
If you missed it, you can access a transcript to the program on
http://abc.net.au/4corners

Draw your own conclusions!

MORE OF THE SAME

The economic rationalists in the Territories Department are at it again. They have just put out a tender for someone to do an Economic Impact Assessment of the proposed governance arrangements for Norfolk Island.
In view of the fact that the tender was only published on 30th May, and the closing date for lodgement of tenders is 26th June, one wonders if this tender process will just be another "formality" to give the process an appearance of transparency and independence. Do they already have someone lined up to do this study?
The fact is that no inquiry is independent .... it will always serve the interests of those who set the terms of reference. I wonder - did our own government have the opportunity to give input to these terms of reference?
Now many of us are very concerned about the economic impact of the proposed changes. Blind Freddy can tell you it will be very bad for business, our competitiveness and our tourist industry among other things. We will have no problem in presenting a barrage of concerns to whoever conducts this assessment.
But there are three very disturbing aspects of this tender call.
1. Canberra's mind is still made up, whatever the results of this inquiry. I quote from the tender document:
"Where the extension of Commonwealth laws is likely to have a significant negative impact on the Norfolk Island economy, the consultant should provide options to alleviate these impacts, including possible transition arrangements."
In other words, if we do not like the medicine, they will give us a spoonful of sugar to go with it, but we still have to take it.
Please Canberra, we do not want or need your medicine. We would far rather see an open-ended inquiry, the sort of inquiry you should have had before you made up your minds!!!
2.The timeframe for delivery of this tender is 29th September. That is a mere 3 months after the closing date for lodgement of tenders. It would appear that the bureaucratic timetable is set in concrete, whatever concerns and opposition to their plans may arise. This does not suggest genuine consultation and negotiation.
3.This whole business has all been about economics.
I have news for Canberra....there are other things in life that sustain and nurture us....things like national pride and heritage, family and relationships, way of life and rootedness, and most important - our democratic and historic rights!.
Would Canberra have the courage to explore the social impact of these changes on a very special community?
You can read the tender advertisement at

https://www.tenders.gov.au/federal/shared/rftdetail.cfm?p_id=4893&p_criteria
=TRS06%2F188&p_advert=0

Perhaps some of us on Norfolk Island could get together and submit a tender to carry out this assessment?
Or would it be seen as biased?
I suppose it is too much to expect that the real stakeholders in this whole issue should be allowed to have a genuine voice and involvement.

A PAINFUL CHANGE

"You must be the change you wish to see in the world."
Gandhi




When I started "AngelsandEagles", one of my aims was to make people aware of what is going on with the island's relationship with Australia. I have also tried to educate people (including me!) and put a perspective on what has happened in the past. Above all I hope I have helped people feel inspired and proud to belong to this unique and wonderful island community.
I have consciously refrained from discussing current local politics up until now. That is not because there are no issues that concern me. But it has been my view that our own elected government needs and deserves support and loyalty in the extremely difficult challenges that have been thrust in front of them....demands and difficulties that none of them could have envisaged when they stood for election. At that time, they probably had a fair idea of what their "mandate" was, but ascertaining the mood and will of the people over the Canberra/governance issue would not have been easy.
I believe that the Norfolk people have been telling them strongly and clearly that that they want to see
*leadership
*action
*direction
*momentum
*communication
*negotiation
Our government has reorganised itself. Those responsible say they believe it was the only way to achieve these goals. It has been a very painful time for every member. I do not believe that any member could be accused of ignoring the challenges we face, and all have approached their task with energy and earnestness.
But the reality is that we seemed to be facing an impasse, a severe communication break-down, and change was needed. It is my belief that it is better for that change to come from within, rather than be forced on them from outside.
It is not a sign of instability...it is a sign of taking responsibility. All governments readjust and re-shuffle their human resources from time to time in order to be more effective and achieve their aims. That includes Liberal and Labour governments in Australia.
Time will tell if these are the right changes, but I strongly believe we should give them time to give it a go! Meanwhile all of us, including our elected members, will need to put self-interest, egos and personality clashes behind us, and put Norfolk Island first.
We do not need to turn our own people into adversaries. We badly need to support and understand each other, whatever our views. Or we risk damaging the very way of life we are trying to preserve.