UNDER THE MICROSCOPE - AGAIN

The Commonwealth Grants Commission has put out its preliminary report. Hard copies will be available next week, but in the meantime, you can read it on the web.
But you will have to wade through 146 pages, with a lot of data, tables and figures.
You may not wish to go through all that, and just want to know "What is the bottom line?"
Actually there isn't one. Bodies like the CGC and the ABS are policy neutral. They just produce the data, and someone else uses it to make decisions and policy....in this case DOTARS, Minister Lloyd and ultimately the Cabinet and the Commonwealth Government.
The CGC and the ABS have had difficullt jobs. They are called independent, but in fact, they are there to serve those who commission them, and they have to work within the criteria and the narrow terms of reference that have been set for them.
Because the CGC is neutral, and because the members are here "on the ground" for reasonable lengths of time, they have the opportunity to speak with lots of people, both individuals and larger groups and forums. They have seen at close hand how things work, and I suspect some of the members of these visiting Inquiries quietly and personally think our way of doing things does work!! Let's face it...they are reasonable, intelligent and highly trained people, selected on merit rather than popularity with the voters! I think the people of Norfolk Island have been open and honest with them, and they have obviously taken on board much of what we have told them.
For instance, the CGC has noted that generally we have a high level of satisfaction with our medical facilities. They have noted that land has a strong cultural significance to us. The report mentions that our policing requirements are lower than average, because we do not have high levels of crime or community problems. There is also a recognition that many of our government-provided services operate on a user-pays basis, to a greater extent than happens in Australia. The fact that we have quite different priorities and expectations here has probably presented quite a challenge.
Nevertheless, the Commission has had the task of comparing Norfolk's way of doing things with those of states and territories with in Australia, and have also had to weigh us up against comparable communities with in Australia. Of course, we and they know there are no comparable communities, in fact nothing even remotely like this island.
Another difficulty the Commission has acknowledged is that whatever data they have produced in this report would no longer actually be valid under the changed circumstances of the Commonwealth's proposals for our governance and economy.
So they have been forced into dealing with quite a few assumptions and hypotheticals and unknowns.
Fortunately, we will have the opportunity of having a further say next month when the CGC returns to the island. I would urge every one who feels they have a stake in this island continuing to be a strong and viable society and community to give the preliminary report a bit more than a cursory glance. And plan to have your say when the opportunity presents itself next month.