WALK RIGHT IN

I apologise for a longish posting today. But the juggernaut of imminent change rolls swiftly on, and there are still so many questions unanswered about the implications for this island. Immigration is one of the serious issues we must confront.
When the Pitcairners first relocated to Norfolk Island, it was expected that they would wish to continue in the relative isolation that they had known on Pitcairn. Indeed, Captain Denison more or less instructed them that they were not to allow others in, or to buy and sell their land that was being granted to them.
Such advice may have been well-intentioned, but it was paternalistic and misguided. When the Pitcairners had expressed a desire to be left alone, they meant that they wanted to go on managing their community life in their own way, and according to their own laws and customs.
Fortunately, the Pitcairners did not realise that they were being looked on, by the outside world, almost as a museum curio which should be kept in strictly controlled conditions, and an almost rarified atmosphere. In fact, they were far more realistic and practical. Over the next few decades, quite a number of people joined the community, much to the annoyance of the colonial authorities. In some cases these were people who were able to bring skills and qualifications which were to prove useful. This enhanced the economic life of the community. There were new settlers who married into the Pitcairn families, such as those from the Melanesian Mission. Those who were welcomed into the community, and stayed for the long term, tended to be those who accepted the way of life and the codes of laws and values of the original settlers and their descendants. They were people who were prepared to pull their weight and make a contribution towards the well-being and sustainability of the island.
Funny....this all sounds very much like the criteria that Australia uses for its Immigration regime today....having needed skills and qualifications, family connections, willingness to espouse Australian values. Much has been said about that one recently.
With loss of control of our own immigration, the situation is going to be like this. Anyone who qualifies as suitable to immigrate into Australia will automatically be deemed suitable to move to Norfolk Island. A willingness to espouse Norfolk values will not be necessary. There will be no periods of time to qualify for residency here. No criteria...as long as you are coming from Australia. People wanting to come from anywhere other than Australia or New Zealand will find it far more difficult, however well-suited we may consider them to be. Even for Norfolk Islanders and people of Pitcairn descent. That special relationship with the island will count for nothing.
Thinking we are so naive that we do not know the difference between Immigration and population control, the Commonwealth has told us we just need to solve any potential difficulties through planning controls. It is OK for them to have criteria other than simple numbers, but not for us. We will be like Lord Howe where you only need an address to live there! Except that there are a lot more available addresses on this island, particularly if you have a bit of money behind you. After all, the locals won't be able to afford them. The good things in the community that we have built up, with very little outside help..things like our well-run school and hospital, communtiy facilities and amenities, and less tangible things like our community spirit and way of life...anyone will be able to avail themselves of these just as long as they have that Australian passport.
We do know the difference between Immigration and Population control, but unfortunately, we made the mistake of not distinguishing between residency and citizenship. We treated Residency as something to be earned and cherished, and although having ethnic ties to this island and its people was helpful in achieving that residency, once you had it, you enjoyed full citizenship rights on this island, whatever your background. No discrimination. We were exercising equality and human rights long before Australia started making an issue of it!
It is Australia who has introduced the concept of two classes of citizen on this island...those who can vote and stand for the Assembly, and those who can't. And those who can't include people of Pitcairn descent, and people who have lived here for a large chunk of their lives.
Yes, a large percentage of people here have Australian citizenship. Anyone born before 1949 had it conferred on them without their consent or knowledge. That is all that counts nowadays. Your connection to this island means nothing.
Some say that losing control of Immigration will not matter, because we have only had an Immigration regime for a few decades anyway. But 50 years ago, there was a difference. Norfolk Island was far more isolated, and making the move to settle here involved a considerable commitment and willingness to adapt. Even more important was the fact that you were moving to a place with its own system of laws, different from those in Australia.
If Canberra has its way, anyone who chooses to hop on a plane and buy or rent a place here will be able to. And because we will be living under Commonwealth law, those people will expect to enjoy the same rights and facilities as in any place on the Australian mainland...and will be able to demand them. And if they feel marginalised or discriminated against, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunties Commission will be on the case as quick as a flash. We can already thank that body for the change in our electoral laws. There will be no more more saying that we do things differently here. Some of the Australian politicians have told us that we shoud be negotiating over what Commonwealth laws should apply here, but that is an empty hope. At this stage they are not showing many signs af actually listening.
For one thing, your jobs will be up for grabs. Forget the reassurances that Centrelink will not be allowing people to come and look for jobs in areas where there is high unemployment. There are jobs here for them..and the one you were hoping to qualify for is one of them.
And did you know that Centrelink and its agencies has already been subsidising people on their books to come here and take up positions? And that it recently sought to establish a Work-for-Dole scheme for unemployed people on their books who wanted to go on living here after they lost their jobs? Signs of things to come!!
That is just one of the many implications of losing control of Immigration.
But there is worse to come. Because your Australian citizenship actually does not mean everything you thought it did. If you read the article in the Norfolk Islander about the Ame Case, and were able to delve through all the legal jargon, you will have discoverd that citizenship is not an entrenched right for all Australians. At least, it is not if you happen to have dual citizenship, or if you hold it by virtue of being born in one of Australia's external territories. You could lose it. That is how the High Court reads things from the Australian constitution.
I believe that both Australia and Norfolk Island should take a much longer, harder look at all the implications of what is proposed. We should be asking a lot more questions, and if they cannot answer them, then we should insist that they we will just not accept any changes until we are satisfied with the answers.
Is Australia really interested in human rights, or just Australian rights?

RESCUE.....OR PILLAGE???

Our N.I. Government ministers have been holding further talks in Canberra. We have had very little feedback at this stage, but it is to be hoped that the debate and dialogue have proceeded on a more reasonable and rational basis than the exaggerated misrepresentations we heard from the Senate debate on the Norfolk Island situation.
Following on from his incredible statements about the lack of provision of basic services and human rights on Norfolk Island....e.g phones, roads, power, garbage disposal,water, pensions, aged care etc, Senator Kim Carr proceeded to criticise "well-orchestrated efforts of island diehards who would have us believe that Norfolk Island is some sort of Utopia." He proceeds to assert, and one wonders where he got his information from, that most islanders want current arrangements to change, and then, in a massive sweep of arrogance, says
"Only the Commonwealth of Australia can guarantee (those) basic human rights."
Let us say from the outset that no one should be apologetic about being very proud of their island, their homeland. Proud of what has been achieved, enthusiastic about our way of life, and very thankful for a good standard of living. Just as you would expect Australians to be proud of their nation.
That does not mean we promote it as Utopia. We have problems like anywhere else ...and we have the means to deal with them. We have faced incredible demands for change in recent decades, and have managed them extremely well..and will continue to do so. We accept that by sheer virtue of our small population and our geographic isolation, there are challenges living here on our small island. Those who were born here have grown up with those challenges, others of us have chosen to accept them because the compensations of living on this island are enormous.
Yes, we accept that freight costs make many things a little dearer here. We often have to wait for the ship to bring needed supplies of this or that item. There is not always the same choice or access you would have living in a larger centre. There may not be the same range of skilled and specialised services and facilities.
But we are resourceful. We improvise and we recycle. We get off our backsides and do things for ourselves instead of sitting round waiting. We become multi-skilled. We sort out our priorities and we get creative. We are careful with our resources, especially our water and our power.....even if it means saving a bit of money using candles in the evening. (But if you drive around the island in the evening, you will know that not many have chosen that course!) We tailor our services so they are targetted to meet our real needs, with the minimum of wastage. Is that such a bad thing in today's world where waste, red tape and mass consumerism are causing such problems?
Above all, most people here feel a sense of responsibility to this community and the well-being of those in it, and there are many individuals and community groups quietly enhancing the lives of those around them, and giving of their time, skills and resources to keep this a very good place to live in.
We are told that there are some shortfalls in labelling and signage on chemicals and hose reels at our airport.......but our government has done a magnificent job in keep the planes flying reliably to this island!
We are told that the hospital storage and maintence shed are not up to (someone else's) standard....but our mums can still have their babies here, and our low tax status enables us to attract quality doctors.
Our visitors tell us time and time again that they envy our way of life, and no one, absolutely no one, has been able to describe any country town or isolated community in Australia, with a similar population, that enjoys anywhere near the level of facilities and services that we have on this island.
I cannot help having this vision of Australian politicians and bureaucrats, fancying themselves as our rescuers, dressed as knights in shining armour, riding in on their white chargers, and scooping up the damsel in distress and carrying her off to their castles. Except that this little island is not a damsel in distress. You simply cannot offer us anything better than we already have or better than we are capable of achieving if we are given a little bit of help and understanding to get on with the job ourselves.
If our Senator friends are really concerned about human rights, democracy and fairness are right there near the top. Instead of trampling on our rights, they should be making a stand to uphold our right to choose for ourselves.

A PEOPLE AND A PLACE

The frustration of still not knowing what will happen to this island continues, and as Christmas approaches, the prospect of celebrating that season with either uncertainty or bad news hanging over our heads is a worrying one.
But things are happening. The High Court has heard our case. Their judgment will take quite some time, and even then it will be a majority decision of seven judges who are known to approach their task in different ways, and frequently reach different conclusions. Constitutions are funny things, and it is sometimes difficult to interpret something that was framed some time ago in a way that reflects modern values and needs. And, as Judge Michael Kirby reminded the court
"we have to give effect to the Constitution of the Commonwealth. That is our constitutional duty. "
In other words. it is the Australian Constitution and Australian law which will form the basis of their final judgment.
I have been wading through the transcript, and some of the legal jargon and references are daunting. But a couple of things stand out in my mind. The first is that both sides of the case are somewhat short on the facts about this island, its people, their background and their way of life, and if I had been there in the courtroom, I would have been very tempted to interrupt and correct a few basic errors of fact, things that are very obvious to anyone who has actually lived here and thrown their lot in with this community.
The second aspect of the case and the associated legal argument is this..... much of it seems to centre on the theme of Norfolk Island as a geographical place, as opposed to Norfolk Island as a "people". Counsel for the Commonwealth took the view that Norfolk Island(the place) came under Australia's jurisdiction, and therefore whoever lives here (even if it were just penguins as on Heard Island) also come automatically under Australia's jurisdiction. Australia legislates for Norfolk Island simply because it can!!
The fact that the Norfolk Island people are a distinct community, with their own ethnicity, history, roots and traditions is, according to the Commonwealth's Counsel, irrelevant. Indeed, he goes on to question the right to even use the words distinct or separate in relation to Norfolk Island. He makes the following points:
*that we are no more a "distinct and separate settlement" than, say, Byron Bay or other country towns or settlements within Australia.
*that saying that we are Norfolk Islanders from Norfolk Island is no different to saying we are Tasmanians from Tasmania.
*that different ethnicity carries no weight, because there are many other ethnic groups in Australia, such as the descendants of the German settlers in Hahndorf in S.A.
That sort of thinking is what we are up against.
It is ignorant and it is false.
But it is something they trot out frequently. In a letter to Mr Rick Kleiner, Minister Lloyd said:(Norfolk Island's) 'cultural differences are no more pronounced than those of other communities within Australia.'
He proceeds to back up these insulting claims by quoting from Australia's Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission, from The Joint Standing Committee's 2003 Report, the Nimmo Commission, and the Berwick Case in the High Court.
These are, of course, all Australian bodies, making judgments and observations, as usual, from an Australia-centric point of view. It is a view that the people of Norfolk Island, those of Pitcairn descent, and the others who have married into the Pitcairn community or who have thrown their lot in and made this their home, must strongly and proudly deny and resist.
The consequences of allowing this view of Norfolk Island are dire.
*Our culture will be reduced (in Australia's eyes)to a few recipes, a bit of island dancing, a handful of public holidays, an odd dialect to which they will pay a bit of token lipservice.
*Norfolk Island will no longer be a "homeland". Those German settlers of Hahndorf who decided voluntarily to migrate to Australia, for whatever reasons, accepted that they were leaving Germany behind, and making a new life with the people of another country. Their homeland, Germany, is still there. Australia wants to take away our right to call Norfolk Island our special place, our homeland where we have our roots, a place to which we belong in a special sense, and a place with values and traditions that have developed separately from Australia. If they take that away, we have nothing left. We are just a few insignificant and indistinguishable drops in a big Australian ocean. Not only will we have lost our sense of this being "our place", but we will be diminshed as a people.
To read the transcript of the High Court proceedings
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/hca/transcripts/recent-transcripts.html
To read the Minster's reply to Rick Kleiner asking whether he considers that Norfolk Island has an indigenous population
http://www.nagnorfolk.com/Indigeneous.pdf

NOT GOING ANYWHERE

"This claim has come out of nowhere" said David Bennett, the legal Counsel for the Commonwealth, defending the High Court Case in which the Norfolk Island Government and residents have questioned Australia's right to legislate for an island which regards itself as a distinct and separate settlement.
Tell that to all those Norfolk Islanders who have grown up believing that this island was given to them in 1856 to live in according to their own laws and customs. They believe this firmly, and their parents and grandparents believed it before them. It is not something they have just recently invented in order to hold Australia's laws and taxes at bay. It is something that has always gone to the very core of their being and identity as a people.
This case is not a frivolous one. The traditional belief of Norfolk's people is backed by considerable evidence that has been presented by some great legal and constitutional experts. In spite of the efforts of Australia over many decades to take away our rights and identity by stealth, and and to deflate the issue by a gradual and insidious process of "Australianisation", it just will not go away. Here on Norfolk Island there is a people, a community which is justly proud of what they has been achieved and developed through hard work and resourcefulness over more than 200 years from somewhat inauspicious beginnings and roots. They are proud of their British heritage, albeit through mutineers, and they are proud of their strong Polynesian heritage, which played a strong part in forging the community we know today.
The irony is that Norfolk Island has also been reasonably happy with its close association with Australia, firstly through the colonial authorities and later through coming under the protection of the Commonwealth. Yes, there was discontent about the breaking of promises and the reneging of commitments, and there was frustration and disappointment about the lack of consultation and the passing of legislation without the knowledge or consent of the island's people. From time to time, resentment would surface when Commonwealth authorities were out of touch with the island's real needs, or when their concerns and advice were ignored or overridden. But as long as the island was being governed for the benefit of its own people, and the advice of the Island's council was recognised and acted upon, Norfolkers were generally content, as long as they were able to continue to meet the needs of the community, and live according to their own customs and values.
But that was not good enough for Australia, who regarded Norfolk as an annoying anomaly. The Nimmo Report in the 70's recommended to absorb the island right into mainstream Australia or abandon it altogether. All or nothing!
Fortunately, there were those who had sufficient vision to see that a middle ground was still possible, and indeed this could be a better system than before. That was how we ended up with the Norfolk Island Act of 1979. This island courageously embraced this opportunity to manage its own affairs and finances, and most of us believe we have done a magnificent job, albeit without the genuine support and review processes that were initially promised by Australia.
It was Robert Ellicot who was the architect of this process of self-government, and it is this ame man who is now prepared to defend not only his vision, but the historic rights of the Norfolk Island people.
I am prepared to say that even if Norfolk Island were to lose this case on legal or technical or constitutional grounds, the moral issue will not go away. Promises were made to those early Pitcairners to persuade them to exchange their traditional homeland for a new one. And for 150 years, they have regarded this as their homeland, despite attempts to make it a part of middle mediocre Australia. I have said it before, but what Canberra wants to do does not mean taking us back to the days before self-government. Canberra once again wants all or nothing. No middle ground.
It will take us into a new era, where we will be governed solely for the benefit if a wider Australia and for any Australians who choose live here. And the gate will be firmly closed behind us. This is why we must have some legal recognition of what Norfolk Islanders have always known....NOW. And our traditional rights must be recognised and entrenched in such a way that they cannot be taken away on the whim of a government whose attitudes and policies seem to belong back in a past colonial era.

PUTTING IT TO THE TEST

In a democracy, people elect governments, governments make laws, and then the judges decide whether those laws are being kept as they were intended to.
And that will be the job of the High Court when it meets to hear the Norfolk Island case today.
But while we must leave it to the Honorable judges to test whether Australia has acted properly and constitutionally in legislating for Norfolk Island, we should be very concerned about the fairness of what is going on in the Australian parliament.
As I said, the politicians there are elected by the Australian people, usually on the grounds of their policies, abilities and record. It is their job to ascertain the needs and views of their constituents whom they represent. This initially happens at the ballot box, but during their term of office it is achieved by talking and listening, consulting and studying issues. If they get it wrong, then they will find out when they go back to the ballot box.
The trouble is that we currently have Australian politicians making sweeping and distorted statements and allegations in the Australian parliament about Norfolk Island, which is not even in their constituency. Not only are they making these statements under Parliamentary privilege, but what they claim will not be put to the test. Moreover, some of the things they are saying may well be influencing the attitude of their colleagues to Norfolk Island and its position, and the news is not good. Nor do we have any redress.
I would like to protest in the strongest terms about statements such as these made in the Australian Senate. This includes the following statements made by two senators to persuade anyone who may think otherwise that the Norfolk community wants the changes they propose.
Senator Carr:"in my opinion there are a majority of people on the island that desperately want to see substantial reform" ..."It is my opinion the islanders do want change"....."Many have judged that the current arrangements are in fact a failure and must be changed. As I said most islanders believe that is the case.'
Senator Hogg:"I would have enjoyed being there to witness the change in attitude that has come across both the Norfolk Island government and also a number of leading players in the business community and in the community at large in the island."
I am sorry, Senators, but your flying visits to the island, listening and talking to a few chosen people, relying heavily on views expressed in confidential sessions (which cannot be tested in any public arena) have not given you the right to make these claims.
I have written nearly 100 columns for Angelsandeagles, and have been told by many, many people of all ages and backgrounds that I have put into words what they are feeling. But the views are still my own, based on my love of this island and 40 years of living here and mixing with many parts of the community. I may well represent a majority view, but I would never make bold claims to that effect. Our Norfolk Action group has made a couple of wide and comprehensive polls and surveys which suggest that most people feel like I do. The island has had countless referenda in the past which have indicated that most people want to keep Norfolk Island making decisions for itself. In a democracy, you learn about that sort of thing properly at the ballot box.
However, not only have Senate Joint Standing Committees cast slurs on our past referenda, not only have they belittled our own elected government, but they deny us the right to speak for ourselves in a properly conducted poll on this very issue, which affects us here to the core of our existence.
Of equal concern are misleading statements and allegations such as these:
Senator Carr:(Confidential submissions) are from people who oppose the oligarchy of the rich and the powerful that run the island.......there are those on the island fighting hard to protect their vested interest and their privileged tax status". ..."well-orchestrated efforts by island diehards who would have us believe that Norfolk Island is some sort of Utopia with no social problems"....."beneath the surface informal mechanisms are being allowed to operate with impunity"..."increasingly obvious incapacity of the Norfolk Island government to provide islanders with basic service provision in such fundamental areas as aged care, pensions, health and medical benefits."...."basic services like telephones, power, water (!!!), roads, port facilities and garbage disposal... These are fundamental human rights...but they are not being provided on Norfolk Island." (Senate, Monday 30th October)
I am probably labelled as one of the diehards, but I just do not recognise the picture painted by Senator Carr. It is vitriolic and unsustainable. Take the trouble to read the transcripts in our local press, and I am sure you will be appalled by the sarcasm and innuendo, even from the Chair, about the people of this island. I recognise the need for ongoing change and accountability, and am prepared to embrace the many changes and demands that are needed to meet our challenges. But they should be made by our Norfolk Island government for the people of Norfolk island.
Senators, your words and actions are damaging and maligning us, and you have allowed us no redress either at the ballot box, or in the forum in which you make your allegations.
Is that justice?
The High Court sits today in Canberra at 10.15 to hear the Norfolk Island Case. There will quite a number of Norfolkers there, including many who have made the journey from the island specially. No doubt the media will be far more interested in the Melbourne Cup and in the Murray-Darling Water Summit, but this is an important day for all those who are proud of Norfolk Island, cherish the Island's historic identity, rights and values, and want to resist the push to absorb us completely into mainstream Australia.

LESSONS FROM OUR NEIGHBOURS

No doubt there would have been quite a few Norfolkers shaking their heads and sighing today as they read in our local press the transcripts of an enormous volume of reports, interviews, and Hansards of Australian Senate Debate on the Norfolk Island.
It is frustrating to have to sit back and put up with all the misunderstandings and inaccuracies contained in this material. It is also tempting to feel as if you are a mouse dealing with a monster, and perhaps it is just too hard to fight it. Their thinking seems to be that we are part of Australia, and therefore there is no option but to toe the line, and be like all other Australians.
But we do not need to look very far afield to realise that this need not be the case.
Take our neighbour New Zealand. The Kiwis have a lot in common with Australians culturally, socially and ethnically, but their attitude to small island states which have been entrusted to their care and protection is totally different.
The Cook Islands, for instance, is peopled mainly by Cook Island Maoris, ethnically very close to their New Zealand counterparts. The Cook Islands are not independent, but are "in free association" with New Zealand. New Zealand exercises responsibility in defence and external affairs in consultation with the Cook Islands' government, but exercise no authority in any other area.
In the early days of "free association" post 1965, New Zealand gave assistance in creating legislation for the Cooks until they had the legal and judicial expertise in the more complex areas. And they helped them obtain that expertise!! In the earlier days, there was also a mechanism by which appeals could be made to the High Court of New Zealand. Both of these arrangements ceased around 1980, and today the islands have true self-government. Their people hold New Zealand citizenship, but this does not carry the obligation to "toe the mainstream New Zealand line." They have not been asked to exchange it for their own identity.
The Cooks have their own diplomatic missions in many places, are signatories to several International treaties and conventions, and participate in the South Pacific Forum in their own right. They are also considering joining the UN.
A small and decreasing part of their budget actually comes in the form of aid, mainly from New Zealand. When revenue contribution from New Zealand was higher than it is today, audits were carried out by New Zealand, but assistance to stimulate the local economy, and training in auditing and accounting led to the Cook Islands taking over the audit function in 1991.
The Queen's Representative in the Cook Islands is the Governor-General of New Zealand, but he/she is obliged to act on the advice of the Ministers of the Cook Islands Government.
Since 2000, under the Cotonou agreement,the Cooks have also received financial and technical assistance from the European Union!
They have the right to unilaterally declare themselves independent at any time, and New Zealand cannot object.
The picture has not always been rosy and positive. There were times in the 1980's and 90's when the country "lived beyond its means" and faced difficulties. With some assistance, it reduced its bloated Public Service, restructured debts, introduced reforms in economic management, and stimulated its tourist industry. Their economic recovery has been enhanced by reforms in governance and accountability.
Overall, New Zealand's part in the relationship was initially to assist in setting up basic social and economic programmes. Aid continues to be targetted in ensuring services reach outlying islands in the group. Underpinning this help was the aim of promoting national development, and reducing the reliance of the Cooks on handouts.
Former NZ PM Norman Kirk wrote:
"The special relationship between the Cook Islands and New Zealand is on both sides a voluntary arrangement which depends on shared interests and shared sympathies. In particular it calls for understanding on New Zealand's part of the Cook Islands' natural desire to lead a life of their own and for equal understanding on the Cook Islands' part of New Zealand's determination to safeguard the values on which its citizenship is based."
Now doesn't that read like a breath of fresh air!
New Zealand recognises the right of the Cook Islanders to retain their own identity, and gives the Cook Islands a bit of help to help themselves.
Come on, you Aussie politicians and bureaucrats, would it be so very hard to do the same thing for Norfolk Island and its people?

CUSTOMS CONCERNS

The Australian Government commissioned an Economic Impact Assessment into the possible economic effects of the huge changes they have planned for Norfolk Island. They have recognised that our economy has developed differently from that of mainland Australia, but I am not sure if they are recognising that a whole lot of other things are different too, such as our culture, and our expectations and needs.
Anyway, this assessment study has been carried out, and Canberra plans to use it, they say, to minimise the negative impacts of their changes. Things such as staggering them and introducing them in stages. In other words ïf they "do us slowly", perhaps we will not feel the flames so badly.
But we have enormous concerns.
Firstly, the Economic Impact assessment Report is to be kept confidential, and you and I will not know what it has said...until it is far too late. Are we not to be trusted with this information?
The second problem is that they did not ask very many of us how the changes would affect us, and we all know they will be extremely damaging to our way of life, our businesses, our sense of community and especially to our tourist industry.
Take Customs for instance. Canberra is not just going to assume control of that area. It will be abolished altogether, and Norfolk Island Customs will no longer exist. We will be under the Australian Customs Regime....completely.
Any goods coming here from other parts of the world will be subject to the same tariffs as those entering Australia. Now these tariffs and import duties have been set to suit Australian needs, to protect Australian industries, and to help fill Australian coffers.
Never mind that our local needs are quite different.
Never mind that when Australia first decided to do this, Norfolk Island Customs Duties were an important part of our revenue stream. So much for being concerned about our sustainability!
Did they take the trouble to observe how many of our successful and popular tourist shops import quality products from all over the world, and have been able to sell these to our visitors at extremely attractive prices. They have been able to do this, partly because of our low duty regime, and partly because they did not have to go through Australian agents and middlemen.
We will no longer be seeing our tourist shoppers loaded down with imported shoes, Lego, porcelain and china, perfumes and giftware items that have made shopping here very attractive. It will all need to be imported through Australia, and you can bet your bottom dollar that we will also be required to use those agencies and middlemen which have exclusive import rights within that country. Because we will no longer have our separate identity.
Our shopping will either become very expensive, or Burnt Pine will need to become a "Chinatown" type precinct of $2 and Junk type shops trying to woo our visitors with cheap mass-produced goods and trinkets.
All this is justified by vague mumblings about "anomalies"and "inconsistency" and "tidying things up in Australia's border protection regime". This is in spite of the fact that our Norfolk Island Government has offered to meet them more than halfway on questions of genuine security concerns, and does, in fact, provide an extra security checkpoint under the current arrangements!!
Sadly, our Norfolk Island Customs regime is just one more of the "loose ends" that is to be firmly woven into the fabric of Australia's all-enveloping mantle of control.
It means a loss of government revenue, a loss of part of an industry that has underpinned our sustainability, and another major step in the loss of our unique and separate identity.

BROAD OR NARROW

In February Canberra announced two broad options for change of Governance in Norfolk Island. However, time has proved these two options to be very narrow indeed, with no opportunities for meaningful input from the people of this island, and not even any encouraging signs that we may have any actual say in which option is finally chosen. Indeed there have moments during this year when Norfolkers have had the feeling of being driven relentlessly along a very narrow path, on a route that has obviously been carefully mapped out by the politicians and bureaucrats a long time ago, and with a timetable set in concrete.
Although Minister Lloyd has been our designated driver, and Australia's representative on this island our "chaperone", the whole agenda is much bigger than both of those people, and apparently even enjoys bilateral support in Australian politics.This island's financial capacity and sustainability have proved to be a convenient vehicle for this journey towards loss of self-government, and, sadly, it has been fuelled by flawed data and misinformation. The Acumen Report, which Canberra has used as its rationale for the course it has set us upon, has been shown to be based on false assumptions, poor statistics, and a gross misunderstanding of the actual needs and expectations of the people of this island.
The Minister and the Australian Parliament have once again chosen to play the financial card in recent days, spreading alarm and suspicion and anxiety, which they hope will work in their favour.What we need to realise is that even if our financial situation were
so dire that we needed Australia's intervention (and it is certainly not), this is merely a smokescreen for a quite different and unrelated agenda which Australia has said it means to implement regardless, and which, according to Minister Lloyd, is completely non-negotiable. This agenda includes the following:
*Application of all Commonwealth laws to Norfolk Island with few exceptions
*The power to intervene to develop and amend any Norfolk Island laws "in the public interest"(i.e. Australia's interest)
*Bringing Norfolk Island within Australia's taxation and social welfare system
*Bringing Norfolk Island under Australia's electoral system
*Bringing Norfolk's Customs and Quarantine under the Australian system
*Abolishing our powers of Immigration control completely.

In other words, take away the last vestiges of our separate and unique identity as a people and community.

The ironic thing is that not only will these changes bring about social and cultural damage to our island community, but they will have enormous negative effects on our economic and financial well-being. I will explore more of these negative effects in future posts.
Unfortunately for us, the ultimate decision on our fate will be made by Cabinet and by the Australian Parliament. We shudder to think of the unbalanced advice and misinformation on which this decision will be based.
Our Chief Minister has finally succeeded in obtaining a face to face meeting with Minister Lloyd tomorrow. We need to hope and pray for some honesty, flexibility and integrity to enter this process. We need some genuine consultation and dialogue. We need Canberra to step back and be prepared to start again, if they really care about the interests of the people of Norfolk Island.