SUBMISSION TO JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE
Mary Christian-Bailey

I am British born, but have lived on Norfolk Island for some 42 years. My husband and five children are Norfolk Islanders, and we all share a very strong commitment to this place. It is my family’s homeland, and my adopted homeland, even though I have been partially disenfranchised here by the Australian Government in recent years.
I will not enter into any argument about whether Norfolk Island is part of Australia or whether Australia has the right to legislate for Norfolk Island. The answer to both is probably ‘YES’, if only because Australia says it is.
But I would dearly love the Australian Government to acknowledge the following:
The people of Norfolk did not first receive self-government in 1979. They previously had it for 107 years until it was unjustly taken away in 1896. The Norfolk people did not start off as Australians. They did not have their roots in Australia, and they never migrated to Australia. They were never asked if they wanted to become part of Australia, or under Australia’s authority, and they were never consulted about being made citizens of Australia. Their history is quite distinct from that of other Australians. Their status, apart from the current self-government which it seems is tenuously held only at Australia’s discretion, is mostly a result of decisions that have been made over time for and about them without consultation or consent, and often without their knowledge. I defy you to find anywhere in the historical record that says otherwise.

In the light of this, you may understand better the deeply entrenched desire of the people to make their own decisions. These are some of the things I would like to see your Committee recommend:

1. That any action that is taken or law that is passed that affects Norfolk Island should be a matter for prior consultation on an equal government to government basis between Norfolk and Australia.
2. That no change be made without a properly conducted economic impact study, the results of which we have free and open access to. There is more to what makes this place tick than economic factors, but that would be a good start.
3. That where it is considered, by mutual agreement, that we need to lift our game in some area – and what government anywhere cannot say that – that the necessary action be taken by the Norfolk Island Government, under Norfolk Island law, albeit with some help and advice from your own authorities.
4. That before risking change to this island, both your committee and the people of the island should seriously examine Australia’s record on dealing with economic sustainability and cultural and social sensitivities in its own remote communities, including Aboriginal communities, Christmas and Cocos Islands, and struggling rural communities. One of your own former members described Christmas Island as “a basket case.”
5. That no change be made affecting Norfolk Island without seeking the will of the people of this island, through properly-conducted referenda. Send a scrutineer or observer if you like, if you really believe our referenda are manipulated and invalid as suggested by a previous JSC Committee.
   
   What I would really like to see is for your Committee come here with a view to learning why we are so successful, and why, against all odds, we are such a productive, vibrant, self-reliant and resourceful community, and how a small remote place of fewer than 2000 people can boast ready access to such a wide range of goods and services, enjoying an enviable quality of life. And perhaps apply some of what you have learnt to help other less fortunate places. I know your bureaucracy finds Norfolk Island an untidy anomaly – but wouldn’t it be wonderful if you thought of us as “the jewel in your crown”, and not just “a thorn in your side”?
   
   Now I would briefly like to deal with some myths. I am sorry that we need always to be on the back foot defending ourselves, when we would rather be moving forward positively on the front foot.

The myth that big is better. Every time you tune into the news now, you realise that the bigger you get, whether it is an economy or a business or any other entity, the harder you fall. We only need small government for what is a small island state.

The myth that this island has a culture of intimidation and violence and threatening behaviour, that we regularly burn each other’s houses down, that we protect murderers. It is to your shame that defamatory comments and numerous untested allegations like these are not only included in your reports, but two of your former members even went to the media with them. Your reports freely quote similar defamatory statements made by Nimmo from 30 years ago, and he in turn quoted negative observations from 1885!! Let us have facts.

The myth of a big divide between the haves and have nots, and the mysterious rich and influential people who stand in the way of justice for the disadvantaged on the island. You will have to provide some pretty good evidence for this, because none of us know who these people are. Many of us are asset rich but cash poor. Our family land is our children’s birthright and insures they can call Norfolk Island their home. But that will all be in vain if you manage to change the culture of this place and make it unaffordable.

The myth that we are heading for the status of failed state. This island has a wonderful energy, a high level of participation in work and leisure activities, and enviable array of easily accessed goods and services. We are peaceful and productive. Crime, violence and anti-social behaviour are at low levels.

The myth that we are blinkered into thinking this is UTOPIA. We work hard and with resourcefulness and creativity to overcome challenges and obstacles. We care for one another in hard times. We can adapt to growth and change – we have had to –but on our terms. We have responded readily to many things that have been recommended in previous JSC reports. Your own government has really only responded to one – and that was the electoral issue which managed to disenfranchise many long term residents, including some of Pitcairn descent. Whose interests are you really looking out for?
There is another issue which I would like to raise briefly. In your former report on Governance, whose quaint Latin name I will not attempt to pronounce, even though I studied Latin for five years, you said you did not consider it appropriate for this island to consider itself part of the Pacific community. But it is part of the Pacific community. It is a small island state, with many geographical and cultural connections to other Pacific Islands. And many of the people around me still have every bit as much Tahitian blood as many of your Aboriginal people have Aboriginal blood.

Try to see it from our point of view – impose inappropriate change on us from outside, meddle with our “can-do spirit”, turn us into just another area of one-size-fits-all Australia, and it will be like taking away our homeland and the legacy we want to pass on to our children.

Finally, thank you for helping to bring the new Fire Engines to the island. They are an example of our willingness to invest in infrastructure that will ensure a sustainable future. Your assistance was a good example of simple neighbourly help. And that is all we ask – a little bit of help to help ourselves!

Mary Christian-Bailey
November 2008
Norfolk Island
http://angelsandeagles.blogspot.com/
http://devonhouse.blogspot.com/