So - it is a very long time since I have posted. But once again it is time. I believe we are in a position now where the right decisions about Norfolk Island have to be made, made by the right people, and for the right reasons. We are in danger of having those decisions made by people who have little time or thought for this island, who are ill-informed, and who do not wish to consult or really listen to the true stakeholders.
The minister invited Norfolk people to send him their thoughts about what Norfolk Island should do. He had already stated Australia had committed to bringing the island into the Federal taxation and social security regime, which means that is non-negotiable. He has said we must make economic and social(????) changes. So what else does he need to know?
I fear that his invitation (private and confidential) will give him an opportunity to cherry pick the ideas and suggestions that suit him, and allow minority viewpoints to masquerade as the view of the majority - and hope no one is any the wiser.
Nevertheless, I have attempted to tell him what I feel, and hope others will do the same.
>
SUBMISSION FROM
A NORFOLKER TO MINISTER JAMIE BRIGGS
Sincere thanks, Minister, for your
invitation to contact you personally with our views on our current difficult
situation on Norfolk Island. I am aware through
the media that you carry many responsibilities, and it is frustrating to realise
that we compete with many other pressing issues.
I introduce myself as someone who
has lived on Norfolk Island since 1966, married
to a Norfolk Islander of Pitcairn descent, have five adult children who are
proud to call themselves Norfolk Islanders. I have burned all my bridges behind
me, love this island passionately, and will never call any other place home. I
am not of Pitcairn descent, but my own sense of identity is very much bound up
with my adopted homeland. I believe I have earned the respect of Norfolk
Islanders, and have frequently been told by them that I put into words what they
feel in their hearts but cannot express in words.
I realise that some of what I say
will not strictly meet the criteria and guidelines contained in your invitation;
nevertheless I believe it may be helpful for you in gaining an understanding the
realities of what you are dealing with.
UNDERSTANDING NORFOLK ISLAND
Jamie, you have been "quoted" as
saying that you are not interested in 200 years of history, and also that you
find it "absurd" that we are different to the rest of Australia with regard to things like
taxation and social welfare.
Nevertheless, you will have become
aware, as have previous Federal Governments, that dealing with Norfolk Island is a complex process, fraught with
difficulties and uncertainties. Sadly, the Norfolk Island situation is likely to
remain in the "too hard basket", unless your government starts to approach the
issues differently, think laterally, and discard the assumption that Norfolk Island can be made to fit the mould or pattern of
any traditional Australian community.
I feel just a few reminders about
the past may show, if nothing else, why Norfolk
Island is such a complex
anomaly.
OUR HISTORY IS
OUR “DREAMTIME”. IT IS PART OF WHAT WE ARE
TODAY.
·
Historically speaking, the
Pitcairn/Norfolk community did not have its origins on Australia, they never migrated to or settled in
Australia, they have never
asked to become part of Australia, and they have never been asked if they
wished to become part of Australia! We are NOT another
ethnic group in multi-cultural Australia.
·
There was a time last century when
Norfolk Island held an almost identical status to that of New Guinea in its relationship with Australia. I am not sure what has
happened since then, but I do know that Norfolk
Island has had no voice or say in it.
·
There are only two occasions in history when this
community has had a genuine say in its future. The first time was when they were
offered Norfolk Island as their new homeland,
and the whole community chose to relocate here in 1856. To this day, Norfolk
Islanders believe they were "duped", because when they arrived, they discovered
that they would not occupy Norfolk Island under the same conditions they had
occupied Pitcairn
Island.
·
The second occasion was when
Norfolk Island was granted self-government in
1979. Not only did Australia fail to lay down the proper
groundwork for the change and hand over infrastructure in good order, they made
no continuing arrangements to monitor the progress and success of the
arrangements. Moreover, rather than enjoying the status of a distinct and
separate regime, the Norfolk Island community found itself increasingly
accountable to the Federal Government and dictated to, eventually losing control
of many areas,
including electoral arrangements and immigration.
·
Particularly since so-called
self-government, there has never been any certainty or continuity to enable the
island to make sound progress and decisions. We have been subject to the whims
and naive ignorance of changing Federal governments, a long line of
ever-changing responsible ministers, and a Government bureaucracy in which
"Territories" occupied a continually diminishing role, and whose officials
seemed to resent having to deal with the Norfolk Island anomaly. Goal posts have
been moved on a regular basis, a process that continues to this day. However
well- intended the decisions made with regard to Norfolk Island, they have
usually been made mainly in Australia’s national interest. They
have often been to the detriment of Norfolk
Island, and we have had very little input, control or
redress.
·
Prior to self-government, over
several decades, the island was governed somewhat paternally by Australian
officials with a local advisory council. Nevertheless, during this period,
decisions were usually made in the interests of the welfare of the island and
its people, with little attempt to bring things into line with
Australia, or to act in
Australia's national interest or the
interest of those who happened to be Australian citizens. Since self government
the process of "Australianisation" of the island has intensified to the extent
that the Norfolk Islander who draws attention to his separate traditional
origins and ethnicity is being silenced.
·
I recall a time when I first came
to this island (in 1966) when the people of this community lived modestly,
accepted their isolation and remoteness with any inconveniences, and they envied
no one and did not compare themselves with anyone. It was a community that dealt
with their lives with resourcefulness and resilience. These ethics, along with a
degree of pride in having survived more than two centuries as a unique and
separate people continues to this day, and underlies the way our society
operates. Your suggestion that we must make "social reforms" makes us
uneasy.
·
I will concede that the process of
Australianisation, increased travel and improved communications, along with the
growth of a cash economy made possible by a tourist industry, have all helped to
raise expectations about standard of living, services and infrastructure. There
is also greater evidence of an “entitlement” mentality than existed when the
island was a more isolated self-contained community. Reluctantly, we accept that
these changes are probably irreversible. But it is painful for many Norfolkers
to face the fact that it seems we can no longer manage our affairs and meet our
needs from our own assets and resources. However, you cannot blame us for
questioning the obstacles that are placed in our way by virtue of the fact that
we cannot borrow money, accept help from other countries, or benefit from our
own economic zone.
·
Generally speaking,
Australia has not treated
this island well, and Australia must accept responsibility
for many of the problems we are experiencing today.
·
Reluctantly I concede that we are
at a crossroads and must now follow a path that diverges from the one we have
followed in the past, but it must be one that acknowledges the independent and
resourceful spirit of the Norfolk Island people, and the rich heritage, and
community ethic that has given strength and life to the Norfolk Island people
since 1789.
WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO
SEE
·
The Norfolk
Island government should be treated with respect and dignity usually
accorded to the democratically elected government of any country or region. This
must underlie all negotiations.
·
Our government members should be
free to express (verbally or in writing) the concerns and questions of their
electorate without being intimidated or accused of endangering the roadmap. They
should also be able to communicate clearly, openly and directly with yourself
and your office.
·
The Australian Government should
recognise the very real anxieties and doubts of the Norfolk
Island people, particularly in those areas which have longstanding
cultural and social implications – areas like welfare, increased red tape and
regulation, open immigration, transfer of control of our local affairs to
outsiders etc.
- Our government
and people should be given a little bit of help to help ourselves, in
recognition of the fact that managing our affairs in our own Norfolk way is closely tied
up with our cultural identity.
- Priority should be given to
enabling us to have a good third landing
place, something that would greatly improve our freight costs and our
ability to benefit from Cruise ship business. Such a facility, on the west side
of the island, would also enable our fishing boats and recreational craft to go
out far more often, with benefits to local people and our tourist industry.
Shipping access is our lifeline, and is the single most important thing that
would improve our economic viability. Developing a third landing place would
also give local employment at this difficult time.
·
Consideration should also be given
to allowing the island to benefit from its own economic zone and the fishing rights
involved, enabling us to enjoy greater financial
independence.
·
The practice of comparing us and
measuring us against so-called comparable and similar Australian communities
should cease. We need small island solutions to our problems, and would greatly
benefit from the opportunity to engage with other Pacific Island communities and
governments.
·
Please try to understand the
difficulties we have on the land tax/rates
issue. Our land is what we hand on to our children, so they can
continue to think of Norfolk Island as their
homeland, the place where they have their roots.
·
There needs to be a recognition
that the island’s “culture” goes far beyond its language, customs, cooking and
such. It is intimately bound up with the way we deal with one another, make
decisions, manage our resources, care for one another, and take pride in our
unique heritage.
·
Above all, I strongly believe that
while Norfolk Island is an external "self
governing" territory, the people of the island should be allowed to continue to
think of themselves as Norfolkers first, Australians
second.
A POSSIBLE
SOLUTION
Why not SIMPLY
issue a serious and genuine invitation to the Norfolk Island government
and community to become more closely integrated with Australia?
Is that such a novel idea? Would
it not be a way of saying sorry for the mistakes of the past, acknowledging
Australia’s very real responsibilities to a territory that was placed under its
oversight and care a hundred years ago, and allowing Norfolkers to play a very
real role in making the decisions that will determine their future in a very
different world from the one that shaped their
past?
This would
enable Norfolk Island to take part in a process that we have been denied because
Australia failed to list
Norfolk Island as a non-self governing
territory with the United Nations in the past. If Norfolk
Island had been correctly listed, we would have been able to
undertake a process of self-determination through
plebiscite.
Such a plebiscite could still be
undertaken, possibly offering a range of options of degrees of
integration.
The process would offer the
certainty that has been lacking up to this time, because the future would have
been decided democratically by us, the chief stakeholders. Norfolkers would
feel they "owned" the decision instead of feeling trapped in a process that
seems to hover between bribery and blackmail to achieve uncertain and vague
goals. It would also give certainty and clear direction to all the levels of
government and bureaucracy who would be involved in any transition, and
resources could be allocated accordingly. The path may still be difficult and
complex, but there would be a unity of purpose and goodwill if that were to be
the path that the people of Norfolk Island
chose.
Just imagine –
Norfolk Island could become the jewel in Australia’s crown, not just a thorn in Canberra’s
side!
I THANK YOU FOR OFFERING TO
LISTEN. I HOPE YOU HAVE THE COURAGE AND PERCEPTIVE UNDERSTANDING TO TRY A
DIFFERENT APPROACH,
Mary
Christian-Bailey
P.O.
Box
144
Queen Elizabeth
Avenue
NORFOLK
ISLAND