Here I have a transcript of an interview in our local radio with Andre Nobbs. It was a landmark occasion, because it confirmed, in a factual way, what many of us had been suspecting - that the case for Canberra taking us over was very much overcooked, and based on a great deal of untruth and ignorance, and the Norfolk Island government and people were being blamed for much that was not their fault. See what you think.

Now I have in the studio with me Andre Nobbs, now Andre is in the studio to give us an update on the handover of the petition that was earlier on in the week, but also Andre we’ve had a lot of things happening on Norfolk Island, not only of late but over the last few years and I guess I just wanted to take us back to the protest march at the A&H Show which will lead us perhaps into where the petition came in.

Certainly, Thank you Louci and thank you for allowing me to come in and provide information on the marches and also the community related activities that have been part of those marches. Certainly at the Royal A&H Show, there was in effect a protest march that was specifically aimed at highlighting the fact that the community members wanted a real consultation process for their future. There was a head count that was carried out at that march and it was somewhere well above 200 persons that marched, which is very interesting considering we only let people know the evening before the protest march.

There was actually a comment by the assistant minister Jamie Briggs there was something like less than a hundred

Actually in today’s discussion I would like to talk about some of the perhaps incorrect information that is coming from different areas, whether it’s about numbers, whether it’s about legislation, whether it’s about economic strategic planning, a whole range of things. I would just say..

The protest march at the recent Royal A&H Show was a clear demonstration that a great number of the residents of Norfolk Island are concerned about their future mainly because there has not been a consultation process on proposed governance or tax structure for the island.

The march recently held was at the conclusion of the community petitions. The two petitions are to be hand delivered to Canberra by the Speaker of our Parliament and the Leader of our Government. With over 700 signatures on each petition were collected over an 11 day period from a community of 1600 people that indicates all are seeking an informed consulted and successful future.

And it’s worth pointing out Louci that those two petitions, one goes to the senate and one goes to the house of representatives.

Although successive Norfolk Island Governments have supported the need for change and proposed a territory style of governance – the proposal recommended by the JSC and under consideration by Minister Jamie Briggs is vastly different and suggests the repealing of the Norfolk Island Act, in effect removing the constitution for this external territory.

Louci many people marching were well aware of the shortfalls of remote control governance that existed before the 1979 Act enabled a limited form of self government. This limited form of self government transferred the majority of responsibilities and costs to the NI Government, however with no access to its EEZ and virtually no access to external investment if Australia chose not to allow it – this was the case during the GFC when Norfolk Island was excluded from GFC stimulus funding, that funding was available to all other states and territories throughout Australia.

Andre can you give us an example of some of that funding that we have missed out on?

Certainly, when the global financial crisis hit Australia and its territories and states, there was a range of infrastructure stimulus funding and the one that may well resonate loudest for you is the education revolution funding, which was also part of the GFC stimulus packages.

When other funding options were presented to this islands government, the Australian government used its power under the NI Act to obstruct that assistance.

That assistance at the time was offered by one of Australia’s leading banks when they recognised that we weren’t being given any other assistance, however that proposal was rejected by Canberra.

That is well documented in the NI government records Louci. And it is records and facts that I have been asked to provide through this interview.

I have been approached by a very large number of community members and more than a few radio stations to provide facts that respond to statements made in recent interviews by Jamie Briggs and the NI Administrator. Before during and after the march this weekend I was asked to respond as a former government minister and a current member of the NI KAVHA Board – in many cases on behalf of people who are intimidated by the commonwealth representatives and their spin on Norfolk Island.

So what I have done is compile a summary of statements or inferences made by the assistant minister for territories Jamie Briggs and Administrator Gary Hardgrave and I’ve also provided a factual correction that includes the relevant documentation proving they are either grossly misinformed or misleading in their responses:

Minister Jamie Briggs claimed, There are no Gun Laws on Norfolk Island, No Child Welfare legislation and no Drink Driving Laws.

You and I Louci know that is absolute rubbish and misleading to the Australian public that Norfolk Island would not takes these matters seriously or with integrity.

NI has the Firearms and Prohibited Weapons Act 1997 – updated in 2013

I’ll explain shortly why I refer to the updates

The Traffic Act 2010 updated in 2012

The Child Welfare Act 2009 updated on the 5^th of May 2014. I mention the updates as they are carried out on the Authority of the Administrator of Norfolk Island and communicated through the Federal Ministers Office, so who is lying here about very serious issues?

Or not reading some of the paperwork.

It may very well be very badly misinformed Commonwealth representatives, but they are casting a slur on Norfolk Island and our commitment to do what is right.

Any person around the world can view this legislation and all they have to do to view them is to go to the NI Government web page;

As I said I will be providing facts and places where people can go to view those facts, so if you were to go to the   norfolkisland.gov.nf site, you would find those legislation documents.

Jamie Briggs claimed in his interview that NI infrastructure was “third world”, a ridiculous comment that would typically be made by someone who either does not understand the terminology or has preferred to shock the listening public rather than use facts.

We have a fully functional mobile phone network, although we do not have 4G we have the many wireless hotspots to ensure our visitors and locals can maintain contact with the modern world. Our internet has constantly been above the grade I have found in other islands and small communities, and we have just upgraded our systems to expand our bandwidth and reduce latency through the O3B network.

It was noted with the interview with his honour the administrator the other day that of course the JSC report was written prior to the O3B network being installed, so in effect that part of the JSC document was too..

Too limiting perhaps, I know where you are coming from with regard to the earlier stage of internet before shifting to O3B, the bandwidth wasn’t as expanded, the latency wasn’t as reduced, however he has made broad statements over the whole range of the infrastructure and I would even say that prior to shifting to O3B, our internet service was well in excess of many of the other small islands and small communities.

Well especially third world countries.

Lord Howe, Cook Islands, I’ve worked in all sorts of places and certainly been to King Island, and a range of islands in the Australian network and we compete very favourably I can tell you.

Let me be perfectly clear by pointing out that the islands infrastructure was in a very poor state when Australia handed over self government responsibilities to NI, (there is photographic, recording and legislative evidence however since 1979 we have tar sealed all public roads, upgraded the hospital and associated equipment, replaced the outdated electricity generators, installed new reticulation for power distribution, installed two way metering to work in line with the enormous take up of Photovoltaic systems around the island, built an international airport complete with security and fire fighting equipment and ground handling systems, Extended the school and its facilities to cater for year 12 and the national curriculum requirements, upgraded communications technology on the island, an enormous array of things, I’ve barely scratched the surface. There is evidence of all of those claims as well as numerous reports that identify that at the point of handover, although there were many promises to upgrade the infrastructure, they were not followed through.

This island has carried out the bulk of these infrastructure improvements over the last 30 years within the islands own funding, and skills resource. This has been an enormous win for Australia as NI demonstrated the lowest cost operation of an external territory with the highest level of technology and infrastructure.

Infrastructure capacity and status has been negatively impacted over the last four years with the subsistence funding provided to Norfolk specifically not including normal operational costs or the capital works required to maintain infrastructure or assist the private sector through capital works.

I’ll just spell that out Louci because that is really part of the economic challenge for everyone in the private sector at the moment, we have subsistence budget assistance, although it is appreciated, it is actually causing many challenges by not enabling capital works. Not enabling capital works means that there is a snowball of asset replacement, infrastructure repair coming. In the meantime for the private sector, they are not seeing funds that would normally flow through the private sector in capital works funding.

So by not doing anything we are going backwards.

Absolutely

(EVIDENCE) I would welcome any journalist from around the world to come and view the achievements of this island, particularly when you view the limitations imposed on the successive NI governments. Come and view for themselves, make their own expose’ of exactly what the infrastructure is like on this island and particularly reference it to the fact that this island has largely paid for that infrastructure itself and has not been a burden on the Australian taxpayer to do it.

When questioned on ABC radio about the consultation process and the purported 70 letters supporting the vaguely proposed changes under consideration by Jamie Briggs, not only did Briggs dodge the question as to whether 70 out of a total 90 letters he referred to was an adequate consultation process, he deliberately omitted to acknowledge the 80 letters sent from Norfolk Island community members seeking the two governments to work together on the options for Norfolk Islands future and produce properly constructed models for governance and fiscal operation, so that this community … and the Cabinet for that matter were able to make informed decisions. (EVIDENCE -these letters were tabled in the NI Parliament, Hansard 16/4/2014) This is a concern that I am sure any responsible Cabinet Minister would and should take very seriously. This community has been requesting economic and governance modelling information for at least two years. Minister Briggs has no modelling and as such is taking everyone on a misinformed leap of faith. When we compare Norfolk’s 30 years of success to other islands and the IOT’s recent high profile through Jon Stanhope’s demands for democratic and cost effective process there are some better outcomes for the Australian Taxpayer if we work honestly, with integrity and with good planning and modelling.

The Administrator and the Assistant Minister Briggs have made remarks about the Cascade Pier and how they have funding to support improvements for the pier but are awaiting action from the NI Government.

The fact is that the NI Government and NI Administration were successful in getting grant funding through the Infrastructure Australia Grant Funds to enable repair and minor extension to the pier.

Whose pier is it? It’s the Commonwealths asset.

What does that mean? The Norfolk Island government and administration put considerable time and resource into gaining grant funding to repair the Commonwealths asset. The piers are a commonwealth asset, the grant funding achieved to fund repairs to the commonwealth’s asset, has been manipulated by the Assistant ministers department to introduce unrelated conditionality.

And in the meantime our private sector is in dire need of that funding to enable it not only to make repairs to the pier, but also to circulate that money in the economy.

The bottom line is that the Commonwealth should have gotten on with the job of fixing their asset years ago. We got the funding for them, stop blackmailing the private sector by saying this funding is held up by political process, this example of capital works will fix dilapidated Commonwealth infrastructure and enable a much needed economic injection to the private sector. The Kingston pier was repaired with no fuss for example so the commonwealth should just get on with it. (EVIDENCE Kingston pier refurbishment)

The administrator on local radio last week made statements about the pier funding, including many negative and critical references to the lack of economic strategic planning for Norfolk Island. In his view, what he saw was a lack of economic strategic planning for Norfolk Island.

Let’s have some factual corrections to this ill-informed statement. Norfolk has numerous strategic and economic plans specifically from 2007 through to the present. These plans have encouraged not only local development, these plans have specifically been aimed at collaboration with the Australian Government. Perhaps I can ensure the administrator is better informed by listing these plans and some of the outcomes.

The NIG 2007 strategic plan encompassed economic development, and regulatory review, most importantly I would point out that this plan equally identified the NIG’s push for access to the Commonwealth Ombudsman, ICAC and the Australian National Audit Office. Although these reforms were driven by the NI government and we completed every aspect within our power, due to lack of Australian Government commitment, the ICAC connectivity has never happened, the Commonwealth Ombudsman access 7 years later -  still not fully functional, the ANAO access commenced around 3 years after our initial request, a further example of how we plan initiatives but we are ultimately at the mercy of the department in Canberra.

A further Economic strategic plan for Norfolk Island was the Roadmap committed to by both the NI and Australian Governments. Most importantly page 8 of the 2011 Roadmap clearly states the Australian Governments to facilitate dry run tax returns. Hallelujah this would create some data for modelling and enable private and public sectors to evaluate changes required to keep their businesses competitive, or worst case scenario highlight that the proposal was going to render the tourist destination as no longer competitively or commercially viable.

Louci I think all of us have been looking for those guidelines to make sure that we are headed in the right direction and whether we need to change our business practices.

And three years down the track we are still no further along.

There is no model which makes it very hard for people to bank their future on it.

Fact, the Australian Government did not facilitate the dry run of tax forms, the direct result is that there is no data to inform this community or to inform Cabinet or the Australian Taxpayer. This is an irresponsible and pitiful outcome.

A further economic strategic planning tool for Norfolk Island was the Econtech econometric modelling reports contracted by the NI government to, in the first instance demonstrate what was required for the economy of Norfolk Island to get back to a positive position. 

The latest Econtech report was also used to project impacts of the Global Financial Crisis as a result of our main tourism demographic being the group worst affected financially. The Econtech projections were extremely accurate more than twelve months in advance, and although the NIG used this data to seek GFC stimulus from Australia, we were specifically excluded from GFC assistance.  To date this remains the only economy modelling documentation and it was completed and funded by the NI government. In previous reports Econtech also demonstrated the financially unsustainable outcomes proposed by Jim Lloyd back in 2006, Norfolk Island wanted then and now to be productive NOT a contingent liability on the Australian taxpayer.

The recent appropriation Bill proposed by the NIG included an economic development officer to help drive strategic goals for the island, particularly in economic development – this component of the appropriation was not supported by the Assistant Ministers department and so this priority matter appears to not be a priority for Jamie Briggs department.

A further economic strategic planning tool and I will just re point out Louci that each of these plans and each of these documents is available online. Tourism is Norfolk Islands key industry, as such you will see key economic development strategies within the NI government tourist bureaus 2013 – 2023 strategic plan.

The administrator stated his economic development group was about to complete an economic strategy for the island, this is good news although there does not appear to have been much in the way of consultation or apparently minute keeping to ensure an accountable process, but let’s see what comes out of that.

Lastly I would like to respond to the assistant minister and administrators statements that people like myself who seek a consulted, economically modelled and honest process have a vested interest.  I am a former NI government minister and a 7 year board member for the World Heritage Site on Norfolk – I am not wealthy. I have no vested interest in returning to politics on Norfolk Island, or anywhere else for that matter. The KAVHA Board for the World heritage listed site management for me is an unpaid position and - as many would have seen in the local paper recently the UNESCO approved CMP arrangements are not being adhered to by the Australian representatives on the Board, evictions and operational changes to the site define arrogance taking the place of accountability which I have brought to everyone’s attention (Norfolk Islander 2 weeks ago) – needless to say that does not make me popular with commonwealth officials, however everyone should be accountable I am sure UNESCO want all agencies to operate within the agreed CMP. It’s not just about UNESCO, it’s also about the commitment that was made to this community that World Heritage Listing would not change their access, would not change how the site was a living dynamic for the Norfolk Island community. I have mentioned before Louci that I am also a member of the Australian Small Islands Forum Steering Committee, I am privy to perhaps more information than Jamie Briggs - because I know that none of the islands are financially sustainable, I know they all have infrastructure, resourcing, skilled workforce, waste management and cost of living challenges – the question needs to be asked, why is it that so much negative profile is being aimed at Norfolk when we have largely funded the islands operation in isolation, but with numerous limitations.

There is a degree of intimidation from the commonwealth’s representative on Norfolk Island and the Minister in claiming that only those who are wealthy or have a vested interest are voicing concerns over the minister’s current path, which contains no detail, no modelling, no strategic, governance or economic planning.

Over 700 members of this community placed their signatures on a petition and are rightfully concerned that there is a greater likely hood for disaster than success for both this community and the Australian taxpayer given the examples of misinformation or no information whatsoever.

Louci There is definitely a need for change, lets do it properly and acknowledge along the way that for around 30 years Norfolk Island put more into Australia than Australia put into Norfolk Island,

Andre that is a good point there because people do forget, or don’t promote enough what Norfolk has done in the past 30 years.

Absolutely, one of our biggest failings is we’ve never bragged enough. We have developed infrastructure over here and I’m not saying that all our infrastructure is perfect, obviously our roads need a wide range of repairs and we have other infrastructure areas that are challenged as well. I did mention before that subsistence budgets has mad that problem probably worse by eliminating some of the normal roads programs but prior to that and go back to 1979, talk to any long term residents and you will see that most of the roads weren’t sealed, all of those roads are sealed now. The level of infrastructure and the level of self reliance that this community has worked on should be credited, it shouldn’t be pulled down without some sort of endorsement for the efforts that have gone into that.

Norfolk has always worked towards being productive, rather than moving down a line of welfare dependency or contingent liability.

The money that Norfolk has put back into the Australian taxations system is backed up by documentation tabled in the Norfolk Island Parliament, that document uses Australian Taxation Office industry benchmarks and data from the Commonwealths own Access Economics report and demonstrates a considerable tax contribution to Australia from Norfolk Island private and public sector and community that would in many years be above and beyond the Australian financial investment back into Norfolk Island….. and that is before we start discussing the Fisheries income that Norfolk has had no access to. Australia is the beneficiary of what should have been our EEZ to the tune of more than $45M per year for decades. Now how much have we required over the last four years in total -  $47million, worst case scenario around one years current revenues from the fishing zone around Norfolk Island.

Evidence Seaaroundus.org

My assessment of the Jamie Briggs destination is abject failure, Cabinet in Australia will not be so irresponsible to climb on board an assistant minister’s guestimate that will degenerate one of Australia’s premium performing external territories into a welfare dependent contingent liability on the Australian taxpayer.

As a former Cabinet Minister I would be instructing the junior minister and the administrator to abandon ego and present honest, factual and detailed data to ensure a successful future for Australia and it’s external territories.

There is a natural beauty, a race of people a community and an external self-governing territory who deserve proper process. Perhaps international oversight is required if there is to be un-democratic and insensitive or racially prejudiced progression that has no modelled basis to prevent community displacement, social and economic disaster.

These are some of the reasons people on this island marched, -  out of concern for their island home, their families and the productive future.

This discussion is a big one and I am sure there is a lot more to talk about, is there one last thing you want to say?

I look forward to the petition being handed over to the Senate and the House of Reps by our speaker and our Chief Minister and hearing their feedback.

I know I’ve covered a whole range of topics, I would point out that in the economic strategic documentation, there is a further one I could have mentioned and that’s the Acil Tasman Economic Development Report which had many recommendations that don’t seem to have been followed by the Commonwealth either, even though it was their report, commissioned by them.

I’ll just reiterate, this is really just about seeking an honest and informed way forward for the community and for Australia. Obviously there is a collaboration here.

Yes, because the people of Australia want to know what’s happening as well.

There is a need for change, we just have to do it right.