Bob Debus (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Home Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—Perhaps we should turn the telescope around and look at a tiny dot in the Pacific. Mr Speaker, Australia’s territories are often forgotten when we think of our national system of government, but our territories are an integral part of the Federation.

As minister, I recognise the need for the Australian government to actively engage with communities in our inhabited territories to acknowledge their unique characteristics and recognise that residents have essentially the same rights and should receive the same protections as every other Australian. Our island territories are isolated and this brings obvious practical difficulties to the delivery of essential services but as far as practicable they should be comparable to those received by other Australians—remote mainland locations are a good benchmark.

Norfolk Island is an important part of the Australian Federation. Its history is fundamental to the Australian story and our development as a nation. On 6 March 1788, just six weeks after the arrival of the First Fleet at Botany Bay, Lieutenant Philip Gidley King landed on Norfolk Island to establish a penal settlement. Over the first decade, the island was the source of supplies that were essential to the survival of the settlement at Port Jackson. Norfolk Island’s first European settlers were also important to the development of Tasmania when many relocated there in the early 1800s. Many Australians today can still trace a personal family connection to Norfolk Island. The violent history of the hellish second Norfolk Island penal settlement was interrupted for several years by the appointment of the Scottish naval officer and geographer Alexander Maconochie as Commandant in 1840. The practical policies he put into place before his removal are regarded now as a foundation of modern penal practice. Many descendents of the Pitcairn Islanders who came to Norfolk Island in 1856 as the third wave of European settlement have made the island their home.

From time to time, there have been attempts to suggest that Norfolk Island has a legal or constitutional status different to that of other Australian territories, or that it is appropriate for the island to have separate international recognition. These suggestions are unfounded and the High Court of Australia has affirmed that Norfolk Island is an integral part of the federation like all other territories. Nevertheless there are a number of serious problems facing Norfolk which, if uncorrected, will become worse as the population ages. Thirty years ago the Commonwealth established a microstate government for a population of less than 2,000 Australians—complete with substantial taxing powers and finance and service delivery roles, some of which even the existing Australian states do not enjoy. The government takes the view that the model cannot be sustained in its present form.

While a minority of islanders may have their own personal wealth to fall back upon, the present self-government arrangements have caused a growing proportion of people to be significantly disadvantaged in comparison to other Australian citizens. Norfolk Island is falling well behind national standards in areas like health, child protection and welfare, and workplace safety. The government of this very small place is not in a position to resolve its problems independently. The island lacks an economic foundation strong enough to support basic programs and infrastructure. Australian citizens on Norfolk Island do not receive all the benefits and protections enjoyed by other Australians, nor do they have the same obligations.

This unique situation gives special privilege to some islanders and disadvantage to others depending upon their personal wealth and circumstance. The Australian government should not be in the business of allowing specific privilege or permitting disadvantage to flourish merely by virtue of location. Unlike other Australians, Norfolk Island residents do not pay income tax. The Norfolk Island government has for a long time said that such a tax would be a crippling burden on a fragile economy. On the other hand, the 2005 report by the Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories entitled Norfolk Island sustainability: sink or swim heard evidence from the Australian Treasury recommending that the Australian tax system should apply to Norfolk Island. Our Indian Ocean territories are similarly remote, yet the Australian taxation system applies there without detriment to the development and governance of those islands.

The joint standing committee—chaired by Senator Ross Lightfoot—said in its 2005 report:

… the financial situation on Norfolk Island is sufficiently dire to warrant the recommendation of the Island’s integration into the Commonwealth taxation and welfare system, in spite of the concerns expressed by some Island residents. The Committee is convinced that bringing Norfolk Island into the Commonwealth’s taxation regime will mean the residents of Norfolk Island will have access to better quality services than are currently available.

As a broad comparative example of the disadvantages experienced by Norfolk Islanders living outside our tax system, I am advised that the Norfolk Island minimum wage is $10.70 per hour compared to $14.31 on the mainland. The Norfolk Island aged pension cuts off once recipients earn more than $947 a fortnight. At that rate, Commonwealth pensioners are still receiving $227 a fortnight from the Australian government. Norfolk Island pensioners will not benefit from the Rudd government’s boost for Australia’s pensioners to be delivered on 8 December because Norfolk Island pensioners do not receive the Commonwealth pension; they receive the Norfolk Island pension.

Concerns about the arrangement for the governance of Norfolk have been raised repeatedly in a number of reports and studies undertaken by parliamentary committees. During hearings for a report handed down by the Senate Select Committee—chaired by Senator Ian Macdonald—on State Government Financial Management in September this year, the Hon. Grant Tambling, Administrator of Norfolk Island from 2003 to 2007, submitted that:

… Norfolk Island is in urgent need of governance reform …

And the 2005 report by the Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories expressed a view that:

… the Norfolk Island government was not delivering services and was at risk of becoming insolvent.

This year the senate select committee to which I have just referred noted that:

The expectation was that Norfolk Island would also be self sufficient and raise its own funds from within the Norfolk community to pay for its delivery of government services and programmes on-island, using ‘federal’ customs, postal, revenue and taxing powers devolved to it by the Australian Government. Norfolk Island was therefore excluded from federal fiscal and taxation arrangements and from the application of many federal laws and the programmes and services provided under such laws. This has resulted in expensive and sub-standard healthcare and other important services.

In 2005 the Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories report concluded:

… the strategies that have been used to date by the Norfolk Island Government have not, and will not, deliver long-term financial sustainability for Norfolk Island.

And at recommendation 1, it said:

The Committee recommends that a new taxation model be developed whereby Norfolk Island is gradually incorporated into the taxation regime of the Commonwealth of Australia.

A 2003 report by the same committee, also chaired by Senator Lightfoot, recommended:

That the Federal Government reassess its current policies with respect to Norfolk Island and the basis for the Territory’s exclusion from Commonwealth programmes and services, with a view to determining: a clearly understood and consistent rationale and framework for Commonwealth funding, advice and assistance that will be provided across government to the Norfolk Island community.

The Australian government are working in many countries of the Pacific to establish political stability and economic prosperity and we have an obligation in our own territories to uphold those same principles. The 2003 joint standing committee said:

Australia’s long term national interest will be best served by ensuring the same principles of good governance in place in other states and territories of the Commonwealth are adhered to on Norfolk Island. In its efforts to promote good governance in the Pacific region and assist many Pacific Island countries to rebuild and reform their institutions of government, Australia cannot afford to allow Norfolk Island—as an integral part of Australia in the Pacific—to languish behind. Australia also has a national interest and responsibility to ensure that citizens and residents of Australia are not disadvantaged by systemic weaknesses in the existing governance arrangements.

The Senate select committee report from September this year noted that the Howard government considered a range of reforms relating to Norfolk Island in 2006; however, the cabinet, somewhat mysteriously, failed at that time to pursue them. The Senate committee recommended the findings of the 2003 and 2005 reports should be reconsidered together with its own recommendations, and that is what the government is now doing. Australia cannot afford to allow Norfolk Island to become a failed state, which is the likely outcome in the longer term if no action is taken.

Next week I shall visit Norfolk Island, not for the first time but for the first official visit in my capacity as the Australian government minister responsible for territories. The joint standing committee that has made so many reports already will visit next month. It is appropriate that ahead of those visits I advise the House of the government’s concern for the future of Norfolk Island. I will meet again with the Chief Minister and members of the Norfolk Island executive. I will also be meeting less formally with Norfolk Islanders to discuss some of the issues I have raised today. In the coming months I will take a long-term strategic policy to the cabinet which will have the aim of securing the future of Norfolk Island as a sustainable, just and equal part of Australia into the 21st century.

I ask leave of the House to move a motion to enable the member for Farrer to speak for 10 minutes.

Leave granted.

I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent Ms Ley speaking for a period not exceeding 10 minutes.

Question agreed to.

See this speech in context