Paul Neville (Hinkler, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

Let us not get down into that sort of stuff. I always like to take an optimistic view of people. When Norfolk Island’s airport needs resealing periodically, companies are brought in from New Zealand and Australia to do that. When that happens I think the Commonwealth should take the opportunity, while they have the hot mix and all the various screenings and things that you need to do roadworks and runway works, to upgrade a number of streets on the island. In fact, an offer was made some years ago by one of the companies that, for another $1 million, they would do work on most of the streets. Because, let us face it, it is a very difficult thing to do bitumen work on a little island, with a population of only 2,000 people, or 3,000 if you want to count the tourists at a peak period.

I wanted to put those things on the record at the beginning, because I, as a member of this committee and as an Australian, tend to think that we should consider Norfolk Island as our third territory. We talk about six states and two territories, but I would prefer that we talked about six states and three territories. We acknowledge Norfolk Island as one of our territories. We respect its independence as a territory to do certain functions of government and we do not interfere any more than we need to.

But, having said that, I share a lot of the recommendations of this report. One recommendation is that, once the Norfolk Island parliament meets, it should elect a Speaker and a Deputy Speaker, which has to take place for the good running of the government, and the next thing it should do is appoint a Chief Minister. I agree with that because, as it does not have a well-developed party system, nor would it be appropriate to have a well-developed party system where you have only 2,000 or 3,000 people involved, it has to meet to decide who will be the leader. It will not necessarily be the leader of the biggest political party on the island. It establishes that the nine elected members recognise someone as a leader.

That person then appoints his ministers, as would the premiers and the chief ministers of the other states and territories, whereas, under the old system, they were all elected. The Commonwealth recognises the right of Norfolk Island to carry out the same procedures as the other states and territories, and I think that is a good thing. I see that my colleague opposite agrees with me on that. Although it is not specifically laid down in this report, I also think it is fair enough that we should have a more clearly defined method for elections. The island uses the Illinois system, which has its good points and bad points. But I think it should be more in keeping with what exists on the mainland as part of the general Australian experience. As such, it should be tailored to that island to give a good result and reflect what the people of the island feel about the nine people they want to elect.

There will be a provision—it is recommended in this report—for a financial officer if that is required. Sometimes in a small territory like this you lack a skill in your government. It is fair enough that Norfolk Island should be able to ask for—or the Commonwealth should insist; whichever is the case—a financial officer should it be required.

The appointment of the Commonwealth Auditor-General to be the Auditor-General for Norfolk Island is also a good measure. No-one should object to that. There are amendments to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act so that the AAT merits review jurisdiction should apply on the island. Freedom of information should be available. Far from these things denigrating the authority of the island, I think they enhance it. I think they say, ‘Hey, you’re up there now.’

It is good to see the Minister for Home Affairs in here, because he has done quite well with this report. It has raised the tenor of the thing and given the islanders a greater deal of recognition. I think the move with the Commonwealth Ombudsman is also a good one.

There is one other provision I would like to talk about. I hope the minister will insist on this with his department. One of the things that has dogged the relationship between Norfolk Island and the Commonwealth, that has dogged progress on the island, has been the slow response from the Australian bureaucracy even to matters that are purely administrative in nature. To have to wait six months for bills to be approved by the Commonwealth is a bit weak. To some extent it takes from Norfolk Island a measure of the true meaning of self-government.

Keeping the ministry to four and the backbench to four, with a speaker, also reflects a separation of powers that has long been required. (Time expired)

See this speech in context