Warren Snowdon (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for External Territories) Share this | Hansard source

I should not refer to the attendant who is here, but she is a person I have known all my life and she can appreciate that the ageing process is not kind to all of us. It has certainly been kind to her if not kind to me. She knows that I just get uglier by the day. It is something we cannot help.

In any event, as I know from that long experience with the Indian Ocean Territories, people are exercised, as they rightly should be, by the need to have representation and to have people articulating their concerns and voicing their interests in this place. Hitherto, that has not been possible. There have been people who have been able to vote in any electorate, effectively, of the Commonwealth. Many chose to vote in the seat of Canberra, but others chose to vote in the seats of Brisbane and elsewhere. So this is very important. Whatever else happens—and that includes the incorporation using New South Wales law on the island—the Commonwealth minister is ultimately responsible. It does not matter what state laws apply, even though Norfolk Islanders are not represented in state parliament, the fact is that any one of those state laws can be overridden by the federal minister. So when we talk about this it is very important that people understand that there will be a particular onus on the member for Canberra, who will have the responsibility of representing their interests broadly, including in relation to state-type powers that might exist and relate to agreements between the Commonwealth and the New South Wales government in the application of laws from time to time. That will be her responsibility, as it is mine for the Indian Ocean Territories.

We need to understand, more broadly, that when we discuss these issues they are of intense interest to the people of Norfolk Island as they are, and have been, to the people of the Indian Ocean Territories. We should be in no doubt that there has been, in the case of Norfolk Island, some division over support for these issues. But I am very confident, as I am sure the member for Canberra is, that the overwhelming majority of people on Norfolk Island understand the importance of this legislation and the measures that have been taken by the Australian government with the support of the opposition. We have been happy to work in a bipartisan manner with the federal government, and we look forward to continuing to do so with matters to do with Norfolk Island and, indeed, the Indian Ocean Territories. That does not mean we always have to agree, but it does mean that we can try and work cooperatively on important issues such as this.

The bill repeals a provision in the Norfolk Island Legislation Amendment Act 2015 which inadvertently restricted access to social security payments for New Zealand citizens living on Norfolk Island. The amendment in the bill will make sure New Zealanders on Norfolk Island receive the same level of access to social security payments as New Zealanders living on the mainland. The bill will extend child support arrangements to the Christmas Island and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands, correcting another anomaly. This will align those territories with the arrangements that apply on the mainland and will commence on Norfolk Island on 1 July 2016. These are very good examples of where the citizens of Norfolk Island ought to be able to expect the same level of concern and support as the rest of the Australian community. I am pleased to be able to say now that the people of the Indian Ocean Territories can look forward to the extension of these child support arrangements.

The bill will make minor changes to the definition of Norfolk Island Regional Council to remove the requirement that the council be a body corporate. The regional council can be properly constituted under the New South Wales local government framework, as has been agreed between the Commonwealth and the New South Wales government.

The purpose of the Passenger Movement Charge Amendment (Norfolk Island) Bill 2016 is to amend the Passenger Movement Charge Act 1978 so that most departures from Norfolk Island to another country will attract the passenger movement charge, which is what you would expect. The bill recognises the special air transport arrangements in place on Norfolk Island, whereby travel to the mainland may require transit through an international country from time to time. The bill provides that a person is exempt from liability for passenger movement charges if they depart Norfolk Island for another country, or for an installation in the Joint Petroleum Development Area, with the intention of returning to another place in Australia within seven days.

Air travel can be problematic for offshore territories, and I will expand on that in a moment. It is an issue of timing and regularity of services as well as of costs. From time to time, there are issues with severe weather conditions and sudden changes in schedules or cancellations. Islanders often have to travel for medical, educational, business and other reasons that mainlanders—as those of us who live here on the mainland will be referred to—absolutely take for granted, having daily access in our communities. This is particularly important when you contemplate the need for people to travel for health reasons, which is regular and needs to be properly understood. Seven days to travel from an island to the mainland to avoid a charge if travelling through another country may appear quite adequate, but I would counsel people to think carefully about this. It may well be that we have to revisit this issue over time because seven days may not be adequate. It is something I have experienced when flights have been cancelled; if flights are irregular at best, the cancellation of one flight does not mean you get on the next flight—that flight may be full. Unless additional flights are put on, it may well be that the seven-day period will expire prior to that person landing back in Australia.

Let me just re-emphasise that Labor supports these reforms. In short, the Australian citizens on Norfolk Island deserve equal access to that of other Australians to services, whether on the mainland or the other external territories. Federal Labor remains committed to working in partnership with the people of Norfolk Island to ensure this occurs and to harness the opportunities before them.

I am sure the member for Canberra will give expression to the view that we have utmost confidence in the future of Norfolk Island, that we believe there is the potential for healthy economic development, but that requires a lot of Commonwealth expenditure. Infrastructure expenditure on the island requires that there be some give and take in the taxation arrangements. Hitherto, the islanders have not been charged Australian taxation. This will change so that, like every other Australian, they will be able to expect the Commonwealth government not only to properly represent their interests in this place but, most importantly, to understand their peculiar and particular needs—and infrastructure on Norfolk Island is a particular need. If we upgrade that infrastructure appropriately, it is very clear there is a sound basis for further economic development.

We should also reflect upon the importance of the human capital on Norfolk Island. There is absolutely no doubt about the interest or capacity of the people of Norfolk Island to achieve great things for themselves and their community and, indeed, the broader Australian community. But it is important that every Australian and every person living on Norfolk Island knows that universal health care will be provided to them. It should not be the amount of money you have in your wallet or on your credit card that says that you can have good hospital treatment or good medical treatment. They, like every other Australian, should have full access to universal health care. A similar situation should apply with respect to education. Many young people on Norfolk Island have a great desire to better themselves, and their families want that for their children, and we want to encourage that.

I conclude by saying that Norfolk Island is an interesting place. When I was there in the mid-1990s, I had dinner with a man by the name of Mr Hickey. I used to play rugby against him when he lived here in Canberra, where he owned a surveying business. Mr Hickey, who has since died, was originally from Norfolk Island. On this occasion, he had gone back to Norfolk Island and we were having dinner at a restaurant. The waiter asked, 'What would you like?' and I said, 'The steak looks fantastic. I love steak and eggs,' which I do, occasionally. The waiter said, 'We can help you with the steak, but we don't have any eggs.' Mr Hickey said, 'I can fix the eggs.' With that, he got off his chair, walked out of the restaurant and across the road to his house. He went to the chook shed and got two eggs and brought them back so that we could have steak and eggs. It is a wonderful, hospitable place. My experience of meeting people on Norfolk Island has always been one of joy in many respects—not excluding the fact that sometimes we have disagreed on particular things. But we know that they are intensely proud of who they are and where they come from, and we want to support them in whatever we do in this place.

See this speech in context