Carol Brown (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Families and Payments) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move:

That the Senate take note of the report.

On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories, I present the committee's final report on Economic Development and Governance in the Indian Ocean Territories—which encompasses the Christmas Island and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands.

As external territories Christmas and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands are administered by the Commonwealth, with the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development and the minister for the territories having overall responsibility.

Arrangements with the Western Australian government provide state-type services.

Today I wish to briefly highlight the work of the joint standing committee in undertaking this inquiry.

In March 2015, the Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development referred the issue of the economic development and governance in the Indian Ocean Territories to the committee for inquiry and report.

The terms of reference directed the joint standing committee to look into the interaction between formal institutions and the Indian Ocean communities, reviewing:

•   the role of the administrator and the capacity (and appropriateness) of the administrator taking on a stronger decision-making role;

•   existing consultation mechanisms undertaken by government representatives, including the IOT Regional Development Organisation, and best practice for similar small remote communities' engagement with Australian and state governments;

•   local government's role in supporting and representing communities in the Indian Ocean Territories; and

•   opportunities to strengthen and diversify the economy, whilst maintaining and celebrating the unique cultural identity of the Indian Ocean Territories.

As part of the inquiry, the joint standing committee visited Cocos (Keeling) and Christmas Islands in April 2015.

A visit I was sadly unable to attend myself.

However, those colleagues in this and the other place that were able to participate in the visit undertook a hearing, took community statements and made a range of inspections on the islands.

Throughout the course of the inquiry the joint standing committee received 53 submissions and held 14 hearings throughout 2015.

The joint standing committee heard from a diverse array of stakeholders, including Commonwealth officers, local governments, former and the current administrators, business owners, community groups and residents.

The committee heard evidence of great contrast between the islands. The Cocos (Keeling) Islands have long had a static and small economy.

By contrast, Christmas Island has experienced a 'boom and bust' cycle over the years.

In particular, the committee heard calls for call for alternative economic drivers for Christmas Island as a result of the recent decline in immigration detention activity on Christmas Island and ongoing concerns about the longer-term sustainability of the Christmas Island phosphate mine.

Previously, in June 2015, the joint standing committee tabled an interim report which focused on some aspects of economic development where the evidence on how to proceed was clear and consistent.

The committee's interim report did not include the consideration of the more complex issues in relation to the IOT's governance arrangements.

The committee agreed to concentrate on a few measures it believes have the potential to stimulate the IOT economy relatively quickly and could have a multiplier effect.

The committee's interim report contained three recommendations centring on:

•   establishing a policy, legislative and regulatory framework that facilitates the reopening of the Christmas Island casino, and conducting an appropriate process to assess proposals from private sector proponents;

•   allowing Christmas Island District High School to accept fee-paying international students again; and

•   a sea freight service that offers more regular and affordable shipping.

The interim report also highlighted the Mining to Plant Enterprises project which has been successfully trialling agriculture on exhausted mining lease land on Christmas Island.

The joint standing committee's final report into the inquiry, which has been tabled today, makes 19 recommendations.

The recommendations in the final report both builds recommendations of the earlier report on economic development as well as addressing longstanding service delivery and governance issues.

In particular, in considering further opportunities to stimulate economic activity in the IOTs the report looks at ways to increase tourism.

Tourism has long been considered a potential cornerstone of a diversified IOT economy.

The attractive landscapes, rare animal and bird life, and unique cultures of the Christmas and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands are considerable drawcards.

However, the committee heard that like other remote Australian destinations, the development of a vibrant tourism sector in the region faces significant challenges.

These challenges are compounded by the territories' unique governance arrangements and the presence of immigration detention operations on Christmas Island.

The committee concluded that overcoming these barriers will require close collaboration between Commonwealth and local governments, industry and the community to boost promotion and marketing of the region and revitalise the territories' reputation as a premier holiday destination.

Recommendations include establishing closer links with Tourism Western Australia to facilitate access to tourism support services, and measures to promote the Indian Ocean territories as a unique destination with capacity-building assistance for the local tourism associations from Tourism Australia.

Significantly the report also makes recommendations to improve land management.

The need to conduct a detailed geological survey on Christmas Island was identified as a priority.

A further priority which was identified is clarification of the operation of the land trust on the Cocos (Keeling) Islands.

The report also identified the need for a Crown land management framework which sets out the principles governing the release of Crown land, and processes that developers need to follow to lease and purchase Crown land.

The evidence to the inquiry made it clear that residents are dissatisfied with the management and delivery of services in the IOTs.

For example there were well-founded concerns that fire and emergency services on Christmas Island were in jeopardy when existing arrangements were due to expire and new arrangements had not been negotiated.

While I note that this issue has since been resolved it is unsatisfactory that the situation was even allowed to occur in the first place and must never be allowed to happen again.

Related to this are the committee's recommendations on the need for improved consultation with the community and increased transparency and accountability.

Over the course of the inquiry it became apparent that public servants within the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development have assumed some of the responsibilities that were previously assigned to the Administrator.

And as a result the role of the IOT Administrator has diminished over time.

Uncertainty about the role of the IOT Administrator has been compounded by the different approaches of successive administrators.

The result is that the IOT communities are increasingly uncertain about who is responsible for what.

For this reason, the committee has recommended that the role and responsibilities of the IOT Administrator be clarified, including outlining specified delegations.

The report, in its final chapter, examines possible options for reform.

While at a local level there may be scope to streamline and amalgamate some functions of the IOT shire governments, it is clear it is going to take more fundamental reform to achieve significant improvements in governance for the IOT.

This is not a new consideration; however it has been over two decades since the proposal for incorporation of the IOT into a state or territory was last mooted.

The committee came to the view that bringing governance arrangements into line with the rest of Australia would significantly improve investor confidence and enhance economic prospects.

Accordingly, the committee has recommended that the Australian government fully investigate the option of incorporating the IOT into a state or territory as a longer term solution for the IOT and its residents.

Initially this would involve making formal approaches to the relevant state and territory governments and critically, extensive consultation with residents of the IOT.

As we know from previous experience significant reform of this type would not be without its challenges.

However these reforms may be the best and most appropriate way to achieve a stronger foundation and new strategic direction for the IOT.

Finally, on behalf of the chair, myself and my committee colleagues, I wish to thank everyone who contributed to the inquiry, especially residents of the Indian Ocean territories for sharing their views and experiences.

I would also like to acknowledge the work of the committee secretariat for their work on the inquiry and the support they have provided the joint standing committee.

I commend this report to the Senate.

Question agreed to.