The first of seven aspirational goals contained in the Norfolk Island Roadmap is (appropriately) 'governance reform' and, in particular the objective to arrive at 'the preferred model of self-government'.
It is not difficult to accept that the island's government is in need of reform. Apart from the changes bought about recently through the passing of the Territories Law Reform Bill 2010, the Norfolk Island Government (NIG) has run for more than 30 years on what is virtually the original model of self government established under the Norfolk Island Act of 1979.
Over these 30 years the world outside Norfolk has undergone many changes. A lot of these changes have affected Norfolk Island's position in the tourism marketplace, which is the lynchpin of the island's economy. As such, tourism has been contributing less and less to the local coffers but still, Norfolk's anachronistic experiment continues.
It is understandable that any government trying to manage an economy based on such a fickle industry would be tested.The NIG gains most of its revenue from taxes on goods and services consumed. As consumption falls due to tourism's decline, personal incomes decline and when people leave the island to find work elsewhere, the decline continues. For the most part, while this decline in income is occurring, the fixed costs of government and administration remain static. Without revenue raising measures that are not consumption-based, a downward financial spiral is inevitable. If consumption tax in one form or another is the only game in town, then Norfolk needs to seriously reduce its fixed costs, develop its own wealth fund to smooth out the bumps, or convince this community to accept a lower standard of living. The NIG has almost no source of revenue that is not dependent in some way or other on the tourist industry, so there can be no financial stability and no realistic goal setting without some changes. Furthermore, our government is substantially more complex and process heavy than it should be. Why is this so?
The answer to this question may have its roots in earlier perceptions as to the sovereign rights of Australia in relation to Norfolk Island and also what Norfolk Island aspired to be, some sort of micro nation.
With that issue finally put to rest in the High Court it is appropriate that Norfolk's form of government, and the range of responsibilities it has are revisited, and that the Commonwealth re-assert itself in respect of matters that are clearly national responsibilities.
Where a government fits within the Commonwealth, in the main, defines what that Government is expected to do and how it is expected to fund its operations. Now that it has been agreed that Norfolk Island will be part of the Australian Taxation system, the Commonwealth will most likely take responsibility for some activities that have, since self-government, been devolved to Norfolk Island.
Democratic process determines who sits in the Assembly. It is vital that we be as careful as possible in our choices of these people. However, the fact is that we only draw from a small pool and to expect that a sophisticated form of government can be run from the results of a popularity contest is a big ask. What we are now in a position to do is change the scope of government, the way it functions and the size and capacity of our public service.
That should be our focus: to change our system of government and the scope of our administrative activities, to get a good fit within the Commonwealth system and end up with a government more appropriate to the needs of our small population.
