PARLIAMENTARY RIGHTS
PARLIAMENTARY RIGHTS
NORFOLK ISLAND’S REMONSTRANCE Norfolk Island’s Legislative Assembly and the right to self-government.
Hon. David E. Buffett AM MLA is the Speaker
of the outgoing Legislative Assembly of Norfolk Island. He was first elected to the Legislative Assembly in 1979 and has been a Member of each Assembly except the Twelfth.
Hon. Lisle D. Snell MLA is currently the
Chief Minister and Minister forTourism in the outgoing Legislative Assembly of Norfolk Island. Mr Snell was also a Member of the First Legislative Assembly of Norfolk Island.
Norfolk Island is an external territory under the authority of the Commonwealth of Australia. At the time of writing, it is substantially self-governing, and has been for the last 36 years. However the Australian Parliament has recently passed legislation which will abolish Norfolk Island’s Legislative Assembly. That legislation will probably come into operation in mid-June 2015. When it does commence, one of the smallest member branches of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association – with 9 elected representatives – will cease to exist. Why has this happened? The explanation is given in a document entitled ‘Remonstrance’, which was approved by the Norfolk Island Legislative Assembly on 20 May 2015 and subsequently presented by the Assembly’s Speaker to the Deputy President of the Australian Senate and the Speaker of the Australian House of Representatives. The document’s title echoes not only the title of the Grand Remonstrance of 1641, presented by the English Parliament to King Charles I in that year, but also one of the substantive issues raised by the Grand Remonstrance, namely ministerial accountability to Parliament. The short background to the Australian Parliament’s recent measure is as follows. Norfolk Island was given a significant degree of autonomy in 1979.
102 | The Parliamentarian | 2015: Issue Two
The Legislative Assembly created in that year had plenary legislative power, subject only to a restricted list of matters on which it could not legislate, or could do so only with Australia’s consent. Therefore, the Assembly could legislate on many matters which in metropolitan Australia would have been matters for the Federal Parliament including immigration, social security, customs, quarantine, postal services and telecommunications. The Assembly could also legislate on matters typically under the authority of a State in the Australian federal system, for example education, surface transport, firearms, registration of births, deaths and marriages, and public health. At a third level, the local government level, the Island’s democratic institutions had authority over a wide range of local matters, such as roads, water and electricity supply, sewerage, garbage, building control, and museums. This vertically-integrated system is made for simplicity in decision-making and clarity in accountability. The executive government of the Island was appointed from the membership of the Legislative Assembly and was accountable to them. The members of the Assembly, in turn, were elected by the Island’s voters. For many years the system worked well. The Norfolk Island community funded,
under its own system of laws, numerous infrastructure initiatives including taking over the operations and management of the airport, a new airport terminal, extension of the electricity reticulation network, a sewerage scheme and enhanced education opportunities to the end of secondary education. In addition, the Legislative Assembly has passed many innovative laws including a statutory social security system, no fault workers compensation, a health care scheme, land planning and land titles legislation. The Island’s principal industry, tourism, suffered a significant downturn in recent years, which has impacted on the Island’s
“This verticallyintegrated system is made for simplicity in decision-making and clarity in accountability. The executive government of the Island was appointed from the membership of the Legislative Assembly and was accountable to them.”
xxxxxx
economy. It became necessary to seek – to a relatively modest extent – financial assistance from the Australian government. This was forthcoming, but on conditions which included the Island government abandoning its opposition to a Federal measure to drastically reduce the powers of the Legislative Assembly (the Territories Law Reform Bill 2010) and agreeing, in exchange for financial assistance, to the Island’s inclusion in Australian taxation and social security systems. Those changes were accepted by the Norfolk
Island Government and by the Legislative Assembly. They were formally embodied in inter-governmental agreements. Those agreements did not contemplate the abolition of the Assembly or Norfolk Island’s other democratic institutions. The expressed preference of the Norfolk Island Government was for Federal-type functions to be assumed by the Australian authorities, leaving State-type and local government functions to be undertaken by the elected representatives of the Island’s community. Instead, the notion that
Above: The Legislative Assembly of Norfolk Island (Chamber and Offices are shown in the foreground). Image courtesy of Harvie Allison. the Norfolk Island Legislative Assembly should be abolished arose quite recently, in a report by an Australian Parliamentary Committee published in October 2014. That Committee’s perspective was that “a new legislative framework” was required and that State-level services ought to be provided by a state government, “most probably New South Wales”, on a contracted fee for service basis. Local government services would be provided by a proposed
Norfolk Island regional council. This model explicitly mirrored the governance model of Australia’s Indian Ocean Territories – Christmas Island, and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands – which was referred to in the Committee’s Report in the following terms: “This model has delivered appropriate State-level government services to the Indian Ocean Territories at an affordable cost to residents.” Contrary to that though, the
The Parliamentarian | 2015: Issue Two | 103