Norfolk Is. Objects To Canberra Control

Canberra Control

Norfolk Islanders in July made it quite clear to the Aus tralian Government what they think of remote control of the island’s affairs from Canberra.

AND they’ll have the chance to con firm it soon, because they are to be given a Referendum.

Their July decision was made at new elections for four seats on Nor folk’s eight man Council. Voters

elected three supporters of the Council’s present policies, plus one independent—which means that seven of the eight Councillors are members of what is locally termed “the bloc”.

The bloc thumbs its nose at official dom and demands that the island be allowed to run its own affairs, make its own laws and handle its own purse strings.

The leading opponent of the bloc’s policies, Mr. A. S. Bathie, was not re-elected to the Council.

The four who were are: Mr.

Maxwell Christian, Mr. Charles Evans, Mr. Wilfred Randall, and Mr. Ralph Weslake. Mr, Randall is independent.

The four members who did not have to stand for re-election are: Messrs. F. R. Needham, W. S. New bald, S. E. Nobbs and T. B. Bailey.

Mr. Needham was re-elected Council president.

Minister for Territories, Mr. Paul Hasluck, made a three-day visit to the island early in August. He told the Council that a Referendum should satisfy everyone, including the Gov ernment, that the Council’s views really were representative of popular opinion.

The questions to be put would have to be worked out carefully, but voters would be asked to name the kind of political representation they wanted.

The Referendum will undoubtedly

help crystallise some of the confused local thinking on just what is wanted, even if it does not settle the argu ments of the last 12 months.

A fortnight before, at the new Council’s first meeting, Mr. Needham made it clear that the Council did not intend to back down on its anti- Canberra stand.

The meeting had been addressed at length by the Administrator, Mr.

C. S. Leydin, who outlined progress of the previous year.

"Dissension"

In his reply Mr. Needham stated he had doubts that the meeting had been convened legally and went on to say that the 65 years which had elapsed since the Council of Elders was abolished in 1897 had produced only dissension and dissatisfaction.

He attacked the Minister for delay in answering some of the Council’s resolutions, and was critical of poli ticians generally. He said he was prepared to tell the Minister that he wanted to settle “the bugbear about responsibility once and for all”. He said the Council was

(Continued on p. 134)

prepared to take over all 1c revenue with the right to hire i fire if necessary.

Mr. Needham’s tone annoyed so people. The Administration’s wee news sheet Norfolk News on July published three letters critical of address. It was described varior as discourteous, humiliating, agg] sive and without constructive p posals, unpleasant and distasteful.

Wrote R. H. H. Nobbs: “I Needham’s attitude cannot possi gain the support and co-operatiom vitally important at this stage of development, but will serve only further widen the split in this cc munity.”

But there are many people v think otherwise. There can be doubt now that the Council and Needham have much public supfl for their attitude.

It will now be interesting to whether the matter scon gets i the Australian Parliament, beca Norfolk has had a number of Par mentary visitors over the last months. The latest, who were til

n July, were Mr. Clyde Cameron md Mr. A. James.

They promised they would return icxt year bringing other members vith them. They saw everything, vent most places and asked a lot ,f pertinent questions. Mr. Cameron specially is noted for that.

Norfolk’s Council troubles began ifter the Council started work in June ast year, taking over from the old Advisory Council in what was stated 0 be the first experiment with Local Jovernment. But the Council pro ested to Mr. Hasluck that it couldn’t vork under the new arrangements— hat it had to have power to make ts own laws (to be approved by the Commonwealth) and to have com pete control of the budget.

It said that until it got these and )ther things it would act in an ad visory nature. This attitude caused he split in the Council and outside t, and feelings were high and haven’t icttled down yet. 1 The Government’s reaction has >een that the Council should carry )n with the powers it does have and ;ee if it can manage, before taking jver other powers.