5.1
The communities that comprise Australia’s Indian Ocean Territories are unique, with many possessing either Malay or Chinese heritage. As part of the inquiry, Members of the Committee visited communities on Christmas Island and in the Cocos (Keeling) Islands to hear directly from residents about the strategic role of the islands and the impacts on local communities.
5.2
The Committee is immensely grateful to the communities on Christmas Island and in the Cocos Islands for their warm welcome, openness and hospitality during its the visit in April 2016. The visit provided the Committee with invaluable insights into the local communities, their way of life, and their perceptions on the inquiry’s terms of reference.
5.3
This chapter will consider the characteristics of these local communities, the economic and social drivers underpinning life on the islands, and how the Australian Government can better manage its defence and border protection activities in the region in a manner which has minimal impacts on local communities.
Importance of local culture
5.4
The communities of Australia’s Indian Ocean Territories are proudly multicultural whilst remaining staunchly Australian. The Committee’s visit allowed Members to speak with locals and see first-hand the lives of communities on Christmas Island and the Cocos Islands’ communities of Home Island and West Island.
5.5
Christmas Island has a unique multicultural blend, with an ethnic composition of the community comprising approximately 60 per cent Chinese, 25 per cent Malay, and 15 per cent European. Mr Gregory McIntosh from the Islamic Council of Christmas Island told the Committee that a lot of younger people on Christmas Island identify as Australian. However, there are diverse views within the community.
5.6
The Cocos Islands communities are also diverse, consisting of 80 per cent Cocos Malay living on Home Island, and 20 per cent mostly government workers, contractors and families living on West Island. The population of Home Island mainly comprises Cocos Malays who descend from people who came to the island in the 19th century from East Africa, China, Java, India and Sri Lanka. Meanwhile, the majority of the population of West Island are of European heritage. Despite their diverse backgrounds, the Committee heard that the residents of the Cocos Islands generally identify as Australian. Mr Mohammed Minkom from Home Island told the Committee that community members have their shared background and history, and also identify as Australians. This sentiment was echoed by Mr John Clunies-Ross, a resident from West Island who told the Committee that ‘we are islanders first, but we are Australians.’
5.7
Given the significant presence of the Australian Government’s civilian and Defence personnel in the Indian Ocean Territories, local communities encourage visitors to engage meaningfully with residents as part of their work. Ms Kelly Edwards, from Cocos (Keeling) Islands Tourism, told the Committee of the importance of visiting Australian Government personnel taking part in community events, such as fundraising for local initiatives, participating in beach clean ups and other community events. Similarly, Mr Clunies-Ross commented on the importance of Australian Defence Force personnel mixing with the community, noting that it makes island life for both the community and personnel a ‘workable process.’
5.8
The Committee heard from several members of the Cocos Islands community, including during its visit to the islands, that some elements of Australian Government agencies are more successful than others in engaging meaningfully with the local communities. For example, it was noted that Royal Australian Air Force personnel are particularly successful in this regard, and that this helps to build a sense of mutual trust and respect with the local communities.
5.9
The Committee heard that Indian Ocean Territories have the capacity to bring people into the community and teach them the island way of life. Mr Clunies-Ross concluded his comments to the Committee by noting that ‘[a]nyone who comes here [to the Cocos Islands] will be inoculated by the island factor, and they leave here better people. So that is what we can offer to the people who come here.’
Economic drivers in the community
5.10
The Committee has previously reported on the territories’ economies in its 2016 report on economic development in the Indian Ocean Territories. Some of these themes were raised again in the context of the present inquiry. This section considers some of the economic drivers in the context of the strategic role of the islands.
5.11
Much of the economic health of the Indian Ocean Territories’ economies is linked to Australia’s defence and border protection activities. Mr Clive Brown, Chairman of Phosphate Resources Limited, told the Committee that, if Australia truly values the islands as strategically important, it needs to undertake ‘overt action to entrench its national authority’, and this is best done by promoting, facilitating and encouraging a vibrant local community and economy. In order for the Indian Ocean Territories to remain strategically secure, Mr Stephen Clay, appearing in a private capacity, submitted to the Committee that it is important for the islands to have long-term economic futures.
5.12
The Committee received evidence that one of the main drivers of Christmas Island’s private sector economy is phosphate mining. The largest private sector employer is Phosphate Resources, which employs approximately 200 people in mining and subsidiary businesses. The Committee heard that the poor condition of the local port’s infrastructure is a major impediment to the operation of the mine. There is concern among local residents about the mine’s uncertain future, partly due to the port’s infrastructure. During the Committee’s visit, concerns about the longer-term economic security of the island were expressed by local residents and the business community.
5.13
The Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development submitted that the Cocos Island’s primary economic driver is government activity, and the Cocos Co-operative Society is the main private employer in those islands.
5.14
Economic growth is welcomed by the local communities in the Indian Ocean Territories but the Committee heard that social impacts of this growth need to be carefully managed. Mr Michael Asims from the Christmas Island Casino Resort agreed with Mr Clay’s submission to the inquiry, which suggested that the community was not prepared for the local impact of the detention centre during its construction and years of significant activity. Likewise, Mr McIntosh expressed concerns about the extent to which previous large influxes of personnel from the government and private sectors had had a ‘negative impact … [due to] … alcohol, drugs and violence.’ Mr Asims emphasised the need for economic benefits to flow to all communities on the islands and for government to consult with locals to avoid unnecessary social impacts.
5.15
Ms Lisa Preston, from Christmas Island Tourism Association, submitted to the Committee that tourism is an important part of the local economy and there is potential for substantial growth and greater economic contribution from tourism. Accommodation and transport were identified as requirements for the success of the tourism industry. Mr Asims stated that the frequency and costs of flights severely affect tourism, and that the success of the industry is ‘underpinned’ by charter flights.
5.16
The Committee was informed that Australia’s Defence presence on Christmas Island positively contributes to the island’s economy. Ms Preston commented that Defence activities such as flights, refuelling and resupplying of vessels, and local spending by personnel increase economic activity on Christmas Island. Similarly, Mr Barry Haase, the Administrator of the Indian Ocean Territories, told the Committee there are two horticultural entities on Christmas Island that are providing fresh vegetables for Defence personnel.
5.17
Commenting on the character of the community and the nature of work, Mr Clunies-Ross said that the Cocos Islands residents are multi-skilled, flexible and capable, and he expressed his disappointment that the residents are seldom approached to undertake projects on the island.
5.18
The employment profiles and opportunities differ in both communities. Mr Daniel Becker told the Committee that the Cocos Islands have a lot of underemployment, since employment is dependent on intermittent activities—for example, there is a surge in employment when ships dock on the island to unload cargo. By contrast, a lot of jobseekers on Christmas Island are older and on the fringe of retirement age, so the number of unemployed young people is very low. However, Ms Gee Foo from the Chinese Literary Association stated that most young people from Christmas Island leave for mainland Australia due to lack of employment opportunities.
Managing impacts on the local communities
5.19
Given the Australian Government’s broad defence and border protection activities in the Indian Ocean region, the Committee heard about the impacts that this has had on the local communities or may have in the future. Concerns were raised about a number of issues including the impact of defence and border protection activities, the development of infrastructure, and the importance of local communities being consulted about such matters.
Defence and border protection activities
5.20
There is broad support from the Indian Ocean Territories’ communities for the Australian Defence Force and Australian Border Force to use the islands, provided their presence also benefits local communities. The Cocos Islands Cooperative Society submitted to the Committee that local residents have positive relationships with the personnel stationed on the Cocos Islands. Mr Barry Haase commented that the Royal Australian Air Force, the Australian Border Force and the Navy contribute to Christmas Island’s economy by creating jobs and supporting businesses through the supply chain.
5.21
The Cocos Islands Cooperative Society advised that there was a concern among some Cocos Malay that an increased Defence presence may lead to a depopulation of the Cocos Islands. Similarly, Mr McIntosh told the Committee that some residents of Christmas Island have a long family history on the island, and that sections of the community would not support the depopulation of the island.
5.22
The Committee heard evidence that perceptions of the Indian Ocean Territories’ security are enhanced by Defence personnel. Mr Barry Haase told the Committee that the Indian Ocean Territories ‘greatly benefit from the presence of the ADF [Australian Defence Force] and the ABF [Australian Border Force] on our islands and in our surrounding waters.’ Mr Balmut Pirus told the Committee that the Cocos Islands welcome Australian Defence Force personnel as ‘they are the guys looking after the islands security-wise.’
5.23
However, the Committee heard that some cultural sensitivities still existed for residents of the islands regarding the deployment of military personnel. Mrs Seriwait Iku from the Cocos Islands Cooperative told the Committee, for example, that the community would still be ‘cautious’ of an Australian military presence on the Cocos Islands. Similarly, Ms Jeanette Young from the Cocos Islands told the Committee at times she felt there was ‘wariness’ from some Australian Defence personnel when interacting with her due to the fact she wore a headscarf. Mr McIntosh from the Islamic Council of Christmas Island supported the suggestion of a reservist presence on Christmas Island, as discussed previously in this report, but also noted his concern in regards to the potential cultural impacts associated with large increases in Defence personal on the island.
5.24
The Committee heard residents’ concerns about possible negative economic impacts due to increased Defence activity. Ms Avril Whyte, the manager of the tourist resort Oceania House on the Cocos Islands, noted regular shortages of food and other supplies on the island, and suggested that an increase in Defence personnel could lead to a further drain on resources. Ms Whyte also stated that an increased Defence presence could lead to the Cocos Islands being viewed as a military base by mainland Australians, which may negatively impact tourism. Similarly, Ms Young, a health professional on the Cocos Islands, told the Committee that the healthcare services were currently stretched by the current needs of Defence personnel alongside the healthcare needs of residents.
5.25
The community also expressed concerns about the presence of foreign military personnel on the islands as part of any future joint military exercises. Mr Haase told the Committee that joint training exercises between Australian and foreign militaries are perceived to be ‘something of a bogeyman’ for many members of the Christmas Island community, with community members holding the view that the island would be overrun with military personnel and that their community values would be eroded.
Infrastructure development
5.26
Communities expressed the view that Defence capacities will almost always provide the most compelling justification for infrastructure investment in the territories. Mr Clay stated that the infrastructure on both territories is of strategic importance, in particular that refuelling facilities on Christmas Island along with the port infrastructure on both islands are important assets.
5.27
Ageing infrastructure is a contributor to the lack of economic activity in the Indian Ocean Territories. Mr Brown from Phosphate Resources Limited told the Committee that poor and unreliable infrastructure on Christmas Island adds to the costs and hardships facing local residents and businesses.
5.28
However, the Committee also heard that there are significant costs involved in constructing infrastructure in the Indian Ocean Territories. Mr Julian Yates submitted to the Committee that, since the territories are small and isolated from mainland Australia, it would be very expensive to construct Defence specific infrastructure on the islands. Mr Yates also stated that, due to the amount of land needed for this, there would be ‘significant adverse impacts on local communities for comparatively little gain in defence capability.’
5.29
However communities view that infrastructure should benefit their residents by having dual-use capabilities. Mr Geoffrey Bennett from West Island told the Committee that infrastructure for fuel supply to the Cocos Islands is vital for private business. Similarly, Mr Haase also noted that infrastructure is vital to boost tourism activities in the territories. Mr Balmut Pirus commented that if the airstrip on West Island could be further developed it could create opportunities for more airlines to set routes to the islands, leading to increased tourism and employment for locals.
5.30
From an economic viewpoint, Mr Bennett raised the issue of contractor buy-in to the community, noting that whilst economic growth through infrastructure projects on the island is good, it must be balanced with ensuring the community remains cohesive and retains its identity.
The Cocos (Keeling) Islands Golf Club
5.31
The Cocos Islands Golf Club is an important part of the social fabric of West Island in the Cocos Islands. As part of the upgrade to the Cocos Islands Airport runway, it was assumed by the local community that the upgrade could include a perimeter fence being placed around the runway. The local community raised concerns that this would have a significant impact on residents’ access to the golf course.
5.32
The seven hole golf course is unique, as six holes are located on the lagoon side of the airport runway, while a seventh is located on the other side of the runway. Any fence around the runway would restrict access to the seventh hole. Commenting on the golf course, Ms Kelly Anne Edwards, Coordinator of the Cocos (Keeling) Islands Community Resource Centre, told the Committee that the club had a large membership base and provided a social avenue for local communities. Ms Edwards told the Committee that visitors and members of the golf club had permission to cross the runway at a particular place in order to play each hole of the golf course. This crossing was strictly enforced by the club.
5.33
Mr Geoffrey Bennett, Manager of Island Petroleum Services, advised that he had been a member of the club for some 14 years. He advised the Committee that the golf club was important to the community and access should not be restricted as there were limited recreational opportunities available to the local community. He said that the golf course was one of the ‘best assets that we have on our island to get people up, active, walking around, getting out, getting a bit of stress relief, hitting a little white ball.’
Importance of consultation with local communities
5.34
Local communities noted the importance of consultation as part of the development of infrastructure and policy relating to the islands. Mr Thomson, from the Shire of Christmas Island and the Union of Christmas Island Workers, told the Committee that people feel the Australian Government will do whatever it wants with the territories without consultation, since it is the Government’s ‘real estate.’ There were many other examples of local residents expressing dissatisfaction with inadequate consultation on government decisions affecting local communities. In relation to the lack of future planning Mr McIntosh told the Committee there are ‘many examples from modern, recent history with regard to how the community is left to basically deal with the aftermath’ of policies for Christmas Island.
5.35
This desire for greater and more effective consultation was apparent to the Committee during its visit to the Indian Ocean Territories. It was clear that local communities on both Christmas Island and the Cocos Islands were interested in being active participants in decision-making around the Australian Government’s activities on the islands, and the potential impacts on the local communities.
Committee comment
5.36
The Committee is grateful for all members of Christmas and the Cocos Islands communities who appeared before the inquiry to submit evidence. The evidence was extremely beneficial in learning about strategic uses of the Indian Ocean Territories, understanding how the economic and general wellbeing of the residents of Christmas and the Cocos Islands can be improved. Hearing directly from the residents and service providers contributed to the richness of the Committee’s understanding of local impacts.
5.37
The Committee recognises the strategic importance of the Indian Ocean Territories, which have a long and important history in Australia’s security and defence. It is clear that, given the changing dynamics in the Indian Ocean region, Christmas and the Cocos Islands will continue to play a strategic role in years to come.
5.38
To continue relying on these islands for strategic purposes, the Australian Government must ensure suitable infrastructure and economic opportunities for local communities. The Committee notes that government activity is a key driver of both islands’ economies, and considers that ensuring and advancing the islands’ economies demonstrates the importance Australia places on its commitment to Christmas Island and the Cocos Islands. To that end, the Committee is of the view that the Government should further facilitate commercial opportunities on the islands, including those relating to phosphate mining activities and progressing developments relating to the Christmas Island casino.
5.39
The Committee also notes community concerns about the proposal to upgrade the Cocos Islands airport runway and considers it important that the Australian Government give certainty to the community about the detail and timing of the project.
5.40
Noting previous instances of fly in-fly out personnel associated with infrastructure projects accessing limited accommodation options at the expense of the tourism industry, the Committee strongly urges the Australian Government ensure that accommodation for construction personnel be carefully considered to minimise the impact on tourism. This might involve building new accommodation, or repurposing existing accommodation that is not currently being used. The Committee also considers that there would be benefit in infrastructure or service delivery on these islands being drawn from local providers where possible.
5.41
The Committee recommends that the Australian Government engage with local communities to ensure that any proposals for works, funding and planning in the Indian Ocean Territories result in direct benefits to the local communities and, where possible, draw on local suppliers of goods and services.
5.42
The Committee notes that there exists a range of opportunities for the Australian Government to further demonstrate its interest in and commitment to the Indian Ocean Territories. While this might include additional Defence infrastructure or presence as previously discussed in this report, what is clear to the Committee is that local communities must be consulted about potential impacts of any such changes. The Committee notes the importance of consultation with communities of the Indian Ocean Territories regarding proposed plans and polices on the territories. In particular, the Committee believes any proposals which may impede access to the Cocos Islands golf course should only be considered following consultation with the community and consideration of alternative measures. The Committee recognises that these communities also want regular communication with the Australian Government so that they are informed of deliberations and decisions that will affect them.
5.43
The Committee acknowledges community concerns regarding potential impacts that visiting foreign militaries may have on Indian Ocean Territory residents. The Committee anticipates that any exercises would be carried out in a way that ensures the islands are not significantly impacted. Nevertheless, the Committee is firmly of the view that local communities must be consulted about potential impacts of any such changes including joint training exercises with Australia’s Indo-Pacific partners.
5.44
The Committee views that as far as possible, infrastructure projects undertaken by the Australian Government should give consideration to the use of locally engaged staff. The Committee believes that this will provide a host of long term benefits such as transferrable skills and employment opportunities for locals as part of the private economy.
5.45
The Committee recommends any Australian Government departments wishing to do work in the Indian Ocean Territories should do so in genuine partnership with local communities. Departments should undertake extensive consultation processes and respond to the needs of the local community. Government departments should discuss their proposed consultation methods with key stakeholders on the islands to ensure those processes are effective and genuinely inclusive.
5.46
Finally, the Committee would like to thank the communities of Christmas Island, West Island, and Home Island for their warm welcome and considered input into the Committee’s inquiry. The Committee undertook roundtable hearings with community members from both Christmas and the Cocos Islands to understand community concerns and visited sites throughout both islands to see the vibrancy, strength and resilience of communities. The visit also allowed the Committee the opportunity to hear directly from residents about their needs, priorities and concerns about future developments. The Committee received positive feedback from community members appreciating the style of consultation, as a chance for them to speak openly and frankly about the strengths and areas of improvement for the Australian Government in its contribution to their islands. It is clear to the Committee that all residents are proud of their island homes and that, while local communities are aware of the strategic nature of the islands, there is a strong desire that the Australian Government work alongside them and develop opportunities that lie outside the realms of its defence and border protection responsibilities.
Mr Ben Morton MP
Chair
17 August 2017