Malay Association of Christmas Island Submission to the 2018 Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia

Inquiry into Opportunities and Methods for Stimulating the Tourism Industry in Northern Australia
                                         Submission 86

 Malay Association of Christmas Island
 Submission to the 2018 Joint Standing
   Committee on Northern Australia

Opportunities and Methods for Stimulating
the Tourism Industry in Northern Australia

Inquiry into Opportunities and Methods for Stimulating the Tourism Industry in Northern Australia
                                           Submission 86
Malay Association of Christmas Island
The Malay Association of Christmas Island is an incorporated association whose objects are to
maintain and promote Malay culture and heritage on Christmas Island as well to advocate on issues
relating to the opportunity and prosperity for Malay residents and the island in general.

The Malay people of Christmas Island have contributed to the industrial life of the island historically
filling in roles on the wharf and mine, with younger generations working in local government and
administration. We make up about 25-30% of the population according to ABS census data and form
a significant portion of the school intake every year, reflective of the retention rate of our young
people to start careers and marital life on island. There have historically been several Malay Shire
Councillors in every local council, with three currently serving.

One is a National Parks Ranger, another a School Administrator and the third an MBA returnee who
is employed in the community services sector.

In terms of Tourism Development, MACI seeks a future with opportunities for all people on
Christmas Island with a special need to preserve the culture and heritage of long term island
communities. We believe that the people should determine the fate of the territories’ prosperity
and that the territory should not determine the fate of the people’s prosperity.

Mohammed Hafiz Masli

Malay Association Executive Committee

10/2/2018

Inquiry into Opportunities and Methods for Stimulating the Tourism Industry in Northern Australia
                                           Submission 86

Term of Reference 1:

“The Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia will inquire into and report on opportunities
and methods for, and impediments and challenges to stimulating the tourism industry in Northern
Australia including but not limited to: Domestic and international tourism comprising: recreational,
environmental, cultural, educational, and industrial tourism.”

Casino License

MACI recognises the economic opportunity that a profitable Casino will bring to Christmas Island
based on its success in the 1990s. Young people could find work, people could change careers and
there was also work for home makers who wished it. The Casino had many social benefits too in the
provision of a 24 hour bus service on island and subsidised flights to Perth and the north.

MACI recognises the negative externalities possible with a casino in the community and submits that
the official reason the Government provided in 2005 for the closure as paternalistic and repressive.

“In the interests of the CI community, the Australian Government has decided to make legislative
changes to prohibit casino operations on Christmas Island.

‘Gambling has become a major social concern in today’s society and the challenge for the Australian
Government is to find a response which considers not only the financial aspects of a casino in the
Territory, but takes into consideration the social impacts as a consequence of gambling.’ Senator
Campbell said.

‘To that extent, the Government is concerned about the impact a casino would pose to the social
fabric of the Christmas Island community and the dislocation to families that problem gaming can
cause. I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate my strong belief that tourism has the
potential to represent significant economic activity on Christmas Island and I foresee the reopening
of the CI resort as a substantial contribution to the CI economy, he said.”

-Media Release, Senator Ian Campbell 16 July 2004

If the sole reason the Government prevented the license reissue were ‘social concerns,’ why has it
allowed casinos to continue operating on the mainland where they would affect many more people
than the 1300 odd on Christmas Island? Where are the lists of ‘social concerns’ that occurred in the
1990s in the initial opening that assumedly makes the grounds for the 2005 rejection? Where was
the documentation from local social workers showing assumedly dozens upon dozens of gambling
addiction victims? None were presented, because none exist. The Malay Association calls on the
Commonwealth to provide statistical data from the CI social worker’s case load from the 1990s
around ‘damage to the social fabric’ that led them to this decision.

This unilateral decision to stop the CI Resort from getting a Casino license was a complete
turnaround from the conversations that the Department had with the community in the months
leading up to the decision reversal. People had begun to scale their businesses in preparation for an
influx of new arrivals, and when the new arrivals didn’t happen, it affected them greatly.

In regards to ‘social fabric,’ MACI notes that there was not a lot of concern for the social fabric of the
island when the Commonwealth over filled the detention centre in 2010-2011 leading to the riots
and escape of asylum seekers into the community. The negative externalities of over-filling a facility

Inquiry into Opportunities and Methods for Stimulating the Tourism Industry in Northern Australia
                                           Submission 86
meant for 800 with a population of 2,500 with an additional 1,000 at a workers construction camp at
Phosphate Hill were given only the barest addressing, with C’wealth upgrading the sewerage and
power infrastructure of the island to meet its own increased needs.

MACI supports a Casino proposal on Christmas Island and hopes that the recommendations the Joint
Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories made in 2006, 2012 and 2015
as well as by the Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia in 2014 on re-establishing of a
casino license on Christmas Island will be made again by this JSCNA in 2018.

If the 2018 JSCNA committee were to make this same recommendation, it would be the fifth time
this recommendation at a JSC level would have been delivered in 12 years. Essentially once every
two years.

To mitigate ‘social fabric’ concerns, MACI suggests that the Community Benefit Fund, that the Casino
made available in the 1990s, have an appropriate amount sequestered for funding gaming addiction
programs.

MACI suggests that a condition of a gaming license to be delivered to the island should have the
operator fund a gaming addiction program commiserate to a population catchment area for 3000
persons, more than double the 1200 odd population numbers for today and have all literature and
programming in the community languages of Mandarin and Malay as well as English.

Term of Reference 2:

“The role of peak bodies, local communities, and all levels of government in developing and
promoting tourism opportunities nationally and internationally, including regulations and workforce
issues that may inhibit tourism development”

Crown Land Release

MACI submits that the Commonwealth is the main land holder in the IOTs. Land needs to be
released encumbrance free, with red tape gone for development to happen. MACI wishes to see a
diversified economy supporting viable business initiatives from the private sector, rather than the
recent over-reliance on immigration due to stop mid 2018 leaving 70 locals out of work.

The Mine has a lease until 2034 on mining land, but seemingly a lifespan shorter than that awaiting
environmental approvals for exploratory projects. It has recently released 53 locals, about a third of
their workforce, out of work.

The 2017 Crown Land Management Plan the Commonwealth has in place is the key to new
development on island. The Malay Association wishes to see this plan progress in a way that allows
developers to acquire land offered in a timely and encumbrance free manner, noting the
uncertainties the Dept of Environment might have upon development applications as per the
comments made by Clive Brown of Christmas Island Phosphates at the 29/1/18 Christmas Island
hearing.

Christmas Island Malays are the largest intake at the local school, reflective of the permanency of
our population and the decision that many of our young people choose to make in starting a family.
It is of great concern to the Malay Association of Christmas Island that the economic needs of the
next generation of all Christmas Islanders is prepared for during this time; the current generation

Inquiry into Opportunities and Methods for Stimulating the Tourism Industry in Northern Australia
                                           Submission 86
will probably be the last generation to work the phosphate on island, ending 130 odd years of
production.

MACI firmly believes that prosperity for the next generation of Christmas Islanders relies on the
release of land encumbrance free for capital to invest. MACI supports larger tourism initiative
aspirations for accommodation providers which would naturally require more staff over boutique
accommodation projects. MACI supports the boutique initiatives currently and sees them as
supplementing a future larger style resort development.

Cabotage Permissions for the Indian Ocean Territories

MACI supports the idea of allowing international carriers to travel onwards to the next IOT island
after landing on the first one.

A flight triangle between an Asian capital such as Singapore to Cocos, then Christmas then return to
Singapore would open opportunities for tourism jointly on both islands.

MACI understands the reasons why cabotage restriction applies on the mainland to protect domestic
carriers, but does not see why that should affect these two islands so far off the coast of Australia
that most Australians could not point them out on a map.

MACI notes that the only carrier serving CI-CKI is Virgin Airlines who are subsidised by the
Commonwealth to do so. They fly out of Perth and would not really be competing for the same
passengers who are looking to fly to the IOTs out of Singapore or another Asian capital?