There is no reason why shipping containers should not be recycled for housing and an additional steel and galvanised 'tropical' roofing could be added in hot areas and to gather rain. Such houses are enormously strong and resistant to the elements (cyclone proof) and especially the termites that are everywhere in Australia.

Containers are in abundant supply and can easily be trucked to wherever they are needed.

Indigenous labour could easily be trained for modification and assembly. Here are some options:

http://www.shippingcontainerhousedesign.com/

http://www.fabprefab.com/fabfiles/containerbayhome.htm

Just out of curiosity, where else in the world do governments build houses on land which is owned by somebody else, where those governments have no control of tenure ?

With the current range of finaincial benefits accruing to Indigenous people in remote communities on their own land, plus royalties, plus generous tax concession in the North, forgive me for asking: why aren't Aboriginal people buying their own homes and/or having them built on Aboriginal land ?

I.e. why is it assumed that governments have any responsibility whatsoever for the building of homes for Aboriginal people on Aboriginal land ? A population of non-Indigenous people stuck out in the sticks somewhere would have Buckley's of getting any government to build houses for them, and to replace them every ten or fifteen years.

Just asking.

The idea of shipping containers - properly insulated and modified for comfort - has a lot going for it: surely shipping companies would be happy to flog them off to Aboriginal communities at a discount rather than have to cart them back to China ?

Pit-toilets in remote areas would also surely be more hygienic and cheaper for communities to build and maintain ?

Joe

Used shipping containers remain structurally strong, some are insulated (not always necessary depending on housing design) and they are as cheap as chips, just Google used shipping containers.

The availability of small to very large containers and the availability of tested designs delivering flexibility for number of occupants and use, overcome many of the serious problems that are holding up the supply of housing.

This has gone on for years with millions being wasted. Why wouldn't the public be wondering if the various stakeholders are serious and really want housing or not?

SCHEMES like this are about one thing...

"Income Redistribution" from those who have (The Taxpayer) to those who don't... the socialist flunkies who's benefits are not enough now for their lifestyle.

It's never about Indigenous housing.. get real.

income distribution? too superficial.
this one's about power and communication
encompassing tradition from the entire span of human existence.
the outcome will set a precedent for the future of humans globally
and it won't be in converted containers.
essentially Aborigines recognise a women's jurisdiction, europeans don't.
not yet anyway, but will once the republic kicks in.

Whistler,

So what do you mean by 'women's jurisdiction' - and presumably, men's jurisdiction as well ? Why is there a separation ? Are you suggesting that there are issues for women to focus on, and issues for men to focus on, and no common issues ? i.e. women's issues and men's issues - areas, for example, which men keep out of and leave to women, and vice versa ? Can you give us some examples ?

Joe