Joe,
The only consolation here is that this time round most people realise that Labor just can't do the job. The LNP hopefully has sufficient sense to curb the immoral spending of the past few years.
Neither can see the light at the end of the tunnel because Labor is looking in one end & LNP in the other end thus effectively blocking any light.

Wesley Aird correctly states such fiefdoms rob people of their right to their own castle.

Anyone in communities building things soon loose their inve$tment unless they have a lease.

ALR(NT) Land Trust Corporations and agents (Land Councils) deny even "Traditional Owners" leases, for their homes or businesses.

They unlikely to receive finance unless hold long term lease.

Who of sound mind invests, borrows to invest, without lease security ?

ALR(NT) Land Trust Corporations own the land, purporting to act on instructions from "Traditional Owners".

These "Traditional Owners" whilst shareholders in these corporations have no other rights, no right to camp and call it a home, merely a right to stand somewhere until their Corporate Land Trust tells them to move on...

ALR(NT) Land Trust Corporations with their agents (Land Councils) still deny "Traditional Owners" rights for their family to live with them or visit them in their homes, as well as others like tradespersons.

Apartheid and segregation remain Commonwealth policies.

Commonwealth exempts their racist policies from judicial review.

Where applicable for judicial review Commonwealth refuses legal assistance, to delay justice whilst enforcing their racist policies.

Commonwealth and states need IMMEDIATELY strip exemptions these Land Trust Corporations claim enable them to refuse their tenants leases.

Commonwealth and States need IMMEDIATELY force issuing of valid leases by these recalcitrant landlords.

Recalcitrant landlords, these Land Trusts do not accept is their responsibility as landlords to spend their money maintaining, improving, constructing, housing on their own land.

Spend NO public money for housing to benefit these Land Trusts whilst they refuse basic tenancy rights.

.

Hi Polpak,

Well, that's another thing which has bugged me for a while - I'm not saying it shouldn't be done, I'm just puzzled by how it's taken for granted:

* public housing being provided for people on THEIR land.

Around the country, in the cities, housing commissions and housing trusts by whatever name own the land on which they build public housing. So they have security of tenure.

But in remote settlements, and even moreso at very remote out-stations, where people well and truly own their own land, thousands of square kilometres of it, publicly-funded housing is provided, at relatively low rents (low relative to the cost of the houses), and with the expectation that a house might last five or ten years, and then be replaced.

Question: out on those very remote out-stations, how many of those half-million-dollar houses are, at this moment, empty, abandoned, accruing no rents, deteriorating ? Just check out Google Maps, satellite version, and follow a road or two out of large settlements, out into the wild, blue yonder, a hundred kms of maintained road, out to the site of a couple of pretty quiet-looking houses, no cars, no sign of life, solar-powered telephone box, generator. But no people.

And how much longer is this going to go on ?

Suggestion: privatise housing leases, in the usual quarter-acre blocks, and perhaps for 99 years, i.e. effectively forever, but with the community still, and forever, the owners of the land. Tenants agree to buy the existing houses, or to finance the building of their own houses on vacant blocks, and pay back either the private builder or the public housing authority, either with their wages, or their mining royalties, or their national park royalties, or their remote area education allowances.

Of course, in so many ways, this would mean cutting out the ubiquitous middle-man, the Land Councils, and the local councils. And an army of bureaucrats.

But apart from that, what's the problem ?

Cheers,

Joe

But apart from that, what's the problem ?
Joe,
The problem is that many know about it but those with the authority are unwilling to change it yet won't let anyone else do anything either. Just remember that behind every social problem is a successfully incompetent bureaucrat.