makes a lot of sense Don, these buildings are already very much in use across the territory while one firm makes pre-fab modular insulated structures, to cyclone code and individual layouts to order with power points, phone connections, built in cupboards etc also to customer requirements.

In Darwin,government is demolishing 60 units they have allowed to deteriorate that are only 40 years old. This in a situation of desperate families being given tents.

Besides if brick construction is required, the solution is to manufacture on site using local materials and labour using simple brick making moulds as occurred 43 years ago in Kalkaringi

At that time, the people were consulted but of course what would they know ? their preferences to include shaded verandahs was largely ignored

I would rather see people advocating for self built mudbrick or strawbale houses. Not only are they better environmentally they are cheaper and simpler to build that your standard dwelling. They can be very long lasting, easily maintained and quite comfortable in any climate. Much better than your idea for US style "trailer parks'.

At 'the Dreaming' festival http://www.thedreamingfestival.com/ - an amazing international celebration of indigenous arts, music and culture, one of the sponsors associated with the festival displayed an 'outback shelter'. It was well received by the indigenous people who attended, although I realise the festival attendees are a different group to those who might be end-users of such a building. The shelter was cheap, easy to assemble, versatile and available in variants that could be adapted to environments and communities.

Don Allan is right - prefabricated structures exist, are getting better and better in design / execution and are almost infinitely malleable in terms configuration. Have a look. For example - at QT homes, the manufacturers of the Outback Shelter http://www.qthomes.com.au/

The shelter is still in its trial stages but it's a hell of a good idea. Unfortunately they don't have a picture of the prototype on their website.

You can get a heap of them for the $45m administrative cost. For the cost of the SIHIP project you could set up a complete infrastructure / decentralised jobs creation program, avoid the trailer park idea (not a good look mikk), look at an appropriate mix of design and construction and have some left over.

Somebody or some group of bodies is making a shitload out of this rort.

But let's go back one large step - spend a bit of the money asking the communities what they want, where they want it and what function it has to serve. Then make sure you deliver it.

I find it a bit concerning that so much money is being spent to house people in areas in which there is little chance of the community becoming economically viable, thus providing funds for people to build their own houses.

For example if myself and my family chose to move to a remote area with no infrastructure or job opportunities I don't think we would be having a debate on what sort of house the government will provide us. Even if most people do live in areas with preexisting houses etc. many people, such as tradies, must change location to find sufficient job opportunities to survive. Why is this different for aboriginal people living in remote regions? It is the governments responsibility to provide these job opportunities, not to provide free housing.

What sort of houses do aboriginal people want in remote communities? Perhaps we should look to what they had before European settlement.

750 houses for $672 Million? That is almost $900,000 each! What in the world is this government doing with our money? These houses are not on millionair's row are they?
Is this another one of Rudd/Swan's feel good stimulus projects?

The amount of taxpayers' money spent per Aboriginal on remote communities is enough to house them each in comfortable flats or motel rooms with three meals a day and a reasonable allowance for spending money; but as this article demonstrates, very little of it actually gets to the people concerned. Unfortunately the cultural 'choice' to live in remote areas (and who chooses? The old men?) deprives these people of their right to basic welfare and plays into the hands of the well-paid government service industries who can easily spend a week preparing for, carrying out and 'debriefing' from a one-day visit to a remote settlement.

Let boundaries be drawn 100km from Darwin and Alice Springs; and let everyone be comfortably housed within that range on the understanding that welfare stops at the boundary. Let the preservation of tribal homelands be treated in the same way Wiccan or Druidic practices; an amusing hobby which people can indulge in at their own expense -- not mine.

Bruce I do hope Mr Rudd and Mr Swann feel good about these houses as I for one would cheerfully take the money out of the future fund and off the politicians and Public Service pensions. Yes yes yes I know they would take it off the ordinary public servant and then increase the Mandarin's and politicians pensions.
I think everyone who has posted has a sense in this debate and so why not just put up a tender and let all the builders put in bids or part bids on what they can offer. The communities can take up what is on offer as they see fit but with a very limited window of ordering so as to really get going on construction. The builders can be paid progress payments so they would have a real incentive to get out there and get houses built.

"Alternatively, they should be given tents and sent to live for at least three months in an isolated Aboriginal community that needed houses and given the task of providing a solution as to how best to provide them"

Nuts to that. They should be provided with a sheet of corrugated iron and a couple of star pickets and made to live like the natives did back in the sixties.

David

"Unfortunately it won’t, because developers and construction industry, aided and abetted by governments, banks and finance companies only want to build standard brick veneer homes which they sell in house and land packages at prices unaffordable to many Australians."

Add to that the main hurdle of government restriction of the right of people to build such dwellings on their land. Legislation is required to give people the right to build such dwellings. Further legislation is required to make it illegal for developers to stipulate what people may build on the land they are sold.

The idea that giving people the right to build these homes would turn Australia into a trailer park is a nonsense and misleading scaremongering. On the contrary, reducing the cost of housing would bring an enormous economic benefit. That government does not act is a disgrace.

Dear David
"They should be provided with a sheet of corrugated iron and a couple of star pickets and made to live like the natives did back in the sixties."
This government provided house at the top of Cape York sure doesn't resemble corrugated iron or star pickets.
http://naa12.naa.gov.au/scripts/PhotoSearchItemDetail.asp?M=0&B=11219953&SE=1
Regards
Blair

I fully support Don's article as I have been designing and building manufactured or prefabricated housing since 1968. I have never had to build a "traditional" structure in this time to survive.
My work in this field can be overviewed at www.unibuild.com.au. There are over 350 proven and applied projects within Australia and overseas, many designed for fast build and long lasting remote area housing. I have proven that "traditional" housing for remote locations is a wast of time and money. UB.

Blairbar, I was talking about the sort of accomodation that should be provided to the public servants administering the scheme when they go out into the hinterland.

One other problem which seems to be overlooked is the undoubted fact that many people need to be taught how they hould live in the sort of housing with which they will be provided. I do not make that statement lightly. Indeed, I can remember the mayor of Renmark (I that that was right) who made exactly the same comment some years ago when a whole town was built for aboriginals in his area. He was mightily castigated for making the comment, but it was well justified.

Housing Problem ?
Twenty people to one house, is this overcrowding? Or is this a combined income of $4,000 a week? Surely some builder would build three (3) houses for $2,000 a week guaranteed? ( think bags of flour and kangaroo!) Then after about five (5) years the houses would be owned. That would be five (5) to a house. At four rooms each, extra toilet and shower, a lounge or sleep-out for the extra person. Compatibility? everyone keeps changing around until the right combination. And the income is back (with indexation) to about $5000 a week. This model could be passed on. And people to be encouraged to live twenty (20) to a house to start off. The Commonwealth Government to give full support with financial incentive or concession via Centrelink. And State and Local Governments to provide and maintain necessary services. The housing problem will, solve itself !
(Arthur Bell c. 3/07)

Why not provide incentive for them to learn how to do it themselves?

I can think of a variety of creative ways to do this but I will offer a potential solution from within my own experience.

1. Assemble an Ambassadorial delegation from the *Tent Embassy* and take a proposal to the Indonesians to send a work party Delegation of Original Australians to rural Indonesia.

2. As I can personally testify to, the Indonesians are quite capable, if you gain their trust, of teaching people how to knock up an approx 200 meter square, brick, tile, wood, ceramic tile, bamboo and glass dwelling for less than $AU5000 in less than 2 mths @ the Indo local economy rate.

I imagine as opposed to dealing with some people, for the BlakFellas dealing with the Indos would be a "breath of fresh air" and in addition to the potential of also learning more of their own huge potential in the area of "Traditional/Organic Eco-Tourism"

(and the Indonesians are very astute business people but also very laid back and easy going - simple, effective, efficient and cruisy)

such a delegation could go to further the cause of
Good Will and Cross Cultural communication.

Of course, with for the most part rudimentary hand tools and only limited machine assists, the Indos can teach how to create pretty much everything themselves from primary materials up,

(you name it - sand moulds, padi husk fired bricks etc etc)

and contribute to the education of the Original Australians in such a way that they may learn further how to harvest the wealth of resource from their own land under their own feet and become true masters of their own destiny.

I know quite clearly that such an exercise could be initiated within a year from their Social Security payments alone if they are prepared to adhere to a discipline of saving $AU50 per fortnight.

But therein the *Elders* need to lead by example ..

...

$AU45,000,000 / 5000 p.u. = 9,000 houses

Jon J; very good point...

Let boundaries be drawn 100km from Darwin and Alice Springs; and let everyone be comfortably housed within that range on the understanding that welfare stops at the boundary. Let the preservation of tribal homelands be treated in the same way Wiccan or Druidic practices; an amusing hobby which people can indulge in at their own expense -- not mine.

I was of the opinion that being out of work and receiving benefits was on the understanding that one was 'actively seeking work'.

Now I have no problems with ANYONE choosing not to work, after all, it's a fee country, but, who says it's a 'FREE LUNCH'.

It's about time we stop wasting billions on this small minority, UNLESS they seriously do want to become true aussies.

As JJ says, house them in situations where we can affordably provide for them and their families, WHILE THEY ARE AT WORK, and let them visit the 'home land' as often as they like AT THEIR EXPENSE.

If we don't do something seriously effective about ALL welfare handouts, and quick, this country is going to go down the gurgler.