rehctub,

Whites (mostly) living in remote communities are doing fine, these communities are usually hippie communes and many of their people are unemployed and on welfare.
The difference is that most communities are well run, healthy places and even if the mod cons are sometimes a bit 'Heath Robinson', they work.
Many have solar power and I remember, rather fondly, one place in the Upper Bellingen Valley where those who wanted to watch TV at night did a stint on the stationary push bike that drove the 12-volt generator; fitness and doing one's bit at the same time!!

As usual I come at this from a different angle. I would like to set aside the black, white, trashing houses thing for a moment, and focus on where all these billions are going. I have said it before, this welfare angle the govt is always pushing, I find annoying as I suspect that it is really a front for skimming money. Don't ask me how, but I cannot justify the billions spent when you compare the money with the services provided. I think it's a joke that we talk about these houses and the trashing there-of, I agree it is true, but BILLIONS? Something is not right, and it frustrates me that I can't put my finger on what or how they (the govt and their mates) are doing it. I know there is a lot of scrutinee over the money being spent on such people or projects, so it should not be possible to 'skim' any money, but never-the-less, I would like to see the money trail surrounding these grants or projects or housing issues.

Issy, I'm sure you were a sixties flower child, that was you on the bike, right? Under all that camouflage there beats the heart of a fellow greenie, "peace man".

I have spent 38 years uninterupted living & working in remote communities & I suggest people take notice of what Nana says.

One fact that most people don’t seem to be aware of. Most remote aboriginal housing is
built on Native Title land, that is, private land. Nowhere else do citizens get public housing built on their private land.
This is why the government has been seeking 99 year leases over a very small section of land within the Native Title areas so they can build houses and maintain management of them.

Altrav it is always such when bureaucrats, with no skin in the game, let out government contracts.

I was treasure of the P&C at a small, but rapidly expanding country primary school. The school had expanded from 76 pupils 3 teachers & headmaster to 180 pupils in just 2 years, & there was quite a bit of building going on.

One project was a new toilet, a building, 5 pedestals a urinal, a large septic & an expiration trench. I was horrified when in a time when a 3 bedroom house was built for $35,000 in the area, that toilet contract was let for $240,000.

I knew the builder, a small local bloke, who was building it, so asked how they justified such a price. He told me the story.

Like almost all of the education department projects in that district with 55 schools, the contract was awarded to a large builder in Brisbane. That builder sublet the contract to a large building company in Bundaberg who in turn sublet it to a Maryborough company. The local bloke was subcontracted to them to build the project, for $65,000. He reckoned this was the most profitable contract he'd ever had.

When asked why he didn't tender direct for these contracts he pointed out it took a fair bit of time to chase government contracts, which he couldn't afford, as locals very rarely were successful. He said this was the system as it worked, & he was glad to get his first bite at the cherry, & hoped he could get more of it.

That will be the same with aboriginal building, & of course, the distance from any centre of workers makes the actual job more expensive.