Edited by the Institute for Social Research, Swinburne University of Technology

Indigenous housing: myths and realities

14 January 2010Paul Pholeros has spent three decades working on indigenous housing. He talks about why housing for Aboriginal Australians is still in such a dire state and what's needed to improve it?

Comments

This sounds like a good advertisement for healthabitat. The survey and fix approach is an extremely costly approach - $7000 per house. Is this amount of money to be expected to be spent on a yearly basis? Under previous funding agreements (IHANT) each house was allocated $2000 per house per year, but this money was managed and maintenance (not in many instances) managed by local housing organisations and community councils. The record of corruption and bankruptcy of these organisations was not ideal, hence the recent takeover of these types of organisations by the NT local government (mind you not the most functioning of NT government departments). There is no way these houses can be maintained when based on an educated guess more than 50% of the adult residents are alcohol dependent in the town camps. A large amount of the problem does come back to basic hygiene and maintenance. Overcrowding is a massive problem and as a result one year of living is more like 5 years because of the extra wear and tear on the house. I was living in AS in 2007 and drove through a number of the town camps (for want of a better name) and the houses were in terrible condition. All these feel good programs have been happening for many years and we have seen little or no improvement in most social, environmental and health indicators and deterioration in others. Nothing will change until people are held accountable for the government subsidised housing that they receive courtesy of tax payer funded money. As was said in this interview, it was again tax payer money paying for the $7000 per house fix. If I were a homeowner, I would like to think that I would not need to spend that kind of money even every 3 years on my house. Haven't we been talking (and the feel good brigade) about capacity building for years and for some reason, little if any capacity has been built and again it has most likely declined because of the victim mentality and the white helpers going in and doing things for Aboriginal people. How hard is it for someone to change a tap washer? The current generations’ parents could no doubt do this type of work and also speak their traditional languages to a high level and read and write English to a satisfactory to high level. Now the leases have been signed in these places and the $40 million is available to build new houses and fix broken ones in the town camps so we will be starting from scratch. Let's see how long the new houses remain functional before advocating unpublished findings from the healthabitat housing program. And another thing, people all over the world live in crowded poor housing, but do not live in dirty broken houses. There is a culture of cleaning, washing, cooking etc. that is still developing within Aboriginal cultures in more remote settlements in Australia. To ignore this obvious fact is a critical sticking point I have with such discussion and programs.
Well I'm not sure what romantic films you have been watching but crowded poor housing tends to be dirty broken housing world-wide – though perhaps I missed the “obvious fact”. But, leaving this aside and speaking on your terms (taxpayer sovereignty?), what you ought to be a concerned about is why taxpayer funded housing is built to such a poor standard with no accountability of contractors. If the job was done properly in the first place it might indeed be housing worth living in and not necessitate the kind of maintenance you criticise. It must be said that $7000 per house is in fact a very modest amount in maintaining any form of government provided housing. Furthermore, consider the flow-on benefits from better housing, for instance the intrinsic links between improved living environments- which this maintenance provides- and better health outcomes, with reduced costs to the taxpayer. The work of the “feel good brigade”, healthabitat and others, that you so deride in carrying out this maintenance is probably saving taxpayers money and clearly preventing a more serious humanitarian disaster. "Nothing will change until people are held accountable for the government subsidised housing that they receive courtesy of tax payer funded money. " Well, this is an oxymoron. You have put the onus of responsibility on the recipients of subsidies rather than on the government dispensing them. By this argument you would be saying that the government ought to do nothing differently in procuring housing and that the build quality and process of developing indigenous housing overseen by government is adequate. Should these people be “held accountable” for the shoddy buildings we put them in? Clearly, we can see this argument is plain wrong which thankfully spares us from requiring an explanation as to how you would indeed hold these people accountable.

Events

Conference
24 Mar 2010 - 9:00am - 25 Mar 2010 - 5:30am
Darwin
Conference
25 Mar 2010 - 9:00am - 26 Mar 2010 - 5:00pm
Canberra

Noticeboard

16 February 2010

RMIT University in Melbourne runs a degree program where groups of
communication research‐trained students work on a communication research
project for a not‐for‐profit client.

14 January 2010

The National Prison Book Program provides prisoners with free reading materials. Our aim is to provide books to prisoners and enhance prison library and educational services.

27 May 2009

The National Human Rights Online Consultation on Open Forum will run from 19 May until 26 June 2009, providing an extended opportunity for the Australian community to share their views about which rights and responsibilities matter to us as a society,