Mobile/Flexible strategies

The following is an article and discussion about portable architecture moving 'whole cities'.
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/08/here_today_gone.php
The posts that follow the article are very interesting and make a point of saying that this concept is highly unsustainable as it’s almost like stripping the land of all natural resources to then pick up and move to another location to do the same.

I found the following comment in response to the article very valid in that buildings in general will be more viable for the future if they are made to be somewhat portable or mobile.

"I have been starting to think about what I call "Nomadic Resilience", that is, the combination of sustainable strategies with a highly mobile infrastructure. This is the only way I can think of living through climate change. How can you go become a farmer when we don't know where the rain will be?" RUBEN

With so many natural disasters already a major issue in Australia and around the world, all kinds of issues like farming, flooding, consumption of natural resources etc. will be more sustainable in the long term if older building can be relocated rather than building whole new structures in new locations.

My initial thoughts on combining parliamentary functions and mobile architecture, straight away depict a ‘travelling government’, where different agencies move around Australia for a specific purpose. This opens a wide debate about sustainability, in terms of the use of natural resources of the land to support the 'travelling government', as well as the resources and materials used to create the portable building. These issues all depend on the function of the parliament agencies and what their purpose is. For example, if a portable building that focused on education in Australia was moved around to different schools and universities in times of need or decision making processes about funding, procedures etc, how long would the building/agency need to stay there to get the job done? Would it save time and money if we used the current system of flying/driving to each destination? Or would a more suitable approach to any future decision making occur from the government spending quality time in a given situation to understand what needs to happen? Would this strategy be more sustainable than the current situation, as the building form would only stay in a location for a short period of time, and live amongst the communities’ resources? Would this be better than the agency sitting in Canberra’s government building permanently, where the resources are wasted when not in use or the agencies are reviewing current situations from the computer, not face to face?