Transcript of media conference with Vica Bayley, Greens MHA for Clark, and Hobart City Councillor Helen Burnet, Parliament Lawns, Hobart, 18 August 2023.

Vica Bayley

We’re looking at breaking news in relation to the development at New Town that raises a number of significant questions for government to answer, principal among which is the fact that this project is now being pulled after two years, based entirely on financial decisions about cost blowouts for this development, and therefore, its viability going forward.

Now, the most pertinent question that this poses to the Tasmanian Government in the current context is the implications for the stadium at Macquarie Point. Obviously, the stadium – a $715 million project, according to government – that so many people have significant questions about in relation to the accuracy and the credibility of that figure.

I need not remind people that all cost overruns in relation to that project are to be borne by the Tasmanian taxpayer. And so, you know, if you take into account the cost overruns with this development, factor in that construction of a stadium would be beginning in two years at the very best, I think nobody believes the Premier when he says this is as to a $715 million project. This is going to be a billion dollar plus project for Tasmania, and every single cost overrun is going to be borne by the taxpayer.

When we do have such significant crises within the health system, there is additional investment needed in housing and a whole range of other factors, every single cent that is spent on this stadium, particularly when it comes to overruns, is a cent that won’t be spent on those other initiatives. So this raises significant questions for the government.

The parliament has been spending the last couple of weeks trying to get information out of government based on not only the stadium, but the Marinus Link project, getting some transparency on the table. The parliament this week passed the POSS legislation which provided additional engagement of parliament in the final decision for any stadium and indeed any future project of state significance. I mean, every member in this Parliament needs to have credible information put in front of them about the real estate costs of this stadium before they make their decision about whether to vote it into the POSS process.

Now the Greens will be opposing the stadium going into that process. We think it’s a complete waste of money. We have a firm position of opposition to this stadium because of the cost implications for the budget, because it’s not the most appropriate development for the site, and because we have facilities already that are hosting AFL games. It is unnecessary, and it will be an expensive prospect for the Tasmanian people with every cent of cost overruns being borne by the taxpayer.

Journalist – Elliott

How much of a loss is it to our health system that we won’t be getting these extra beds?

Vica Bayley

Well look at every cent that gets spent on projects and overruns for projects like the stadium or indeed Marinus comes at the expense of an investment in other critical services such as the health system, such as affordable housing to fix the housing crisis, such as a range of other things. So it is critical that there is transparency around the cost of the stadium. Nobody believes it’s going to be a $700 million project. And this outcome in New Town just demonstrates that cost blowouts are real. And that this is a billion plus dollar project. And every cost overrun is going to be borne by the taxpayer

Journalist – Laura Beavis

Sorry, just to clarify on that question Elliott asked, do you have any concerns about the impact on the health system of not getting these extra private beds?

Vica Bayley

Of course, this is a lost opportunity for the health system. And this was a project that had been worked through significantly with the community. And nobody disputes that there needs to be additional facilities, health facilities in Hobart and across the state. So this is a massive missed opportunity for Tasmania and a missed opportunity for government to have private investment and private facilities augment the already the struggling public health system. So it is a concern. Of course it is and government do need to step in and articulate how they’re going to address this kind of shortfall. I mean, we’ve heard a lot in Parliament about the Mother and Baby Unit and critical shortages and concerns there. The government and the new health minister Guy Barnett needs to step up and and articulate how the holes are going to be plugged. And it’s clear that the government needs to be investing significant amounts more money in the health system to enable Tasmanians to get the kind of care that they need and deserve.

Journalist – unidentified

There are obviously perils in relying too much on the private system. But are there things we could be doing to really encourage that private health investment? Given that we have had Healthscope and now Nexus dropped out in the last couple of months?

Vica Bayley

I’m sure there’s a range of initiatives that government can be doing to assist. And, and we would encourage them to do that. But ultimately, the government’s focus really should be on the public health system. The government should be doing all it can to invest every spare cent in the public health system to give the beds, the service the and the health care that Tasmanians need.

Journalist – Elliott

Are we already relying too much on the private system?

Vica Bayley

The private system has an important role to play. And I think there’s always going to be a private system in our healthcare system. But the main focus for the government is to ensure that its responsibilities are met. And that comes through the public health care system, providing additional beds, providing additional services, and making sure that Tasmanians get the care that they deserve.

Journalist – Elliott

And how critical is it that places like St. Marys have a full time GP?

Vica Bayley

We’re deeply concerned about stories coming out of the north-east, and indeed, that was discussed in parliament as well. We sympathise and empathise with the St. Marys community and the people of the north-east, a much loved doctor, you know, looking like he cannot stay in his practice and that raising significant questions about what happens next. Again, it’s incumbent upon government to create the settings and provide the situation where there is confidence in the health system, there is capacity for doctors to to move, encouragement for doctors to move to regional and rural Tasmania to fill those positions. The kind of services that GPs in in rural and regional Tasmania provide are critical and the loss of one anywhere across the state is a significant blow.

Tasmanian Times

Just on the stadium costings, do you think the government should also do some budgeting on the option of upgrading Bellerive? As I understand it, the AFL wants things like change rooms with better medical facilities and warm up space, they want some corporate boxes, they want better media facilities. Do you think that’s the costing that the government should be doing?

Vica Bayley

The government has its head in the sand about a number of things, the costs relating to the Mac Point stadium being number one, the opinion of the Tasmanian community when it comes to the investment and the cost overruns in relation to that stadium. And indeed the opportunities that are already there with relation to Bellerive and York Park. I mean, we’ve been playing football AFL football in those stadiums for a long time now. They’ve been completely adequate up until this point.

And, you know, it should be incumbent on government to be exploring all options because the longer and longer this goes on the more and more transparency that’s going to be shone on the Mac Point Stadium, the more marginal and costly it’s going to look to the Tasmanian people. Nobody believes the $715 million price tag. The situation that’s occurred in New Town, a massive cost blowout over the course of two years since this project was approved, just demonstrates the significant pressures on the construction sector and indeed the development sector. The government and Premier Jeremy Rockliff are utterly delusional if they think that this stadium can be built with a roof to meet the requirements of the AFL, for $715 million, and Tasmanian taxpayers need to recognise that they’re going to be in the gun for every single cent of cost overruns that will come.

Journalist – unidentified

Just on the cost overruns on the stadium. So Matthew Pollock from Master Builders, he’s made the comment that, you know, hospitals are not stadiums. There’s plenty of examples of stadiums being built without cost overruns. Do you think that’s a fair comment?

Vica Bayley

I don’t necessarily think that’s a fair comment. I don’t think he quoted any particular examples there. And I don’t think there’s a single other person in the state that truly believes that this stadium with a roof on that site, and the significant public infrastructure that needs to be shifted, the sewage works and the like, can be built for $715 million. And Tasmanians need to recognise that they’re up for every single cent of cost overruns. And let’s look also remember that the federal government’s contribution for this is pretty opaque. I think that’s been allocated for port facilities, for housing and other and other elements, not necessarily the stadium itself. So there’s already blowouts in relation to Tasmania’s commitment. And Tasmanians need to recognise that every single cent of cost overruns is going to come from their tax contributions.

Journalist – Elliott

And just another question on the new town site, what else could potentially go there?

Helen Burnet

It’s really disappointing that the Tasman Hospital project has fallen over. There was considerable work done by residents and developers and of course the council to get to a point where this was an acceptable solution for some of the day care, hospital and ancillary healthcare needs that Hobart requires, and in a purpose-built facility. So it is unfortunate, very unfortunate that that this has ceased, and Nexus has pulled out of delivering this high quality project. The residents, of course, have worked really hard to have a good outcome for this. And it was to them quite acceptable. So they worked over a couple of years, with not much consultation from Nexus, but they worked very hard to get to a point where there was a good enough outcome for that site.

It’s on a main transit route. So if it’s not going to go ahead, if there’s no other takers for this, this type of day hospital facility, then perhaps there are other opportunities on this major transit route in the heart of our city. We’ve heard from many people who’ve lived in this area that it’s a great place to live. And so, why not look at other potential housing opportunities on this site, for starters, and it may be a great opportunity for the for the state government to look at something that is suitable at this point.

Journalist – Elliott

It used to be quite, you know, with video city there and everything, it used to be quite an active retail space, what about some shops and things, could they go in?

Helen Burnet

Well, it is mixed residential use or mixed purpose use. So, there is that potential that there could be a mixture of commercial opportunities there. But residential first and foremost, I think is something that we are crying out for, that medium density, well-designed residential facilities not only for our key workers and ironically, hospital workers and health workers are finding it very difficult to settle in the municipality of Hobart. So why not look at something like medium density housing, which is affordable, and perhaps even include inclusionary zoning so that some of those are for social housing as well, as part of that solution.

Journalist – Elliott

And how was Council notified of this latest development? I’ve heard residents got a letter.

Helen Burnet

The first thing that I heard about it was on the front page of The Mercury this morning, and I know that residents received a letter, but I’m not sure or how that was translated to to the council. I think it’s just a really disappointing missed opportunity for for the health care sector to facilitate or you know, like we need a strong public health care system. But there are those needs for purpose built facilities as well for things like ophthalmology, orthopaedic surgery, physiotherapy, podiatry, and so forth.

Journalist – unidentified

Is it your understanding that this was meant to house the replacement dialysis service?

Helen Burnet

From my understanding, this was mainly for orthopaedics and and eye surgery, so ophthalmology, and it would have had physiotherapy and some other allied health services in the facility. I think the renal facility is out at St. John’s Park presently, and the government has talked about a replacement for that, but I don’t think it was at this point at the Tasman hospital site.

Journalist – Laura Beavis

To clarify, are you speaking on behalf of Council or as a councillor?

Helen Burnet

As a councillor. A Greens councillor.

Tasmanian Times

One more on the stadium please. It appears the original costing was done by a public servant who looked up on the internet how much does a seat cost in a stadium, came up with $13,000. Multiplied that by 23,000, added on something for a roof, added on something for site remediation whose costing was already several years old. So who should do the costing so that the parliamentarians and the people of Tasmania can have a reasonable level of confidence in it?

Vica Bayley

One of the things the parliament has been trying to find out is advice from Treasury and as to where the Treasury provided the Premier specific advice around the costings of this stadium going into the future. Now, the Premier has failed to be able to divulge any information in that regard which, you know, I say smacks of two things. Either the premier isn’t being upfront with the parliament and people and that advice is there and he isn’t a divulging it, or indeed, the government has made these massive decisions on behalf of Tasmanian taxpayers without even having the advice of its own department.

So who should do a cost estimate? I mean, look, there are a myriad of consultants and or public servants that I’m sure could do a very credible job when it comes to estimating the costs of the building of a stadium such as what’s proposed at Macquarie Point. The key point here is that it needs to be open, it needs to be transparent, and it needs to be scrutinised by peers of that person: other economists, other engineers, other experts in the field of building these kinds of stadiums and estimating their costs, need to have the opportunity – as do the public – to have a look at the figures and reality check them and that’s something that’s sorely missing. $715 million, is the figure that the government has put on the table. And seemingly that despite the fact that every other building development around the country and around the world is blowing out by the tune of 50 or more percent, this particular stadium is going to be held to budget. It’s not believable, it’s not credible, and until the government actually engages a genuine cost benefit analysis that can be scrutinised by the public and peers of that that consultant or that public servant then the Premier will continue to lack credibility on his claims.

BOOHOO: Stadium Now Officially a POSS (Paragon of Stupid Shit).