Nic Street, Minister for Sport and Events, 26 September 2024

Macquarie Point Precinct Plan finalised

The Mac Point Precinct Plan roadmap for the development of the site has been finalised, highlighting the enormous benefits the Precinct will bring to Tasmania.

Minister for Sport and Events, Nic Street, said the Precinct Plan sets out the Tasmanian Government’s vision to create a mixed-use precinct.

“This includes our multipurpose stadium, which will be a foundation development to activate the precinct. But it shows the site is about much more,” Minister Street said.

“The precinct will include inner city living, offices spaces, cafes, and complimentary developments such as the ability to develop visitor accommodation. This will support year-round activation of the site.

“These opportunities will be delivered through development areas in the northern and eastern areas of the site and are identified in the plan as the Residential Development and Public Foreshore Zone in the north and the Antarctic Facilities Zone and Complementary Integrated Mixed-Use Zone on the eastern side of the site.

“Importantly, the western side of the site, where the original shoreline sits, will be informed by guidance from the Tasmania Aboriginal community, and is identified in the plan as the Aboriginal Culturally Informed Zone.”

The Mac Point Precinct Plan reflects feedback received over four months of public consultation including over 2,200 written submissions, more than 100 meetings with local organisations, businesses and individuals, and input from expert consultants.

“The Precinct Plan was developed by the Macquarie Point Development Corporation, which I have received and approved. The Plan has also been shared with and accepted by the Federal Infrastructure Minister, as is required under the Federation Funding Agreement,” Minister Street said.

The Precinct Plan provides a roadmap for the development of Macquarie Point, ensuring it aligns with the community’s aspirations and provides guidance to the private sector on the areas and types of development that have been identified to contribute to the urban renewal of the site.

As part of our 2030 Strong Plan for Tasmania’s Future, the Tasmanian Government has capped expenditure on the stadium at $375m.

The Macquarie Point Precinct Plan is available at www.macpoint.com/precinctplan.

Media release – Kristie Johnston, independent MHA for Clark, 26 September 2024

Stadium Costings Limited At Best

Any hope the Tasmanian Planning Commission (TPC) will make an informed analysis of the stadium’s economic viability were dashed today.

In response to my Budget Estimate questions, Macquarie Point Development CEO Anne Beach revealed the TPC will only consider a summary of the vital quantity surveyors report.

It was further revealed that the stadium’s cost-benefit analysis by KPMG is based only on an indicative “snapshot” costing – which is “dynamic” and will change.

The WTP Partners quantity surveyors report is critical to understanding the stadium’s economic viability, as is the KPMG report.

It is unacceptable that the TPC are being kept in the dark with regards to this critical information.

Tasmanians should be deeply concerned about the costs, and it begs the question, what are they hiding?

Media release – Vica Bayley MP, Greens Sport and Recreation spokesperson, 26 September 2024

MPDC Revelation Makes Mockery of Stadium Cost Cap

Under questioning from the Greens in Budget Estimates today, Macquarie Point Development Corporation have confirmed the taxpayer cost of the Liberals’ stadium will exceed the Premier’s promised $375 million cap.

After refusing all week to answer who will pay for relocating the Goods Shed to build the stadium, MPDC has finally admitted they will be paying this significant cost. As a public entity, this will mean more costs to the taxpayer – costs that are over and above the Premier’s promised cost cap.

Given the stadium’s cost had already blown out by $115 million, it’s alarming to have it confirmed that taxpayers will be on the hook for even more stadium costs with the Goods Shed relocation. This revelation makes a mockery of Jeremy Rockliff’s promised cost cap.

Relocating the Goods Shed is an essential component of the stadium project, and it will be a very costly exercise. But Jeremy Rockliff hasn’t budgeted for these costs in his so-called $375 million cap on taxpayer funding for the stadium. Clearly Tasmanians will in fact be paying a few “red cents” more than the Premier promised.

The stadium costs are spiralling out of control and the Liberals are desperately scrambling to try and fudge the numbers to pretend everything is going smoothly. But we’re not buying it, and neither are most Tasmanians.

Media release – Jacqui Lambie Network Member for Lyons, Andrew Jenner, 26 September 2024

— untitled —

The Jacqui Lambie Network Member for Lyons, Andrew Jenner has stated that his decision to vote against the budget would not have been swayed by any of the answers given in budget estimates this week.

“I made my decision not to vote for the budget before the start of budget estimates. Saul Eslake, one of the best economists in Australia, gave his assessment on the budget and it is shocking.

“This is a budget that does not prioritise the needs of Tasmanians, but prioritises Liberal party wants, which is why I cannot vote for it.

“It wouldn’t have mattered how many questions I asked in budget estimates, the budget would remain the same. This is a government that does not respond to criticism.

“While I commend both the Labor and Greens members and some of my fellow crossbenchers for their work scrutinising the budget, I also note there were other crossbenchers doing the work of Liberal back benchers. This is pathetic and not what the cross bench is for.

“Tasmanians with urgent needs have contacted my office and I feel it a better use of my time finding solutions for them.

“One of the several issues I have been dealing with this week is urgent housing for Tasmanians with a disability.

“Tasmanians with disabilities are well aware that this Government would prefer to spend money on a stadium rather than dealing with their issues.”

Statement – Roland Browne, Spokesperson for Our Place, 27 September 2024

— untitled —

After a week of parliamentary Estimates hearings, all we see is more smoke and mirrors on the cost of the proposed stadium.

The list of components that are part of the stadium, but not costed, grows each week.  While that list grows, the ALP’s engagement with the stadium’s cost issue shrivels.  No questions were put to the Treasurer about the cost of the stadium.

A good start for the ALP would have been to ask the Treasurer how he calculates the spending cap, and how he measures the $375m.  Will it be measured by spending or allocation or commitment?  Or what?