Media release – City of Hobart, 9 April 2025

News from tonight’s Hobart City Council Planning Authority Committee meeting

Macquarie Point Stadium – Project of State Significance

The Hobart City Council Planning Authority Committee requests that the Lord Mayor, CEO and council officers engage with state parliamentarians to outline the risks of bypassing the Project of State Significance (POSS) process for the Macquarie Point Stadium.

It expresses disappointment in the State Government’s handling of the proposal and its disregard for the planning system and due process.

The Committee calls on the Government to consider the independent review by Nicholas Gruen, respond appropriately to the Tasmanian Planning Commission’s draft report, address concerns from the Planning Institute of Australia, and uphold transparency and public participation.

It notes the City’s significant investment in reviewing the project and serious concerns with both the proposal and process.

The Committee urges the Government to retain a transparent planning process to maintain public trust.

The Lord Mayor is to seek a meeting with the AFL CEO to raise identified issues, and write to the incoming Prime Minister and Federal Infrastructure Minister to confirm stakeholder engagement obligations, ensure funding supports broader precinct upgrades, and highlight key planning concerns.

The Committee also calls on the State Opposition to support transparent planning and hold the Government to its commitments.

Officers are to prepare a report outlining the process and timing for a possible elector poll if the POSS process is abandoned.

9 Queen Street, Sandy Bay

The Hobart City Council Planning Authority Committee has approved a development application for partial demolition, alterations, extension and outbuilding for 9 Queen Street, Sandy Bay.

The proposal includes demolishing the rear shed and an existing rear addition, altering the dwelling to create a new bedroom, ensuite and bathroom, and converting a bedroom into a rumpus room. A two-storey extension is planned at the rear, with an open-plan kitchen, dining and living area on the ground floor. The first floor will feature a master bedroom with an ensuite, walk-in robe and an attached rear deck.

30 McRobies Road, South Hobart

The Hobart City Council Planning Authority Committee has approved a development application for partial change of use to container refund point and signage for 30 McRobies Road, South Hobart.

The proposal includes a partial change of use at the McRobies Gully Waste Management Centre to include a Container Refund Point. A container refund machine will be installed next to the Tip Shop, connected by a small awning. It will operate during the Centre’s existing hours (Monday to Friday 7.30am–4pm; Saturday to Sunday 10am–4pm), with vehicle access via the current drive-through lane. Three parking spaces will be set aside for users, and signage will be installed at the entrance and near the Tip Shop.

Officer level development applications approved between 18 March and 31 March 2025

Between Hobart City Council Planning Authority Committee meetings, the City’s Planning Officers are busy reviewing a range of residential and commercial development applications for Hobart.

Since the last meeting, 14 development applications delegated to council officers were also approved while 22 development applications are currently being advertised.

A reminder that the Council has a planner on duty during office hours which members of the community can call through our Customer Services to check to see whether any development or work to a garden will require planning approval.

Further information about the proposals can be found in the Planning Committee agenda here.


Media release – Vica Bayley MP, Greens Sports Spokesperson, ​​​​9 April 2025

Rockliff Won’t Rule Out Stadium Legislation Before May Budget

Jeremy Rockliff looks like he’s shaping up to bring special approval legislation for the stadium to Parliament in a matter of weeks, after he refused to rule out bringing this matter to Parliament before the State Budget in May.

The Premier has been trying to whip up a false sense of urgency to justify fast tracking the stadium through Parliament using special legislation. But the AFL has repeatedly said they’re happy for the PoSS process to run its course – even if this goes into the second half of this year.

It’s pretty clear Jeremy Rockliff simply didn’t like that the Planning Commission poked so many holes in his pet project – like the huge hit to the state’s finances, traffic congestion, impacts on heritage, and the risk of flooding. He’s now trying to discredit the their report and stop them from finishing their assessment on the stadium.

In his own words, this Premier is willing to do anything to try to push the stadium forward – no matter how dodgy or how misguided. Clearly this means cutting public voices out of this process, with the Premier once again refusing to deny he’ll take the stadium out of the PoSS process before public hearings.

It seems likely the Rockliff Government is set to try to use the cover of the state budget to push the stadium through Parliament. It looks like they’re narrowing in on two options to progress their special legislation.

Either they’ll table the bill in the first sitting week of May and debate it in budget week. Or they’ll take their contempt for proper process even further by bringing in the bill in budget week and using Labor’s support to ram it through immediately using urgency provisions.

Whatever the Liberals’ plan, their push for special approval legislation for the stadium is deeply concerning. The majority of Tasmanians want taxpayer funds spent improving our health and housing systems, instead of a stadium we don’t need and that will cost us billions.


Media release – Jacqui Lambie, JLN Senator for Tasmania, 9 April 2025

Statement from Jacqui Lambie on ABC Stadium story (08042025)

“When my office reached out to Dr Gruen to ask if he would be interested in doing the review, he knew little about the AFL stadium proposal. As a highly respected professor of economics and a visiting fellow at the King’s College London Policy Institute, I felt that he was more than qualified to do an independent review.

“When an Inquiry is happening I always tell people from right across the board to put submissions in – that is just part of my job.” Said Senator Lambie

My office suggested that Dr Gruen speak to a range of people, including community groups (Roland Browne, Richard Flanagan), MONA, retailers like Ruth Langford, Tasmanian Aboriginal Leaders, (inc. Rodney Dillon), John Hardy RSL Tasmania and the proponents of Stadium 2.0.

I didn’t meet or speak with Dr Gruen until his review had been underway for some months. At that meeting Dr Gruen did not share his opinion of the project, the first I knew of his views on the strength of the business case, is when I read his review in full when it was released to the public.

I note that the Tasmanian Planning Commission concurred with Dr Gruen’s findings, as did respected independent Tasmanian economist, Saul Eslake. This huge overreaction just tells me that the Tasmanian Liberal government is grasping at straws, they know this AFL stadium is a disaster and they are reaching for anything that discredits their approach. Finally seeing David O’Byrne jumping on the bandwagon this morning, standing with the Liberals when he is supposed to be an independent is very disappointing.” Said Senator Lambie.


Editor’s note: we have been aware of the Chris Rowbottom hit job for some time, as have the Our Place group. In a newsletter today Our Place made the following comment:

Campaign Update – Tinfoil hats at the ABC!

This morning, our public broadcaster published an article by Chris Rowbottom that seeks to suggest some sort of conspiracy between Our Place, other individual Tasmanians and Dr Nicholas Gruen. It is an attack upon Dr Gruen.

Nearly two weeks ago, Mr Rowbottom sent Roland Browne a series of questions as part of setting the scene for today’s article. You can read Roland’s response to those questions here:

Read Roland’s response