Premier Jeremy Rockliff has been talking up the stadium for months,bowing to the demands of the AFL which will only grant Tasmania a football team on condition of a new stadium being built at Macquarie Point,even though that site had been earmarked for other plans. The AFL has pledged $15 million towards the stadium – about one-50th of the cost.
The federal government is considering the state’s bid for $240 million to build a new stadium in Hobart. Inset:Tasmania Premier Jeremy Rockliff.The Age
The premier himself has acknowledged that without $240 million in federal funding the stadium proposal is dead.
On Saturday,when asked by a Hobart radio station about the stadium plans,the Prime Minister chose his words carefully,but his reservations about a stadium being the best solution for Macquarie Point were clear. He pointed to Sydney’s Barangaroo as a vibrant example of urban renewal,cautioning,“What you don’t want is a stadium,that when things aren’t happening there,there isn’t economic activity in the area.”
None of this stopped Hobart’s only major newspaper,Murdoch-ownedThe Mercury,from reporting on Monday that Albanese “warmed the hearts of those backing a stadium and Tasmanian’s AFL dream”. Ah,no,not really. But spin,unfortunately,has beenThe Mercury’s default position on this subject.
Rockliff and the AFL are infatuated with the idea of a stadium at Macquarie Point,and their desires are being fanned byThe Mercury,which doesn’t miss an opportunity to promote the proposal on its front page,gathering sound bites from everyone from English pop star Robbie Williams (who has never been to Hobart,but would “love to[go],even if they have a medium-sized stadium”) to television breakfast host David Koch,president of Port Adelaide Football Club (“It is about respecting your fans enough to give them the best show in sport”). Curiously,these sound bites,(and others first published inThe Mercury) are repeated in the “testimonials” section of Tasmanian government’s business case for the stadium,along with a testimonial fromThe Mercury’s editor.
Robbie Williams has stated his support for the stadium.Scott Barbour
Of course there was no mention of that in the packed Hobart town hall in November where the mood was decidedly against the stadium and Booker Prize-winning author Richard Flanagan pointed out a profound conflict of interest at the heart ofThe Mercury’s pro-stadium campaign:the paper’s owner,News Corp,also the majority owner of Foxtel,has billions of dollars invested in AFL broadcasting rights.
Never mind that a cost-benefit analysis from MI Global Partners,commissioned by the Tasmanian government last year,and released only last week,shows that the stadium will lose $300 million over 20 years of operation. In other words,the state will be propping up a proposal that primarily benefits the AFL.
The Tasmanian government claims the stadium will deliver $2.2 billion to the economy over 25 years,which it will invest in “schools,hospitals,roads,social housing and future critical infrastructure projects”. The problem is,schools,hospitals,roads,and social housing are critical infrastructure projects that need investment now. It’s no joke that Tasmania has the highest levels of illiteracy and lowest life expectancy of any Australian state.
But the state government’s business case,released two days before Christmas,was near breathless about the stadium. It would miraculously “unlock transport corridors” (in a city where public transport is virtually non-existent and limited access roads into town congest at the drop of hat);coax people off the couch and into playing sport;boost their mental and physical health;improve Tasmania’s “green credentials”;attract “cultural exhibitions” and prevent Tasmanians from moving interstate;make Tasmania a “destination of choice … the whole year round”;and have the same global impact that MONA did,“providing Australians and people from across the world with a reason to come here”.
What’s really hard to stomach is that the Tasmanian government is cynically riding on the coattails of MONA to bolster its pitch. The business case mentions the gallery no fewer than 11 times,the museum’s winter festival,Dark Mofo,six times,and summer festival Mona Foma once. This is odd,as the stadium proposal has overshadowed the vision commissioned from MONA for Macquarie Point,which had as its centrepiece a Truth and Reconciliation Art Park. Apparently there is “scope and aspiration” to include a reconciliation park,although there’s no mention of funding for it.
The extravagant claims being made about the stadium fly in the face of the reality that the arts transformed Hobart and Tasmania,through the privately funded MONA and its associated festivals,which truly did give people from around the world a reason to visit.
Rockliff is right about one thing,this is a “once-in-a-generational opportunity” for a site that is a vital piece of Hobart’s scenic waterfront. But what we have here is an unelected football organisation dictating the development of that key site,with the backing of the Murdoch media,and an elected government seemingly kowtowing to its demands.
The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge,champion and inform your own..
More original opinions
Home affordability: A third of the Australian population doesn’t own a home,two thirds do,so which group do politicians want to look after? Is that why they can’t answer about Australian house prices?
The energy gap:A recent breakthrough in the creation of is good news for climate change,but what will human civilisation do to get through the next 20 or 30 years until it becomes a reality? And will we get there?
Quick exit: Australia’s young voters are. How does the Liberal party get them back,and why are young Australians turning away from party values – individual freedom,equality of opportunity and reward for effort – in the first place?