HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2)
2008-06-03 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

AAMI STADIUM

Mr KOUTSANTONIS (West Torrens) (14:51): Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. My question is to the Treasurer. Is the Treasurer aware of any alternative views on the South Australian National Football League's upgrade of AAMI Stadium?

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY (Port Adelaide—Deputy Premier, Treasurer, Minister for Industry and Trade, Minister for Federal/State Relations) (14:52): On Sunday the Premier—

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Treasurer, please wait for the call.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Sorry.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Treasurer.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. On Sunday, the Premier, the minister for sport and I announced a $100 million government contribution to the redevelopment of AAMI Stadium. The redevelopment includes enhanced roof coverage. The aim is to have 70 per cent of all spectators under cover, including the back of the grandstand area for the patrons who use the bar, food and toilet amenities at the back of the grandstand; improved dining, bar and toilet facilities; a new convention centre and western grandstand upgrade; improvements to the stadium entrances; new corporate suites; and expanded administration offices at the site. The redevelopment of AAMI Stadium is the preferred option, and the government, I might add, has been in discussions for many months.

Members interjecting:

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: I stand to be corrected on the length, but if the opposition leader honestly believes that this is a reaction to his statement, he really is in a fantasy land.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Has the Treasurer completed his answer?

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: I am just having trouble shouting above the members opposite.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, Treasurer; you may resume.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: The government has been in discussion with the SANFL for a long time about many aspects relating to the upgrade of Football Park and its future needs. Indeed, we have provided both financial assistance in the past and have been kept abreast by the SANFL of its expectations and requirements for the expansion and upgrade of that stadium. On this side of politics, we happen to think $100 million on Football Park is a more prudent expenditure than in excess of $1 billion of public money that would be required to build on a greenfield site somewhere in the city—if a site existed, I might add. The other question is: where would you find a greenfield site, given that we have already committed to the building of the new Adelaide hospital?

I was asked at the press conference what the views of the opposition would be. I said, 'I reckon that today they will support it. The Leader of the Opposition, today he will support it and tomorrow he will oppose it.' Well, what an incredibly clever bloke am I, I could almost sense exactly the wording of the Leader of the Opposition.

True to form, the Leader of the Opposition did not disappoint. According to The Advertiser, on Sunday the Leader of the Opposition supported the government's contribution to the redevelopment of AAMI Stadium. Less than 24 hours later, of course, he was backing away, calling for a cost benefit analysis. He told ABC 891 morning presenter Matthew Abraham:

I want to compare that with the cost benefits of a city stadium.

He also said:

I suspect it'll be more than a hundred million Matt...the AFL itself has said 250 to 300 million; others have said 400 million to refurbish West Lakes.

I do not know who the 'others' are, but, anyway, he went on to say:

...we could finish up having to spend five or six hundred million on West Lakes to get it up to the world class standard...I want to compare that with the cost benefits of a city stadium.

He has now said that it will cost somewhere between $500 and $600 million: that is his estimate. He now wants to compare that. But, then again, later in the day, on FIVEaa he said:

...if it's going to be West Lakes we need a significant plan to make it last for 50 years, not $100 million, the AFL itself was talking 250 to 300...I just think we need to have a cost benefit study on this because I think there's going to be hundreds of millions of dollars more to be spent.

What are you saying? What is the position of the opposition? It is bizarre. He will say something different on any radio program. He will say something different to any media outlet, and he trips over his comments.

For the record, already on the public record, the AFL Chief Executive, Andrew Demetriou, told ABC 891 on 12 May:

...we commissioned a study with the SANFL last year and out of that...we realised it (AAMI Stadium) needs some $150m to $200m to be spent on that stadium.

They have done their analysis, that is what they need to spend—unless genius over there does not believe the work of the SANFL and the AFL. What we have said as a government is: 'Capped; limited; no more. Our contribution is $100 million to that program.'

The balance of that program will need to be met by the SANFL through its borrowing capacities and through other avenues, be that the AFL, the federal government, or whatever other mechanism they choose to implement. We provide $100 million. Our $100 million contribution will fund the new roof, dining, bar and toilet facilities, and improved entrances. The commercial enterprises will be funded by the SANFL at a later date.

When the Leader of the Opposition goes on about this cost benefit analysis, let us remember the article in the Sunday Mail, which again I think was quoted in The Advertiser in the last day or so. The Leader of the Opposition went out and got a consultant, and that consultant said that a city stadium would only cost $520 million—and I cannot believe that the print media of this state actually bought this—but they then said that we cannot tell you who the consultant is and we cannot show you the consultant's report. Why—commercial in confidence.

They have gone out and got some dodgy consultant's report where the guy is not even prepared to put his name to it or release it. That somehow is a substantial piece of work done to cost up a city stadium. He wants us to do a cost benefit analysis, he wants the AFL to do a cost benefit analysis and he wants the SANFL to do a cost benefit analysis, but he does not do one. He just comes up with a number out of the air. Subiaco, on the last advice I was given, is costing in excess of $1.5 billion.

Mr Hamilton-Smith: Rubbish!

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: He says 'rubbish'. The Leader of the Opposition best ring Alan Carpenter—

Mr Hamilton-Smith: You are dribbling. It is not $1.5 billion, and you know it.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Madam Deputy Speaker, the Premier of Western Australia has made it very clear to me that the Subiaco redevelopment is costing $1.5 billion.

Mr Hamilton-Smith interjecting:

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: So, what is the component of the oval worth? If you honestly believe—

Mr Hamilton-Smith: What is the stadium component?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: To build a brand new stadium with a roof in the city will cost at least $1 billion.

Members interjecting:

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Madam Deputy Speaker, can I have some protection, please?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: The Subiaco project is $1.5 billion-plus. As the leader said, that includes other amenities in that project. The oval component—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Madam Deputy Speaker, can I have some protection please?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Treasurer, I invite you to resume your seat every time you need the chamber to come to order, and you will be given the preference of the call. Treasurer.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: All the advice I have been given and all the experience shows that a city stadium is going to cost at least $1 billion.

The Hon. P.F. Conlon: We know where to put it.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: We would know where to put it: we have already committed the site to a hospital. We actually think a hospital is better value than a football stadium at $1 billion.

Members interjecting:

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: This guy makes up these numbers. No-one in the football world I speak to who has experience in stadium construction honestly believes you could build it for half a billion dollars. The Leader of the Opposition will say whatever he likes to get a headline. What I say to the Leader of the Opposition is: show us your consultancy report. Will you show us that report?

Mr Hamilton-Smith: During the campaign.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Oh, during the campaign.

Mr Hamilton-Smith: You gave your costings two days before election day. Two days!

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: The Leader of the Opposition says he will show us the consultancy report during the election campaign. Show it to us now. Let us have a look at it.

Mr Hamilton-Smith: You show us yours and we will show you ours.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: What a lightweight outfit is the opposition, and the Leader of the Opposition will say whatever he likes, whenever he likes, to whomever he likes. He changes his position daily, and I think the public of this state is catching up with him on that.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT