HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2011-05-05 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

ADELAIDE OVAL

Mrs VLAHOS (Taylor) (15:00): My question is to the Minister for Recreation, Sport and Racing. Can the minister outline the expected benefits for grassroots sports from the Adelaide Oval development?

The Hon. T.R. KENYON (Newland—Minister for Recreation, Sport and Racing, Minister for Road Safety, Minister for Veterans' Affairs, Minister Assisting the Premier with South Australia's Strategic Plan) (15:00): As minister for recreation and sport, as well as a proud South Australian, I have a keen interest in the flow-on effects of the proposal to bring football back to Adelaide Oval in a new redeveloped stadium. Amid the huge level of current public interest, I thought it important to share with the house the benefits for sport itself, not just the SANFL and SACA.

The SANFL CEO, Mr Leigh Whicker, has advised government that football involves more than 100,000 participants and more than 1,500 staff, and drives more than $100 million into the state's economy. Of course, there are also positive benefits for communities, for health and for the social good. These benefits are conditional on the ongoing financial success of the SANFL—a level of success the opposition leader, the deputy leader, the member for Davenport and the member for Adelaide are currently trying to destroy.

Mr Whicker has informed government that, through a number of factors, the brand of AAMI Stadium has been destroyed to a point where it is almost beyond repair. He advises that the financial strength of football throughout the state is dependent on the revenues of the Adelaide Crows, the Port Adelaide Football Club and their stadium revenues. Mr Whicker said:

In turn, the ability of the Adelaide Football Club and the Port Adelaide Football Club to not only survive but also to succeed and compete on a level playing field in the AFL competition is totally reliant on their playing at a stadium which is accessible and has facilities which meet current requirements. Sadly, AAMI Stadium does not now meet these criteria and cannot do so without an expensive upgrade which would require the expenditure of between $200 million and $250 million.

I am astounded that the member for Davenport would be so opposed to the ongoing success of football. Mr Whicker went on to say:

The SANFL, the Adelaide Football Club and the Port Adelaide Football Club are convinced—

yes, convinced—

that the future base of football and the playing of AFL games in this state should be at a redeveloped Adelaide Oval and request that the government finds a way for it to proceed.

In terms of economic impact, the increased revenues from the move to Adelaide Oval will provide more money for grassroots football. This has been said time and again by former premier John Olsen and Mr Whicker. Similarly, the Adelaide Oval will provide more money for SACA to spend on grassroots cricket around the state, and this has been supported by country cricket chief, Mr Ian Ravenscroft.

The government's involvement in Adelaide Oval frees SACA of $85 million in debt and frees up $18 million in the first two years to be spent on cricket. There is also a revenue uplift of between $2 million and $4 million for cricket each year based on these new facilities.

Mr Griffiths interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order, the member for Goyder!

The Hon. T.R. KENYON: These benefits are massive for cricket around the state. It is a financial position that is going to benefit small teams, big teams and the development of young cricketers. In SACA's own words, it means more resources for clubs, regional development centres, youth and school programs; more resources for elite cricket programs; construction of a new, larger, world-class indoor cricket training centre at Adelaide Oval; the resurfacing and enhancement of Adelaide Oval No. 2; and the retention of year-round cricket training at Adelaide Oval.

I suggest every Liberal member goes and tells the football, cricketing and community-based families in their electorate why they think this Adelaide Oval redevelopment should not go ahead. I suggest that the Leader of the Opposition explain to the Mount Lofty football club (the member for Davenport's beloved mighty Mountain Devils) why they should not get access to more money for football; that the member for Davenport should explain to the Coromandel Valley cricket club why they should not get access to more money for cricket; that the member for Schubert should explain to the Nuriootpa Cricket Club; that the member for Kavel should explain to the Nairne Cricket Club; and that the member for Goyder should explain to the Sunbury Cricket Club (affectionately known as the Lords).

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