Honorable Speaker. This debate is not about whether Tasmanians love their football or that this state deserves a team. Of course we do. Tasmania, entering the AFL should be one of the greatest moments in our state’s history. However it has become a divisive issue that people are reluctant to discuss with their friends and family.
Firstly, I want to deal in numbers, not in nostalgia. The proposed stadium project is now estimated to cost over a billion dollars in combined public and private funding. This is through the state’s direct commitment through borrowings. Grants associated infrastructure with an additional $240 million from the Commonwealth.
Letter to the Editor
But these figures are not fixed. Every major project of this scale in Australia in the past decade has exceeded initial estimates by 20 to 40 percent. If we apply that historical average, the real cost would be closer to $1.5 billion plus by completion. $1.5 billion dollars Honorable Speaker. That is not theoretical.
That is a figure that represents debt service obligations for 20 years to commit to a project of this magnitude when essential services are struggling to meet existing demand. It demands a level of confidence in the future revenue that this government simply has not demonstrated. I’m not advocating for this money to be spent on services such as education, health etc because building infrastructure is essential for the future of this state.
We must grow the revenue in this state so we can fund our essential services. I have sat in numerous treasury briefings and attempted to understand the forecasting and pie charts. What I could understand is that we need to make the pie bigger. There is also the question of timing. We are entering a period of economic uncertainty.
Construction costs have risen by nearly 30 percent since 2021. Labor shortages persist. Contractors are already stretched across multiple major projects including housing, hospitals, and renewable infrastructure. This means that any additional project of this scale risks either diverting skilled labor from essential works or inflating prices even further.
The North Coast Post: BSB 633 000 · Account number: 2366 8 9535
If the government insists on pushing ahead, it must be prepared to admit that other projects will be delayed or scaled back. This is not a question of opposing development. It is a question of sequencing, and priority. Honorable Speaker. I have no doubt that those involved in this project are well intentioned.
But the governance model is still vague. The handling of the POSS (Project of State Significance) process was comical and the government’s response looked rushed and dismissive. We are being asked to approve expenditure on the promise of future benefits without a clear, accountable mechanism to measure them. A responsible government before proceeding would present the house with an independent review of financial risk, contingency planning, and operational sustainability.
Not slogans, not concept art. Hard numbers, measurable outcomes. Tasmania’s small population base limits the local multiplier effect. Unlike larger states, we do not have millions of residents attending multiple major events each month. The stadium will rely on out of state visitation, and national events scheduling to generate returns.
This is an uncertain foundation on which to build a billion dollar public investment. And critically, the projected stadium operating model assumes ongoing government support in the form of maintenance, event subsidies, promotional funding, and promotional funding. In other words, the initial cost is not the final cost.
It is not unpatriotic to ask whether this is unsustainable. It is responsible. The government has not done their job in bringing the public along on this journey and to fully educate them on the need for a new stadium. But speaker, there is another truth that we must hold alongside.
All of those concerns have waited decades for recognition on, on the national sporting stage. For too long, our state has produced extraordinary athletes. Filled stadiums elsewhere, and yet being treated as a spectator in our own story. The Shooters, Fishers, and Farmers Party strongly advocates for children to be active outside, preferably fishing and camping with your friends and family.
But if you want to kick a football around. Go for it. There comes a time when numbers alone cannot define ambition for all the financial risk. This project represents something rare and an opportunity for Tasmania to be part of a national league to project confidence, to invest in itself as a place that matters on the map.
It is not just about football, it is about identity, pride, and the message that we send to our children that Tasmania can stand on its own two feet. Our young people are leaving our state in droves for education and lifestyle reasons. We must attract working professionals and families to return to our state.
And send a message interstate that Tasmania is viable for all generations. A stadium is more than a structure. It is a signal. When visitors fly into Hobart, or Launceston, what they see and experience shapes their perception of this island. When our young people dream of sporting careers, they should be able to imagine themselves playing for their home state, on home soil.
We can and should demand accountability for costs, but we must not confuse accountability for paralysis. Too often in this state, our default answer to change is no, and we need to be dragged kicking and screaming before saying yes.
Then when it’s a success, we wonder why we never did this before. The correct posture for this parliament is not blind enthusiasm, not blanket rejection. It is cautious courage to proceed with all the safeguards to invest, but always open to ensure that the stadium does not become a financial monument, but a functioning, living part of our community fabric.
If we are to build this, we must insist Tasmanian companies and workers benefit first. We must require that access is affordable, that community sport is integrated, and that the venue serves not only elite events, but grassroots participation. The government must enshrine transparency over every dollar spent.
Regular public reporting, independent auditing. And genuine community consultation must be non-negotiable. Honorable Speaker, I’ve been forthright today about the cost, it is immense. The risks are real. And the government has been flawed. But when we step back, we must also ask what kind of state do we want to be?
Do we choose to stand until conditions are perfect, or do we take a carefully calculated step into a larger story for Tasmania. This is not a blank check. It is a leap with conditions. We proceed, not because the numbers are perfect, but because the opportunity is rare. We do so knowing the cost, but also knowing that cost of inaction.
The loss of our team, the loss of belief of a moment that may not return. Prior to the election I took a position of voting no against the stadium based on my own views and understanding at the time. I’m not too proud to admit that I didn’t understand the issue fully. Since being elected, I’ve spent a lot of time in the community.
I have listened to the people of Lyons. I’ve met both sides of the debate. I’ve had strong discussions even within my own party, and I’ve received hundreds of emails and even been stopped in my local supermarket to listen to the community when I just wanted to go and buy some milk and go home.
I listened to the hospitality events and tourism community that are overwhelmingly supportive of this. I listened to Brendon Gale and the Devils who outlined how crucial this stadium is to the team. I listened to local sporting communities have seen drastic increases in participation since the team’s announcement.
As most would know, I’m not an Aussie rules follower. I would much prefer to be out in the bush. I have never supported a team in the past. However, I am proud to say that I’m now a Devils fan. Well, I will not stand here and say I am for the team, but against the stadium because we know they are one and the same.
I owe the people of Tasmania the respect that they deserve to take this vote very seriously. I understand my decision today will upset some people. I may lose their support. But that is something that has weighed on my mind these last few months. Being in this place is about making hard decisions on behalf of the Tasmanian people.
Some people may say, I back flipped. If you are not allowed to change your position after critically weighing up options, then I’m not sure what the purpose of being here is. I have heard a lot over the last few months from people in this chamber that we must be willing to compromise and work collaboratively.
I am yet to see much compromise, so I will not cheer recklessly Honorable Speaker, but nor will I stand in the way. I will determine that if this parliament builds something of this scale, it does so with both caution and conviction.
As I cast my vote, I do say weighing up concerns and doubts about the stadium and the economic risk involved, but also for the past generations who have worked decades for this. I will be voting yes for the future generations of Tasmanians, who deserve an AFL team.
Thank you.
