Federal funds for Brisbane Olympics stalled after arena shift
The Albanese government had agreed to fund the Brisbane Arena, which would host Olympic and Paralympic swimming events, leaving the main Olympic stadium to be delivered by the state.
But when Queensland's new Crisafulli LNP government adopted its Brisbane 2032 delivery plan in March, the arena – which the previous Labor government planned to build at Roma Street – was left for the private sector to deliver at Woolloongabba.
Swimming would be held at a new National Aquatic Centre to be built next to the Centenary Pool at Victoria Park, where the main 63,000-seat Olympic stadium would also be built, though its exact location and design were yet to be determined.
The change meant the $7 billion joint funding agreement between the Albanese and Palaszczuk governments in 2023 needed to be renegotiated.
Noting what she called the 'positive changes' coming out of the Crisafulli government's 100-day review, Federal Sports Minister Anika Wells said she was keen to come to a new agreement.
'The prime minister wrote to the premier saying, 'you don't have to worry about us squibbing on the deal' – we love the Games, we want to make it a success, but we need to see that detail,' she said.
Wells said there had to be value for money to justify the use of federal taxpayer funds, which was something the Albanese government had identified in the Brisbane Arena.
'One of the things we loved about the Brisbane Arena is that we could say to people from Karratha or Bendigo, this is something that you can enjoy when you come to Brisbane,' she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
7 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Albanese government set to overhaul childcare subsidy model
Treasurer Jim Chalmers has revealed the Albanese government may need to completely overhaul its childcare subsidy model. Universal childcare has been the goal for Prime Minister Anthony Albanese since he pledged to work toward it during the election campaign. Speaking to The Australian, The Treasurer says universal care is an ambitious plan which needs to be achieved in an affordable way.
7NEWS
8 hours ago
- 7NEWS
7NEWS The Issue: Why Trump's latest veiled threat could spell trouble for the pride of Australia
It was a telling measure of the value Australians put in the country's 77-year-old Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. In mid March, as the Albanese government looked for an issue to give it impetus for a soon-to-be-called election, it turned to the PBS; loved in Australia - and loathed by Pharmaceutical makers abroad - for delivering medicines at little more than one quarter the cost paid by Americans. Prime Minister Albanese announced, if reelected, he'd reduce the scheme's cap on prescriptions, from $31.60 to just $25. Opposition leader Peter Dutton immediately backed the plan. 'We support affordable medicines,' he told radio 2GB. On complaints from US pharmaceutical companies about the PBS, the Prime Minister seized on the chance for a fight. The PBS, he said was 'a monument to the fairness at the heart of Australian life and we don't negotiate our values.' The PBS is political gold. Supporting it is a 'no brainer' for a federal politician. Yet, five months on that threat from the US, has only intensified and it may yet test Australia's love for the scheme. For President Donald Trump, high prescription drug costs in America have become a cause. Loading content... Last month, the White House announced the President had written to 17 drug company CEOs demanding guarantees 'they will not offer other developed nations better prices for new drugs than prices offered in the United States.' According to a Trump White House fact sheet, 'Americans are subsidising drug-manufacturer profits and foreign health systems.' The statement did not mention Australia's PBS, but if the White House staff had wanted an example, it would have been an obvious candidate. 'The PBS is a cornerstone of our Medicare system' according to Medicines Australia CEO, Liz de Somer, though that's where her applause for the scheme ends. Medicines Australia is the industry body representing many of the same pharmaceutical giants now targeted by the Trump White House. According to Liz de Somer 'we're lagging behind other countries in the time it takes to make new medicines available on the PBS.' 'We are now taking an average of 466 days for a new innovative medicine to be listed on the PBS, and that's after it's already been deemed safe and effective by the Therapeutic Goods Administration.' 'We know these drugs are safe, we know they're effective, but the government has not yet decided to purchase them and make them subsidised for patients. They take too long.' Medicines Australia wants the 466 days average drug listing time, reduced dramatically - to just sixty days. That would likely mean dramatically reducing the time taken by the government and companies to negotiate a price for their medicines. The end result could easily be a bigger bill for the Australian taxpayer. Currently, the PBS costs about $14 billion a year to run. Of course, there is a human cost to delaying approval for medicines. Medicines Australia points to the 'many, many cancer medicines that are not available for patients' in Australia. According to Liz de Somer: 'We are getting one in four innovations listed on our PBS at the moment. That's not good enough.' 'We know that people are waiting for these medicines. We know that they can see they're available in other countries, and they don't understand why they're not made available here.' There is an obvious profit motive for pharmaceutical companies in getting listed sooner and selling their product more quickly, but delays in the system have a human cost. The Albanese government is currently considering recommendations to reform the scheme including measures designed to speed the process.
The Age
9 hours ago
- The Age
Premier doubles down on suggestion LNP figures viewed top doc pick unfit
The news Queensland Premier David Crisafulli has defended his government's abandoning of the merit-selected appointment of a new chief health officer and has declared he was trying to respect the doctor's privacy by not giving further detail. But Crisafulli doubled-down on the veiled suggestion the decision to scrap the imminent ascension of Dr Krispin Hajkowicz was because he was deemed unfit by senior LNP government figures, despite a rigorous external recruitment process. And, in his first public comments on the matter, Crisafulli continued to deny suggestions a Save Victoria Park sign displayed at his house, along with the historical display of a Greens election corflute known to some in the LNP, had also played a role. Why it matters Hajkowicz is seeking legal advice after his appointment as Dr John Gerrard's permanent successor was abruptly scuttled by the government, despite his selection through the merit-based process run by recruitment agency HardyGroup. It was not the first time Hajkowicz had been selected as CHO – the former Labor government appointed him to the role in 2021, but he decided not to take up the role just days from his official start date, citing personal reasons. After two days of refusing to answer questions, or even acknowledge the decision, a government spokesperson late on Thursday said Hajkowicz's 2021 withdrawal was the reason this appointment had been vetoed. By whom is still unclear.
