Tasmania to seek loan for Hobart stadium funding shortfall in pivot away from 'private-public partnership'
The ABC can reveal the government will fund construction of the stadium via debt obtained through the Macquarie Point Development Corporation (MPDC), on top of $630 million of already committed state, federal and AFL funding.
The decision was rubberstamped by cabinet last week, following a market-sounding exercise and was based partly on advice from Perth consultants Paxon Group and the Melbourne-based Infrastructure Advisory Group.
The government will pivot toward a "design and construct" model and away from a "private-public partnership", which it determined would carry too high a risk to the state and threaten already tight timelines.
It then intends to sell off parcels of the broader Macquarie Point precinct to private developers and use those funds to pay off the loan — which is likely to be upwards of $200 million.
The proposed stadium is due to be completed by 2029.
(
Supplied: MPDC
)
Photo shows
A concept image of the proposed Hobart stadium at Macquarie Poi nt.
A leading independent economist tasked with reviewing Tasmania's proposal to build an AFL stadium on Hobart's waterfront finds the project is "already displaying the hallmarks of mismanagement" and is likely to exceed $1 billion.
The parcels would include about 17,000 square metres of commercially zoned space encompassing Macquarie Point's "mixed use" and Antarctic precinct, as well as the housing precinct at Regatta Point, and an underground multi-storey car park.
Under the plan, those parcels will become available following commencement of the stadium — provided it is approved by both houses of parliament — with the market value of the land expected to rise as the stadium development progresses.
However, those land sales are not expected to cover the full amount of the loan.
The MPDC will use existing funds to pay for the stadium build and, on current timelines, is not expected to borrow until about 2027 or later.
The state government plans to introduce "enabling legislation" to the parliament to progress the stadium, rather than continuing with the Project of State Significance process.
(
Supplied: MPDC
)
The current official cost estimate for the stadium is $775 million but has been estimated by external quantity surveyors to be closer to $900 million.
The state government has pledged $375 million in capital funding, while the federal government has committed $240 million and the AFL $15 million, leaving at minimum a $145 million shortfall, but the loan amount will likely be higher than that.
Public-private partnership would have left state worse off, minister says
Public infrastructure funders from around the world had expressed strong interest in partnering with the government to deliver the stadium and broader precinct, with the ABC confirming Tetris Capital, John Laing Group, Capella Capital and property developer Milieu — which was set to develop the site under a previous master plan — were among those keen.
Melbourne-based Plenary Group, which had assembled a consortium, including a financier and builder, was considered the frontrunner had the government opted to partner with the private sector.
But in a statement, Business, Industry and Resources Minister Eric Abetz told the ABC that the government's advice was that a private-public partnership would ultimately leave the state worse off.
Eric Abetz says the new funding model will help the stadium be built on time.
(
ABC News: Owain Stia James
)
Mr Abetz said it would "cost the taxpayer more, take longer to implement and take away from the asset being owned by and for the Tasmanian people".
"The decision to prioritise the delivery of the multipurpose stadium through a 'design and construct' pathway provides certainty and confidence in the future of the precinct and the Tasmania Devils AFL club," he said.
"
We cannot afford any delays if we are to meet existing time frames set out in the AFL agreement. Without a stadium, there is no Tasmanian AFL team.
"
The government's deal with the AFL requires a roofed stadium be built at Macquarie Point for the state to get a team.
(
Supplied: MPDC
)
Plenary managing director Damien Augustinus told the ABC he believed a private-public partnership would "deliver greater innovation, more certainty around on-time delivery and costs, and better whole-of-life outcomes than traditional design and construct or managing contract procurement methods".
Mr Augustinus said involving the private sector would "mean more investment in Tasmania, creating more Tasmanian jobs and permit a cohesive whole-of-precinct approach".
"
In the Macquarie Point precinct, the Tasmanian government has a golden opportunity to partner with the private sector to finance, deliver and manage a world-class sporting, tourism and entertainment precinct.
"
A render of a bar inside the relocated and re-imagined Goods Shed, next to the proposed stadium.
(
Supplied: MPDC
)
What's a private-public partnership?
A private-public partnership (PPP) would mean a public infrastructure firm would fund a shortfall, construct the stadium, and then enter an agreement with the government to maintain, and potentially operate, the stadium and precinct for 25-30 years.
Photo shows
A map showing pinch points on three out of the four sides of a stadium and nearby areas.
Macquarie Point is hemmed in by a highway, a working port, heritage buildings and a knoll, with just enough space for a stadium. The Planning Commission has laid bare the problems.
The government would have paid the consortium an agreed upon annual or quarterly fee, and likely a slice of revenue generated by the precinct for that period of time.
Independent economist Saul Eslake said that while tempting, private-public partnerships had their pitfalls.
"Because it's usually believed the private sector can manage construction projects more efficiently than the public sector, that is assumed to result in a net saving to the government," he said.
"What PPPs sometimes ignore is that governments can borrow at lower interest rates than private companies, and in many PPPs that have been entered to in other states and in overseas jurisdictions, the private participants often find ways through complex legal contracts find ways to transfer risk back to the public sector."
Saul Eslake says private-public partnerships have their pitfalls.
(
ABC News: Daniel Irvine
)
Mr Eslake said borrowing through the MPDC would provide the government with some budgetary camouflage — but that ultimately it will still be public money that will be borrowed and needs to be paid back, with interest.
"If the government were to borrow through TASCORP in its own name, that would be reflected in the government's budget deficit and would add to the government's net debt,"
he said.
"But if the Macquarie Point Development Corporation were to borrow — they would not appear in the general government's deficit and net debt, but rather in that of the public and non-financial corporation sector.
"Although that would be disclosed in the budget papers, the borrowings of GBEs [government business enterprises] and other public non-financial corporations don't get as much attention or scrutiny."
More stories on the stadium:
Crucial independent MLC 'pleased' with change in funding
Independent MLC Ruth Forrest, who holds a crucial upper house vote on the stadium, is not yet sold on the project, but said she was "pleased" the government had rejected a private-public partnership and that it would "absolutely" influence her vote.
"It's critical in my mind,"
Ms Forrest said.
Photo shows
Concept art showing interior of sports stadium with cricket match underway.
If it wasn't already official, it is now: The proposed Hobart stadium is massively on the nose among many Tasmanians.
"It won't cost the state any more, because ultimately, we'd be underwriting any private-public partnership I would imagine.
"It's more transparent because the people of Tasmania will have more vision of what it'll actually cost."
Ms Forrest still wants answers to key questions raised by the Tasmanian Planning Commission as well as surety around the ongoing operating model of the stadium.
"I'll need to be really clear about the operations of the food and beverage, the hospitality, the venue space, what that looks like. We need to own all of that, operate and control all of that to be assured it can be a sustainable model," she said.
Greens say government's taxpayer funding promise is broken
The government has long insisted its funding toward the stadium was capped at $375 million and "not a red cent more".
The Greens, who have long opposed the stadium, said the decision to switch the funding model signalled a "huge broken promise".
"The premier said 'not a red cent more' than $375 million would be spent on the stadium, but now Tasmanian taxpayers are responsible for many hundreds of millions of dollars more than he promised," Greens deputy leader Vica Bayley said.
"The Liberal government's talk of private investment has always been a ploy to mislead the community about the true cost of the stadium to the taxpayer.
"There's no good model for funding the stadium, which is why the government should scrap it."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Sky News AU
3 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Opposition's big call on union's push for four-day work week
The opposition has dismissed calls for a four-day work week as an 'ambit claim' from unions, but says it is ultimately up to employers. The Australian Council of Trade Unions this week announced they would push for a shorter work week at the Albanese government's Economic Reform Roundtable. The ACTU argued working four days would boost productivity, pointing to recent research from more than 140 organisations across Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Canada, the UK and the US. It said that it would share productivity gains more fairly with workers and improve living standards. Opposition industrial relations and employment spokesman Tim Wilson said on Sunday the ACTU was not serious about it. 'This is just an ambit claim from the trade union movement,' he told the ABC. 'We know it's an ambit claim because only a few months ago, the unions shut down a pathway where the retail industry, again, actually applied to introduce a pathway for a four-day working week. 'The unions were the one who shut this down.' He said if ACTU chief Sally McManus 'really believed that this was such a good idea, she would introduce it across all the people who work for trade unions across the countries'. Though, he added that employers were free to set arrangements as they liked with their employees. 'If work employers and employees want to come together and negotiate arrangements that suit them, that's a very different thing from what Sally McManus is proposing, where they're seeking to legislate these sorts of proposals which they aren't even adopting themselves,' Mr Wilson said. 'That's what workplace flexibility means. 'It means coming together to get the best outcome for workers and employers, to advance economic productivity and improving standards of living for every Australian.' Anthony Albanese and his senior ministers have said the government is not working on a policy for a four-day work week. Instead, they put the focus back on flexible work arrangements through enterprise bargaining. Employment and Workplace Relations Minister Amanda Rishworth earlier said it was one of many 'different ideas' feeding into the roundtable. 'What I would say is what I hear and what the unions and businesses have often put forward, is making sure that there is flexibility around caring responsibilities, work-life balance, which is really key,' she told Sky News. 'Which is why, in the Secure Jobs Better Pay Bill that passed the parliament last term, there is the right to request flexible arrangements – that could be location, that could be hours. 'You have the right to do that if you are balancing family and care responsibilities.' Originally published as Calls for four-day work week a ruse, opposition says

Sky News AU
3 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Former Hong Kong lawmaker and outspoken pro-democracy activist Ted Hui granted asylum in Australia months after receiving threatening letter
Exiled Hong Kong pro-democracy activist Ted Hui has announced on social media that he has been granted asylum in Australia. Hui revealed on Saturday that he had received written notice from the Australian Department of Home Affairs on Friday approving his asylum claim and that his wife, children and parents were also granted visas. 'When people around me say 'congratulations' to me, although I politely thank them, I can't help but feel sad in my heart. How to congratulate a political refugee who misses his hometown?" he said in the Facebook post on Saturday. "If it weren't for political persecution, I would never have thought of living in a foreign land. Immigrants can always return to their hometowns to visit relatives at any time; Exiles have no home. 'The permanent status under asylum removes the uncertainties and pressures they face for a long time —like in which country they will live in, how they will go to school, employment, and elderly — so they can plan for the longer term." The Home Affairs Department did not immediately respond to emailed questions sent after business hours. The Hong Kong government said that it was "against the harbouring of criminals in any form by any country," in a statement. China's foreign ministry did not respond to questions about the decision. The Adelaide-based lawyer and exiled Hong Kong pro-democracy campaigner was targeted with a menacing letter in mid-March that offered a handsome reward for anyone who handed the dissident over to authorities. Mr Hui revealed in a Facebook post that the anonymous letter had been mailed to his colleagues at the Adelaide law firm where he works, offering $203,000 to anyone who handed him over, or divulged information regarding his family's whereabouts. The letter, mailed from a Hong Kong address in early March, claimed Mr Hui was a 'wanted person' for a myriad of national security related offences including 'incitement to secession' and 'collusion with a foreign country'. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese visited Beijing last month as part of his government's years-long push to improve ties with China, and came under fire for toeing the CCP party line. A former Democratic Party lawmaker, Hui left Hong Kong in late 2020 after facing criminal charges over the 2019 pro-democracy protests. In 2023 Hong Kong accused him and seven others of national security offences, including incitement to secession, and put HK$1 million ($196,376) bounties on their heads. Australia said it was disappointed by the decision at the time and concerned about the law. Pro-democracy businessman Jimmy Lai is currently on trial in Hong Kong on charges related to a national security law imposed by Beijing and alleged sedition. - With Reuters

AU Financial Review
5 hours ago
- AU Financial Review
Robbie Williams invests in Heaps Normal, riding no-alcohol wave
British singer Robbie Williams enjoyed his can of Heaps Normal so much while on tour in Australia, he bought a stake in the no-alcohol beer company. Williams, who has not drunk alcohol in more than 20 years, is part of a growing trend of more health-conscious consumers favouring no-alcohol brands. It's a trend that is driving strong sales growth at the Sydney-based company, which has stepped up ambitious plans to expand overseas.