❓ Mr. Murray questions the Treasurer on the inclusion of additional facilities at the new Burswood stadium and their potential impact on the budget. The Treasurer clarifies that while such facilities are envisioned for the broader precinct, they are not included in the stadium's $700 million budget or the transport infrastructure's $300 million allocation.
AnsweredQoN 291Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
PERTH MAJOR SPORTS STADIUM — ADDITIONAL
FACILITIES
291. Mr M.P. MURRAY to the Treasurer:
My question without notice is to the Treasurer. Treasurer,
are you right?
Mr C.J. Barnett :
Yes, fine.
Mr M.P. MURRAY :
That is okay. I just thought the Treasurer was having a fit!
I refer to the Treasurer's commitment that the new
Burswood stadium would include such additions as waterparks for children, a
creche, theatres, the ability for people to order food from their seats, and
seat speakers, and to the former Treasurer's statement during estimates
that if such additions would increase the cost over $700 million, they would
not be included.
(1) Was the
former Treasurer correct that these additions will be dropped if the $700 million
target figure is breached?
(2) Did the
Treasurer have any discussions with the former Treasurer over his differing
views on these additions?
(3) Is the
Treasurer still committed to the inclusion of these additions?
FACILITIES
291. Mr M.P. MURRAY to the Treasurer:
My question without notice is to the Treasurer. Treasurer,
are you right?
Mr C.J. Barnett :
Yes, fine.
Mr M.P. MURRAY :
That is okay. I just thought the Treasurer was having a fit!
I refer to the Treasurer's commitment that the new
Burswood stadium would include such additions as waterparks for children, a
creche, theatres, the ability for people to order food from their seats, and
seat speakers, and to the former Treasurer's statement during estimates
that if such additions would increase the cost over $700 million, they would
not be included.
(1) Was the
former Treasurer correct that these additions will be dropped if the $700 million
target figure is breached?
(2) Did the
Treasurer have any discussions with the former Treasurer over his differing
views on these additions?
(3) Is the
Treasurer still committed to the inclusion of these additions?
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(3) I
thought when I made those comments that I was pretty clear, but clearly members
opposite did not understand what I was saying. The estimated budget for the
stadium is $700 million for the construction of the major stadium—the
60 000-seat stadium in its basic form. There is an additional $300 million
allocated for transport infrastructure. That includes the rail station, a
proposed pedestrian crossing over the river —
Ms M.M. Quirk : A
crossing, not a bridge?
Mr C.J. BARNETT : A
bridge—yes, there will be a bridge.
Mr
F.M. Logan : You do not know the cost of it!
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : No, because it has not been designed, let alone costed.
So, based on the figures, or the information, from the
Langoulant report, and the decision at the time that was made last year on the
stadium, the provisional budget for the stadium is $700 million and for the
associated transport infrastructure in its various forms is $300 million. When
asked and commenting on the stadium, I made the observation that, in effect, if
I can make myself clearer, beyond that, this is not just simply a stadium or a
rail station: this is the development of an entire eastside precinct for the
City of Perth, on the Burswood peninsula. I made the comment that people would
expect to see, and they will see in time, other facilities around it. They may
include a water playground. They may include an amphitheatre. They may include
other entertainment and events. That is what is happening. But if I can make
myself clear, because obviously members opposite did not understand me at the
time, that is not in any sense part of the stadium or transport infrastructure.
These are the sorts of facilities that I would hope would develop on Burswood
over the future, and they will, because it is a vast area of land that is all
government owned. Would it not be great? Would it not be fantastic to park our
car in East Perth —
Ms M.M. Quirk :
Where?
Mr C.J. BARNETT : —
park our car in East Perth, in the city, walk across the pedestrian bridge,
have a barbecue, let the kids play in the water playground, and listen to a
band playing in an amphitheatre? Would it not be fantastic? But not for those
opposite! They want to go to Subiaco! They want to stay in Subiaco! Well, we
will all be over there, with all their constituents from the eastern suburbs,
at the new stadium!
thought when I made those comments that I was pretty clear, but clearly members
opposite did not understand what I was saying. The estimated budget for the
stadium is $700 million for the construction of the major stadium—the
60 000-seat stadium in its basic form. There is an additional $300 million
allocated for transport infrastructure. That includes the rail station, a
proposed pedestrian crossing over the river —
Ms M.M. Quirk : A
crossing, not a bridge?
Mr C.J. BARNETT : A
bridge—yes, there will be a bridge.
Mr
F.M. Logan : You do not know the cost of it!
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : No, because it has not been designed, let alone costed.
So, based on the figures, or the information, from the
Langoulant report, and the decision at the time that was made last year on the
stadium, the provisional budget for the stadium is $700 million and for the
associated transport infrastructure in its various forms is $300 million. When
asked and commenting on the stadium, I made the observation that, in effect, if
I can make myself clearer, beyond that, this is not just simply a stadium or a
rail station: this is the development of an entire eastside precinct for the
City of Perth, on the Burswood peninsula. I made the comment that people would
expect to see, and they will see in time, other facilities around it. They may
include a water playground. They may include an amphitheatre. They may include
other entertainment and events. That is what is happening. But if I can make
myself clear, because obviously members opposite did not understand me at the
time, that is not in any sense part of the stadium or transport infrastructure.
These are the sorts of facilities that I would hope would develop on Burswood
over the future, and they will, because it is a vast area of land that is all
government owned. Would it not be great? Would it not be fantastic to park our
car in East Perth —
Ms M.M. Quirk :
Where?
Mr C.J. BARNETT : —
park our car in East Perth, in the city, walk across the pedestrian bridge,
have a barbecue, let the kids play in the water playground, and listen to a
band playing in an amphitheatre? Would it not be fantastic? But not for those
opposite! They want to go to Subiaco! They want to stay in Subiaco! Well, we
will all be over there, with all their constituents from the eastern suburbs,
at the new stadium!
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.