❓ Opposition questions the Minister for Sport and Recreation about the costings for the Perth Stadium project at Burswood, alleging the Minister is ignoring higher cost estimates from his department. The Minister defends his figures, citing the Langoulant report as the basis for the $700 million stadium cost plus $300 million for transport.
AnsweredQoN 655Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
PERTH MAJOR SPORTS STADIUM — BURSWOOD
I refer to the minister’s statements that the full cost of the stadium at Burswood will be $1 billion and to his decision to ignore costings given to him by his department that the actual cost of this project is significantly higher than that amount. (1) From where is the minister getting the costings that he is using publicly? (2) Will the minister table any alternative advice that he has based these costings on? Mr T.K. WALDRON
I refer to the minister’s statements that the full cost of the stadium at Burswood will be $1 billion and to his decision to ignore costings given to him by his department that the actual cost of this project is significantly higher than that amount. (1) From where is the minister getting the costings that he is using publicly? (2) Will the minister table any alternative advice that he has based these costings on? Mr T.K. WALDRON
AnswerView source ↗
The indicative cost of the stadium, as we said yesterday on a number of occasions, is $700 million. An amount of $300 million is allowed for transport arrangements — Mr E.S. Ripper : On what advice is that based? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The actual base advice, working back, comes from the Langoulant report. If we look at the figures in the Langoulant report — Mr E.S. Ripper : You said yesterday that that was our project, not yours! Mr T.K. WALDRON : Yes. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
(1) From where is the minister getting the costings that he is using publicly? (2) Will the minister table any alternative advice that he has based these costings on? Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: The indicative cost of the stadium, as we said yesterday on a number of occasions, is $700 million. An amount of $300 million is allowed for transport arrangements — Mr E.S. Ripper : On what advice is that based? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The actual base advice, working back, comes from the Langoulant report. If we look at the figures in the Langoulant report — Mr E.S. Ripper : You said yesterday that that was our project, not yours! Mr T.K. WALDRON : Yes. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
(2) Will the minister table any alternative advice that he has based these costings on? Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: The indicative cost of the stadium, as we said yesterday on a number of occasions, is $700 million. An amount of $300 million is allowed for transport arrangements — Mr E.S. Ripper : On what advice is that based? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The actual base advice, working back, comes from the Langoulant report. If we look at the figures in the Langoulant report — Mr E.S. Ripper : You said yesterday that that was our project, not yours! Mr T.K. WALDRON : Yes. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: The indicative cost of the stadium, as we said yesterday on a number of occasions, is $700 million. An amount of $300 million is allowed for transport arrangements — Mr E.S. Ripper : On what advice is that based? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The actual base advice, working back, comes from the Langoulant report. If we look at the figures in the Langoulant report — Mr E.S. Ripper : You said yesterday that that was our project, not yours! Mr T.K. WALDRON : Yes. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
The indicative cost of the stadium, as we said yesterday on a number of occasions, is $700 million. An amount of $300 million is allowed for transport arrangements — Mr E.S. Ripper : On what advice is that based? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The actual base advice, working back, comes from the Langoulant report. If we look at the figures in the Langoulant report — Mr E.S. Ripper : You said yesterday that that was our project, not yours! Mr T.K. WALDRON : Yes. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Mr E.S. Ripper : On what advice is that based? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The actual base advice, working back, comes from the Langoulant report. If we look at the figures in the Langoulant report — Mr E.S. Ripper : You said yesterday that that was our project, not yours! Mr T.K. WALDRON : Yes. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Mr T.K. WALDRON : The actual base advice, working back, comes from the Langoulant report. If we look at the figures in the Langoulant report — Mr E.S. Ripper : You said yesterday that that was our project, not yours! Mr T.K. WALDRON : Yes. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Mr E.S. Ripper : You said yesterday that that was our project, not yours! Mr T.K. WALDRON : Yes. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Mr T.K. WALDRON : Yes. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
(1) From where is the minister getting the costings that he is using publicly? (2) Will the minister table any alternative advice that he has based these costings on? Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: The indicative cost of the stadium, as we said yesterday on a number of occasions, is $700 million. An amount of $300 million is allowed for transport arrangements — Mr E.S. Ripper : On what advice is that based? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The actual base advice, working back, comes from the Langoulant report. If we look at the figures in the Langoulant report — Mr E.S. Ripper : You said yesterday that that was our project, not yours! Mr T.K. WALDRON : Yes. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
(2) Will the minister table any alternative advice that he has based these costings on? Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: The indicative cost of the stadium, as we said yesterday on a number of occasions, is $700 million. An amount of $300 million is allowed for transport arrangements — Mr E.S. Ripper : On what advice is that based? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The actual base advice, working back, comes from the Langoulant report. If we look at the figures in the Langoulant report — Mr E.S. Ripper : You said yesterday that that was our project, not yours! Mr T.K. WALDRON : Yes. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: The indicative cost of the stadium, as we said yesterday on a number of occasions, is $700 million. An amount of $300 million is allowed for transport arrangements — Mr E.S. Ripper : On what advice is that based? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The actual base advice, working back, comes from the Langoulant report. If we look at the figures in the Langoulant report — Mr E.S. Ripper : You said yesterday that that was our project, not yours! Mr T.K. WALDRON : Yes. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
The indicative cost of the stadium, as we said yesterday on a number of occasions, is $700 million. An amount of $300 million is allowed for transport arrangements — Mr E.S. Ripper : On what advice is that based? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The actual base advice, working back, comes from the Langoulant report. If we look at the figures in the Langoulant report — Mr E.S. Ripper : You said yesterday that that was our project, not yours! Mr T.K. WALDRON : Yes. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Mr E.S. Ripper : On what advice is that based? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The actual base advice, working back, comes from the Langoulant report. If we look at the figures in the Langoulant report — Mr E.S. Ripper : You said yesterday that that was our project, not yours! Mr T.K. WALDRON : Yes. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Mr T.K. WALDRON : The actual base advice, working back, comes from the Langoulant report. If we look at the figures in the Langoulant report — Mr E.S. Ripper : You said yesterday that that was our project, not yours! Mr T.K. WALDRON : Yes. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Mr E.S. Ripper : You said yesterday that that was our project, not yours! Mr T.K. WALDRON : Yes. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Mr T.K. WALDRON : Yes. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
The SPEAKER : My impression of the question was that some information was sought by the member for Kwinana and the information might lie with the minister. If other people have information, maybe they should stand at another time and deliver that information. At this moment, it is the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s opportunity. Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Mr T.K. WALDRON : As I said, right through the last nearly three years, when we put the stadium on hold for two years, we referred to the Langoulant report all the way through. If we went back through all the interviews I have done, we would see that I have always referred to it. The base pricing of Burswood that the report showed was a guide for us to work off. The price that the member for Kwinana was talking about yesterday was a forecast. The document the member has—which comes out of the Langoulant report anyway—showed the forecast with the building index what the cost could go to. From memory, I think it was $1.24 billion. Of course, that figure included, as I said—I do not know how many times I have to say this—the underground car park that was planned under the previous government in its Burswood proposal and the raised area for the plaza, which is not part of the state government’s project. With the base funding, we worked back to the Langoulant report. The extra funding that the member is talking about has been extrapolated out. The member took into account the car park and the plaza area. That is it. This is a new project. Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Mr R.H. Cook : Will you table the advice? Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
Mr T.K. WALDRON : The advice is there. The member has the advice; he used it yesterday. The advice is in the Langoulant report. I will tell members something: we have made a decision to pick the best site and no doubt this is the best site. It is more than just a stadium; it is about the entry to Perth. The greenfields site gives us flexibility. The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
The Subiaco site was a reasonable site; there is no doubt about that. The opposition could have gone there, but there were lots of issues of constraint. There were houses that had to be resumed, there was state housing that had to be shifted. There was stuff on Roberts Road that could not be done because of the constraints. We can now build a proper stadium. We have said there is funding of $700 million plus the $300 million. I do not know how much clearer I can be.
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.