A supplementary question regarding a dedicated budget for additional facilities at the new Perth Stadium is met with a defensive response highlighting the broader entertainment precinct vision and contrasting it with the opposition's stance.

AnsweredQoN 292Legislative Assembly
Asked
12 June 2012
Portfolio
Treasurer

QuestionView source ↗

PERTH MAJOR SPORTS STADIUM — ADDITIONAL
FACILITIES
292. Mr M.P. MURRAY to the Treasurer:
I ask a supplementary question. Is the Treasurer now saying
that there will be a special budget for these extras?

AnswerView source ↗

Members opposite do not even grasp
the most simple concept! This is a stadium in an area that will become a large
entertainment precinct for the people of Western Australia. Members opposite
clearly oppose that. One of the reasons for choosing the Burswood site is that
we could not do that at Subiaco. At Burswood, we can have far more than simply
a sports stadium. Indeed, should in the future this state ever bid for, say, a
Commonwealth Games, we could have a whole sporting entertainment complex on
that site. But what we are doing at this stage, which is the big step, is
building a world-class stadium with world-class transport infrastructure, to
which 70 per cent of the people will come on public transport—and
members opposite oppose it, because their policy is to stay at Subiaco!

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more