Editorial: Brisbane Olympic stadium boils down to two choices

Queensland will have to choose one of just two options for an Olympic stadium in the next few months, writes the editor.

A concept for a redeveloped Gabba

Queensland will have to confront what for some will be a challenging choice over the next few months – and yes, it relates to stadiums.

The choice will be whether to spend $1bn or so just keeping the lights on at the Gabba, or investing more in a new stadium for cricket and AFL. Those are the options.

The Gabba is to reach its viable end of life at the end of the decade, the result of underinvestment in its upkeep over the years. That $1bn or so would not deliver much in the way of noticeable improvements, and its capacity would remain the same (at about 35,000).

Going for the bigger option will of course be a political challenge for the government, both due to the fact we are in a cost-of-living crisis and that all but five members in the Crisafulli LNP party room represent electorates outside of Brisbane.

But they are all Queenslanders, and thinking bigger will deliver a better legacy for Queensland – a stadium that is modern, larger and so will give us a better chance of competing with the other capitals for big concerts and events.

As proponents begin clamouring for the ears of those who this week will be tasked with performing the Crisafulli government’s 100-day venues review (ahead of the final decisions being made about how to best invest the $7bn Olympic and Paralympic Games infrastructure budget that the state and federal governments have gone halves in), The Courier-Mail’s position is unchanged and consistent with our broader view of the Games.

Our position is that this is a once-in-forever legacy opportunity for Brisbane and for Queensland. Whatever decisions are made, they therefore must be made with one eye on that legacy – of not missing this opportunity of a set deadline to deliver infrastructure that will make Queensland better.

More generally, we also always back the wise use of taxpayer cash. And so our ask of the Premier is he keeps the terms of reference for that expert review as open as possible to ensure it can focus on the best possible outcome for Queensland – rather than being a proposal constrained by politics.

We agree with the International Olympic Committee’s head of legacy Tania Braga when she says no new venues should be built just for the Games, and that temporary facilities should be avoided. The driver of these decisions must be Queensland’s long-term needs, and not solely those of the 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games.

We also agree with Deputy Premier and Infrastructure Minister Jarrod Bleijie’s view that any infrastructure funded by that budget already set aside for the Games must be generational in its scope, and so be guaranteed to deliver a lasting legacy.

We further note the wisdom of Australia’s IOC vice-president John Coates, when he says “we are not talking about a lot of venues here” – and that the success of Brisbane’s bid was that most venues were existing or planned, such as the Brisbane Live indoor arena in the Roma Street precinct.

However, we also think Lord Mayor Adrian Schrinner has a point when he warns that “if we nickel-and-dime the things that need to be built for the future … we’ll look back in 10 years’ time and think, why didn’t we do this properly”. This is why government must be willing to explore public-private partnership opportunities, such as the deal that allowed the Perth Stadium to be constructed – where the state government paid upfront for 60 per cent of the cost, followed by monthly “concession” payments for 25 years to its private funding partner, which manages and maintains the venue until it hands back the keys after that time.

We featured in our Tuesday edition some images of the mind-blowing designs for the stadiums set to host Saudi Arabia’s FIFA World Cup in 2034. These should serve as inspiration for what can be delivered here in Brisbane – an architectural design that becomes a genuine landmark in itself.

As Queenslanders, it is time that we lifted our collective gaze. Our capital city is about to become an Olympic city. We should all be leaning into this, not shying away.

AGE LIMIT TO SAVE LIVES

No solution is ever perfect. Some are simply necessary. And so it is with the federal government’s proposed legislation to force social media companies to impose an age limit of 16 for accessing their content – a world-leading reform that will save many lives.

Those few MPs who are holding out, arguing that this ban is too blunt an instrument, will realise in the future that they were on the wrong side of history. That a new poll by respected firm YouGov finding eight in 10 Australians back the move shows the holdout MPs are also well and truly on the wrong side of public opinion.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton must be commended for his courage in standing up to – and seeing off – the attempted party room revolt on the legislation, led by South Australian Liberal senator Alex Antic and his Queensland LNP colleague Matt Canavan.

Parents and health professionals are united behind the need for this change. It is only the first step. But it is necessary, and it is significant.