Commonwealth Games officials were always going to be angry.
But the withering take-down of the Andrews government’s decision to junk the 2026 Games strikes at the heart of the credibility of the administration and the Victorian regional model it adopted.
It also calls into question the accuracy of Premier Daniel Andrews’s claims that the Games would cost as much as $7bn to hold in the five regional areas.
It is clear from Tuesday’s announcement that someone – or some people – can’t count.
There is no logical reason why the Games should initially cost $2.6bn but then explode in just over a year by as much as $4.4bn.
The multi-city model was made more ridiculous by the wealth of existing sporting assets available in Melbourne.
At the heart of these questions is why a fiscally torn government would deem it prudent to run a fully regional-based Commonwealth Games when the add-ons were always going to be high.
Five lots of security, five lots of athlete accommodation, five lots of public transport, in areas where infrastructure has lagged Melbourne.
The strategy was skewed for base political reasons. It was, to be frank, a policy dog.
Ever since 1999 Labor has focused heavily, and with great success, on winning and holding about eight key regional and interface seats, making the Coalition’s task of winning government even tougher.
Most of the Commonwealth Games events were to be held in Victoria’s three biggest regional centres – Geelong, Ballarat and Bendigo.
Rather than focusing on the world-class assets in Melbourne, the regional-first strategy baked in unacceptable costs that contributed greatly to Tuesday’s decision.
The reason a city-based Games would have been vastly cheaper is rather obvious.
Melbourne had run the 2006 Commonwealth Games with great success and there would have been no need for five layers of security, public transport and athlete accommodation.
The political trade-off is that the regions will still get significant legacy infrastructure, including housing and updating of sporting facilities.
It is clear from this decision that the government’s parlous financial position is driving much of this decision.
Record debt and high inflation have had a huge impact on the budget and will continue to do so in the medium term.
While Victoria’s finances are in a mess and the government is knee-deep in its third term, Labor is also still fighting integrity issues and the community is recovering from some of the world’s longest pandemic lockdowns.
It is fair to ask why Labor wasn’t alive to the cost blowouts looming with the Games when it went to the polls late last year. The answer is that the Andrews cabinet probably didn’t want to know the downside of a commitment that would win votes.
Labor’s alternative premier – Jacinta Allan – was the minister responsible for delivering the Games.
There are mixed views on what this decision means for Allan.
One is that it’s bad. The other is it’s bad but not as bad as it might have been if the Games had gone ahead and been a total shambles.
More Coverage
Not quite as bad as Gough but it’s close
The Albanese government provides no rationale or narrative for its disconnected actions. Everything is spin. We’ve seldom seen a government this poor in such critical fields at such a dangerous time.
Crucial face-to-face with Trump? It’ll be a journey to the summit
Anthony Albanese has pointed to a Quad leaders meeting that could be months away for his possible first face-to-face meeting with Donald Trump, as Julie Bishop cast doubt on how long Australian ambassador to the US Kevin Rudd will last.