Brisbane 2032 Olympics venue plans are facing renewed scrutiny as the Queensland government unveils its third proposal, sparking potential controversy and public debate. Premier David Crisafulli’s administration announced modifications to stadium locations, a decision already drawing comparisons to the “hot mess” assessment previously voiced by former Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk regarding the Olympic Games preparations.
New Stadium Proposal for Brisbane Olympics Sparks Debate
The recently elected LNP government presented its updated strategy as a resolution to the disorder that has marred Brisbane Olympic planning over the past four years. However, this third iteration of the venues plan, featuring a new proposed Olympic stadium, may prove to be the most contentious yet.
Victoria Park Stadium: A Divisive Choice
The revised plan is almost certain to ignite demonstrations and opposition on both sides of the Brisbane River. The selection of Victoria Park for a new stadium, coupled with the planned demolition of the Gabba, are anticipated to be highly divisive choices for local residents.
Environmental Concerns and Broken Promises
Furthermore, potential disapproval may arise from an unexpected quarter – the Fitzroy River. Concerns have been raised about the suitability of Rockhampton as an Olympic rowing venue, considering the local freshwater crocodile population.
Premier David Crisafulli initiated the announcement with a form of apology for backtracking on a key election commitment. During his campaign in October of the previous year, Crisafulli pledged “no new stadiums.”
“I have to own that, and I will, and I am sorry, and it’s my decision, and I accept that decision,” Crisafulli stated, acknowledging the shift in position.
Justification for Stadium U-Turn
The Premier attempted to rationalize the broken promise by explaining that he faced a dilemma: proceed with hosting athletics at the outdated Queensland Sports and Athletics Centre (QSAC), an option widely criticized as inadequate, or construct a fresh venue at Victoria Park.
“And I know which one would have been politically easier for me to make, but I’ve made the right choice,” he asserted, defending the decision to build a new stadium.
However, this “choice” appeared evident well before the election. The untenable nature of his stance – “no new stadiums” but also rejecting QSAC – was repeatedly highlighted.
Victoria Park has been promoted as a viable stadium location by certain city factions for over a year. Consequently, the notion that the current plan is simply an independent outcome of a 100-day venues review appears doubtful.
Similarly, the assertion that Olympic needs have finally superseded local political considerations also seems questionable.
Regional Discontent and Venue Distribution
Crisafulli’s “no new stadiums” pledge was primarily aimed at voters in Queensland’s regional areas, who were crucial to the LNP’s electoral victory. Significant expenditure on major projects in Brisbane is likely to provoke discontent in regional cities like Townsville.
Consequently, the LNP government will relocate several sports – archery, sailing, football, and rowing – to northern Queensland. This decision reportedly contradicts the objections of the respective sports’ governing bodies and the recommendations of the venues review panel.
Centenary Pool and Legacy Considerations
Additionally, the government disregarded the panel’s counsel by opting to construct a swimming center of excellence at the Centenary Pool site, situated on the periphery of Victoria Park.
Arguments in favor of this decision emphasize the limited legacy of hosting swimming events in an arena with a temporary pool. A new venue would establish a lasting, world-class facility for swimming.
This rationale mirrors the previous government’s concept of utilizing QSAC for athletics events, aiming to provide athletics with a permanent, top-tier home.
Political Scepticism and Public Trust
Broken commitments are commonplace in politics. Skepticism remains whether this revised plan transcends political motivations, given its apparent design to appease regional voters and various interest groups.
Concerns Over Green Space Development
The original proposal to redevelop the ageing Gabba stadium was abandoned a year prior. Subsequently, Australian Olympics official John Coates commented that the Olympic movement had become unpopular in Brisbane due to the unpopularity surrounding the initial plan. Public concerns centered on the projected costs and the impact on the local community.
Constructing a new (and more costly) stadium at Victoria Park merely shifts the epicenter of controversy to the north side of the river.
Furthermore, transforming the Gabba area into a privately funded entertainment precinct, as presented on Tuesday, will likely sustain protests on the south side as well.
Victoria Park Trade-off: Green Space Exchange?
When Victoria Park was initially proposed, building on the city’s largest green space – a 64-hectare parkland, underutilized despite its proximity to the city – was presented as a potential compromise.
Former Mayor Graham Quirk, a proponent of the Victoria Park location, stated, “Brisbane city council has a policy of no net loss of green space in the city.”
“Our proposal, as inferred in the report, was that you could potentially turn the Gabba, an area which is in drastic need of additional green space, into green space over there. There would be a loss in one location but a gain in another area.”
Olympics in Venues, Not a City?
Notably, green space was not mentioned during the recent launch event on Tuesday.
The overarching vision of the new government, characterized by a polished presentation and inspiring background music, appears to portray an Olympics confined to venues, rather than integrated within the city itself.
Despite the proclaimed urgency and “the time has come to just get on with it” rhetoric on Tuesday, public support for the current Brisbane 2032 Olympics plan remains uncertain.