The proposed Macquarie Point AFL stadium in Hobart should not proceed, a long-awaited assessment from the Tasmanian Planning Commission (TPC) has recommended.
The final report finds that the stadium would “diminish the economic welfare” of Tasmania, the government’s cost-benefit remains significantly overestimated, and it would have an “irrevocable and unacceptable” impact on Hobart’s landscape.
It estimates that the government would need to accumulate $1 billion in debt for construction costs, which would rise to $1.8 billion over 10 years, and taxes would need to increase $50 million per year over 30 years.
The report states the construction cost equates to $5,900 per Tasmanian household not reliant on Commonwealth income support.
Premier Jeremy Rockliff responds to the Tasmanian Planning Commission’s report.
3m agoWed 17 Sep 2025 at 12:40am
Premier pressed further on how he will fund the stadium
Journalist: But how are you going to fund it when it says taxes will need to increase $50 million per year over 30 years?
Premier: Well I disagree with that, and we’re a low taxing government and have always been so. This is about ensuring we can borrow and build for the future generations.
5m agoWed 17 Sep 2025 at 12:38am
First question: Where are you getting your economic figures from?
Journalist: Where are you getting those economic figures from when the report says the government would need to accumulate $1 billion in debt for construction costs, which would rise to $1.8 billion over 10 years and taxes would need to increase $50 million a year, over 30 years.
Premier: I disagree.
Journalist: You disagree with the report?
Premier: This is intergenerational infrastructure, this is for the next 30, 40, 50 years. This is intergenerational infrastructure that will build aspiration for young people, and will be build opportunity and hope for young people. And I want to keep young people in Tasmania … I am not going to give up on this project. This is going to have huge benefits for Tasmania right across every corner of Tasmania.
You cannot put a value on keeping young people in Tasmania and building hope and aspiration.
12m agoWed 17 Sep 2025 at 12:31am
‘We vehemently disagree’ with planning commission: Rockliff
Ending his remarks before moving on to questions, Mr Rockliff says:
“We vehemently disagree with the economic analysis [in the report]. It’s been massively underestimated in terms of the social and economic value of this project. Every single member of parliament will have their say on this project.”
15m agoWed 17 Sep 2025 at 12:28am
Stadium to proceed using special legislation
The premier says he will using special ‘enabling legislation’ in parliament to proceed with the stadium, ending the involvement of the Project of State Significant (POSS) process.
Now that the planning commission has delivered its report, the government will table enabling legislation to approve the project, instead of voting on it through the POSS process.
The final step is similar in either pathway, with both houses of parliament needing to vote to approve the project.
He notes Queensland has enabling legislation to approve the Olympics stadium.
“We can do the same thing here,” Mr Rockliff says.
20m agoWed 17 Sep 2025 at 12:24am
Rockliff says stadium needed to help youth aspire to sport
The premier says the stadium will help Tasmania’s youth aspire to all levels of sport. He notes that the success of the JackJumpers basketball team has seen participation in local basketball soar.
“More sport time, less screen time.”
24m agoWed 17 Sep 2025 at 12:20am
Tasmania’s reputation ‘to get things done’ at stake: premier
“The opportunity cost of this stadium not proceeding is immeasurable, in my point of view in terms of the opportunity lost economically and socially.”
“But also Tasmania’s reputation to get things done.”
26m agoWed 17 Sep 2025 at 12:17am
Premier says his resolve to build the stadium ‘has only strengthened’
He says parliament will have the final say.
As a reminder, if the Liberals and Labor combine to pass the stadium through the lower house (as expected), then it will head to the upper house where they need eight votes to pass it. The Liberals and Labor make up five votes and they will need three independents to support the project.
28m agoWed 17 Sep 2025 at 12:15am
Economic and social value underestimated: Premier
“What the report has massively underestimated though is the economic and social value of such a precinct redevelopment. And that opportunity of course with the Tasmanian Devils AFL team.”
30m agoWed 17 Sep 2025 at 12:14am
‘Today is just another step’
The premier says he wants the project to proceed and the report’s release is “just another step”.
“I note that the planning report has said this is constructable. And those matters that were concerning Tasmanians around safety and transport and other key matters — they can all be resolved.”
34m agoWed 17 Sep 2025 at 12:10am
Premier Jeremy Rockliff is speaking now
He’s at the Longford Football Club reacting to the Tasmanian Planning Commission’s report.
Show more
The report provided a $974 million upfront construction cost, including car park, buses, lifecycle costs and state subsidy for the Tasmania Devils AFL club.
The cost-benefit ratio is less than 0.5, meaning that for every $1 spent, less than a 50-cent direct benefit will be returned.
“The proponent’s cost-benefit analysis prepared by KPMG and released in September 2024, shows a base-case benefit cost ratio of 0.69,” the report reads.
“Since this study was undertaken, the stadium construction cost estimate has increased significantly.”
The proposed stadium will be purpose-built to host AFL matches. (Supplied: MPDC)
Stadium’s size is a ‘fundamental problem’
In its conclusion, the report was highly critical of the planning elements of the stadium.
“The fundamental problem is the size, location and geographical features of the site, in its highly valued context, do not support the disproportionately large, monolithic building proposed,” it reads.
“Proceeding with the project will give rise to irrevocable and unacceptable adverse impacts on Hobart’s spatial and landscape character, urban form and historic cultural heritage.
“The project represents a significant net cost and will diminish the economic welfare of Tasmanians as a whole.”
The project was assessed under the 12-month-long project of state significance (POSS) process and the recommendation comes after an interim report and public hearings.
The stadium should not proceed, the Tasmanian Planning Commission has recommended. (Supplied: MPC)
The recommendation is not binding, with Tasmania’s parliament having the final say on approval for the project with a vote in both houses of parliament.
The report was critical of the stadium proponent — the state-owned Macquarie Point Development Corporation — which said that the stadium would have “unquantifiable social benefits”.
‘Never say never’: Public forum on Hobart stadium a mixed bag
The TPC described the measurable social benefits as “small”.
Rockliff still proceeding with stadium
In a social media post, Premier Jeremy Rockliff disagreed with the independent planning panel’s assessment.
“Unfortunately, it still massively underestimates the social and economic benefits that the stadium, a new AFL team, and a supercharged events industry will have on Tasmania,” his post reads.
“It’s the reason why new stadiums right across the nation are approved using special laws, not the traditional planning scheme.
“The TPC has done its job, and I thank them.
“It’s now time for democratically elected Members of Parliament to have the final say.”
The Liberal government and Labor opposition have both supported the project but the two parties would need the support of three independents in the upper house in order to proceed with the project.
The stadium is a requirement under the AFL’s contract with the Tasmanian government for the state to have its own AFL men’s and women’s teams.
The future of the Tasmania Devils AFL club hinges on whether the stadium is built. (Supplied: Tasmania Football Club/Solstice Digital)
Stadium has ‘divided’ TasmaniansÂ
Elwick independent Upper House MLC Bec Thomas — whose vote could be crucial — told ABC Radio Hobart that she hopes the government takes its time to consider the report.
“This issue has sadly really divided Tasmania, and we have an opportunity now where we have more information presented before us,” she said.
“I really hope they will take their time in considering the information that’s presented in the report, and in considering the decision of the planning commission before liaising with other members of parliament on what they do from here.”
The Tasmanian Planning Commission’s conclusion:
The fundamental problem is the size, location and geographical features of the site, in its highly valued context, do not support the disproportionately large, monolithic building proposed.
It is a building which is incongruent with the valued characteristics of its spatial context, completely at odds with the long-established planning principles guiding and informing development, and with the land and urban fabric surrounding the site and the heritage values associated with nearby places.
Proceeding with the Project will give rise to irrevocable and unacceptable adverse impacts on Hobart’s spatial and landscape character, urban form and historic cultural heritage.
In addition, the Project represents a significant net cost and will diminish the economic welfare of Tasmanians as a whole, and it offers almost no scope for the site to become a vibrant active place that is attractive to visit outside of major event mode.
In very simple terms, the stadium is too big for the site and the benefits it will bring are significantly outweighed by the disbenefits it creates.
Loading