Mr BAYLEY – We were talking earlier about stakeholders, and I want to ask you about RSL Tasmania. Mike Gallagher, State President of the RSL, wrote again to legislative councillors last week, unequivocally putting on the record the RSL’s opposition to the stadium and their belief that this project disrespects the sacred ground at the Cenotaph and the values that they hold dear, and expressing ongoing frustration that their interests and needs are being sacrificed due to this stadium, irrespective of the platitudes and commitments that were made to them over many, many years.
Minister, in November 2024, you directed Macquarie Point Development Corporation to approach the RSL in relation to leasing the Royal Engineers building. Can you give us an update on where that process is at? Did they lease it, and was that an attempt to address their concerns and as effectively an incentive for them not continue their opposition to this stadium?
Mr ABETZ – First of all, the preface to your question, I don’t think I can say better than the Minister for Veterans Affairs did in Question Time in answer to your question to him about the RSL and the importance of the Cenotaph, and as a returned serviceman himself, our minister gave an exceptionally good answer, and I will leave it at that. Suffice to say that sometimes I wish I had a dollar for every veteran that came up to me to express a counter view to that of the official RSL line, so just to put on the record that the RSL does not necessarily speak as one voice, but that said, there is no doubt that the RSL is the peak body for the returned servicemen and women of Tasmania, and that is their particular view, but I think Mr Pierce gave an exceptionally good answer and explanation and I will leave it at that.
Ms BEACH – The Royal Engineers Building was built in 1846 to 1847, and we’ve done a fair bit of work around the external to protect the stoneworks, but it did need some internal work before it was suitable for its next tenancy. We’ve been working through that process, and I’ve been keeping the CEO of RSL in the loop with that, and we’re getting close to completion and having that handover in the next couple of weeks.
Mr BAYLEY – Is there a lease signed?
Ms BEACH – No, that’s to prepare the site for tenancy. We have prepared a draft lease for the RSL to consider, but they’ve recently said that they would like to see it once it is refurbished, to then look at that as a suitable location for them to base some of their services.
Mr BAYLEY – The other stakeholder was the Aboriginal community, and in the Tasmanian Planning Commission’s report and the submissions to the hearing, it is a true indictment on this government and this project with someone as esteemed as Professor Greg Lehman basically calling the efforts to accommodate the needs of Aboriginal people as ‘black cladding’, that is an indictment on this government. I will let that stand, but I want to ask the question about the Aboriginal culturally‑informed zone. Much has been made of it; it’s in all the plans. I understand there clearly there still needs to be more work to be done on it, but how much is budgeted to construct the Aboriginal culturally‑informed zone? Can you confirm that it’s not part of the $1.13 billion cost estimate of the stadium?
Ms BEACH – It is not part of the $1.13 billion, and $11 million was allocated to the development of that space. Progressing that as an Aboriginal culturally‑informed zone, it’s called that based on the advice of the Aboriginal people that the corporation was working with throughout the history of master planning on site. The feedback was that as the site had evolved, it was appropriate to re‑engage with community and not assume a particular use or title for that space, that included Professor Greg Lehman in providing that advice.
The suggestion was that we reengage through Heritage – CHMA, Cultural Heritage Management Australia – and we did do that, and they appointed Aboriginal people to support that engagement, so it was Aboriginal people speaking to Aboriginal people. What we were seeking is guidance on what that opportunity for that space was, what it should be called, how it should be used, if it was appropriate for a cultural centre to be considered in the space and if there’s opportunities to interact with the stadium design and maximising that space.
The only caveat I’d note around that not being including the 1.13, is that we have considered if there’s need to access services. For example, if there is an access from that side and the space allocated internally. If there was an Aboriginal enterprise that was appropriate to be based there, we’d make sure there are some base facilities within the stadium to support that, that’s outward facing into that zone.
Mr BAYLEY – What’s the staging? In in the meantime, it’s just paved and concourse, is it, until you get to point where you will be able to turn a sod on what would be the zone?
Ms BEACH – The day one for the stadium is a stage 1. So, the day one development of that space will be as a park space, with native vegetation in that space, based on engagement.
