Mr BAYLEY – Minister, back to the Goods Shed, what are the cost estimates for moving the Goods Shed?
Ms BEACH – We have had this question through hearings during the week and, as I’ve noted, there are a couple of things we need to consider here. There are a couple of ways we can relocate the Goods Shed.
One is it can be disassembled and then reassembled on site in the location we have identified in our Project of State Significance application. The other option is we have had indications from approaches suggesting it could be moved in one, so as a solid structure. So, we’ll need to go through a process to work out the best way to do that, the most cost-effective and the most appropriate to protect heritage.
In terms of the cost, it would depend on the response to taking that to market to test the most appropriate way. As I noted earlier in the week in the hearings with the Premier, it would be inappropriate for us to indicate costings for that because we do need to get the best possible value when we go to market.
Mr BAYLEY – And, so, there are no guarantees that it can be moved or will be approved to be moved. The Heritage Tasmania works guidelines explicitly say that relocating a significant structure will, in most circumstances, be unacceptable. What conversations have you had with the Tasmanian Heritage Council or Heritage Tasmania, what’s the process and what are the prospects for having this approved to move in the first place?
Ms BEACH – We’ve met with Heritage Tasmania and as you’d be aware –
Mr BAYLEY – Who’s that? Sorry, I just missed that.
Ms BEACH – Heritage Tasmania. As you’d be aware, the Heritage Council has undertaken assessment, supported by Heritage Tasmania, as part of assessing the Goods Shed and listing it on the State Heritage Register.
So, we have an engagement through that process. As part of the Project of State Significance process, the guidelines are in the Cultural Heritage Act. So, it is part of the integrated assessment through the Project of State Significance process, so the Heritage Council has been identified as a relevant agency.
Now that we’ve made our submission, they will have an opportunity to review our submission and provide feedback directly to the Tasmanian Planning Commission, raise any concerns or flag any questions that will then feed through to us to provide any further information. We’ve engaged with Heritage Tasmania, they’re aware of our proposal and our thinking around that, and it’ll be part of the integrated assessment of project.
Mr BAYLEY – Which begs the question, minister, if there are no guarantees this will be approved, whether it’s the move of the Goods Shed or whether it’s the Planning Commission POSS process, full stop, as it stands at the moment, the stadium is currently the biggest risk to the AFL team because no‑one had any control over it – no‑one really, not Premier Rockliff, not anyone could agree to build a stadium there because it has to go through a whole range of steps to get approved and funded. I mean, what are you going to do if the Heritage Council, for example, or the Planning Commission rejects this and says no, you can’t build it and you can’t build it on this site?
Mr STREET – I am not going to deal in hypothetical questions as this stage, Mr Bayley. I’ve every confidence that with the work that the Macquarie Point Development Corporation’s put into the POSS submission that we will be successful in getting planning permission.
Mr BAYLEY – Does that not amount to political pressure on the Planning Commission though? I mean, you are building – and the Premier, every member of your government is building – this expectation that it gets approved and it will happen.
CHAIR – Order.
Mr STREET – That is why I am trying to be careful in my comments now that the POSS submission is in, because I don’t want to be seen to be leaning on the on the TPC. We want the TPC to do the work that’s necessary to assess it and to produce the integrated assessment report, which I think Ms Beach indicated to me would take probably three or four months. Absolutely, we want them to be free to assess the POSS process. The Macquarie Point Development Corporation put a lot of time and effort into that submission and we want it assessed on its merits.
Mr BAYLEY – How can they truly be free if there’s so much political pressure on this?
Mr BAYLEY – Minister, Ms Beach said before that they didn’t want to share certain sensitive information about moving the Goods Shed. I can understand that and I take your point, but can you confirm that you actually do have cost estimates to move it?
Ms BEACH – We’ve looked at a couple of different scenarios and we will need to ‑ the relocation of the shed as a whole is a newer concept. We’ve dismantled ‑
Mr BAYLEY – A what concept, sorry?
Ms BEACH – A newer concept. We’ve dismantled a couple of sheds on site in the last 18 to 24 months, so we have a good feel about those sorts of costings. But relocating it as a whole shed is something we would need to test the market to get an understanding for, so we do need to explore that.
Mr BAYLEY – Isn’t the admission though that you’ve done some costings and you need to go out to market to cost this and that it will cost the Macquarie Point Development Corporation, in itself, an admission that the $375 million that the Premier has capped Tasmania’s expenditure to is a complete furphy? It’s a newer concept, it wasn’t in the original concept and it’s clearly going to cost additional and over and above the $375 million.
Mr STREET – Look, I don’t believe so. I believe that the Macquarie Point Development Corporation’s role was to remediate the site and get it ready to build the stadium and removing the Goods Shed is part of that.
Mr BAYLEY – Part of the original cost, as in contributed by the federal government, the $50 million that was given many years ago and so forth, is that what you’re saying? That it can be paid for by that money?
Ms BEACH – The government has invested money for the corporation to prepare the site, ready for development, and that includes putting infrastructure in place to enable that and interim permit activation. We’ll use the existing funds that the government has invested in the corporation to prepare the Goods Shed for that activation for the community.
Mr BAYLEY – That, then, is an additional cost, surely, in relation to the stadium.
Ms BEACH – It will use the existing funds that the corporation has.
