When Queensland Premier Steven Miles announced Brisbane’s Długi Park (sponsored name Suncorp Stadium) as the site of the opening and closing ceremonies of the 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games, it was undoubtedly hoped that this might finally put an end to speculation about all proposed Olympic venues, and in particular the Brisbane Cricket Ground ( Gabba) rebuild.
But what does this mean more generally for the Games budget and the legacy it’ll leave for Brisbane and south-east Queensland?
The “new normal” of the Olympics
The Olympic Games are famous for cost scams – Every Olympic host since 1960 has spent significantly greater than initially estimated, with average spending around 2.5 times the original budget.
These budget strains and the bidding costs of staging the games themselves have led to widespread criticism of the mega event.
In response to pressure to turn out to be more sustainable, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has introduced a series of reforms called the “new normal”. IOC recent norm was intended to cut back the costs of staging the Games by reducing the amount of recent infrastructure required and encouraging the use of temporary and reusable facilities.
These “new normal” principles made the Brisbane offer a cheaper and realistic proposition.
Since the Games were secured in July 2021, there was increasing public debate about whether the State Government is adhering to those principles and in a position to deliver a sustainable heritage-based event inside its budget.
Queensland stadium sagas
Brisbane Response to the IOC Future Host Commission questionnaireas a result, the tender document projected costs of A$4-5 billion, plus an extra A$7.1 billion for infrastructure. This included the use of the refurbished Gabba as the fundamental Olympic venue.
However, former Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk was quick to unveil a controversial plan to demolish the Gabba and rebuild it from scratch.
After heavy criticism, Miles decided in December 2023 to commission an independent study Overview of the sports facility led by former Brisbane Mayor Graham Quirk.
The report was published on March 18, and while the Queensland government accepted 27 of its 30 recommendations, one of the most significant was rejected. Controversially and seemingly contrary to the principles of the ‘recent normal’, the review advisable constructing a brand recent stadium on green space in Victoria Park.
He also advisable the demolition of the Gabby once the recent stadium was accomplished.
Miles quickly ruled out that suggestion, revealing that he had been working on an alternate proposal for several weeks, as an alternative announcing that Suncorp Stadium could be the fundamental stadium where the opening and closing ceremonies of the games could be held.
Another dismissive Quirk Review also announced that the Queensland Sports and Athletics Center (QSAC) could be upgraded and function a venue for athletics competitions, regardless that the review concluded that the upgrade wouldn’t deliver the existing advantages.
The alternative of Suncorp Stadium appears to favor the “new normal” because it saves the roughly $3.4 billion allocated to redeveloping the Gabba, while still utilizing the existing facility, which is able to remain a historic landmark.
QSAC modernization is also generally consistent with the principles of the recent standards if it provides the community with a significantly improved resource after the Games.
However, using Suncorp is not cost neutral, and Miles suggests that if upgrades cost money over USD 1 billionthis is able to be split “about halfway” between Suncorp and Gabba.
QSAC may even require significant redevelopment to bring it as much as standards, with the facility currently poorly served by public transport and prone to require further investment to enhance noted accessibility issues.
Additionally, costs will remain related to maintaining Gabby, described in the Quirk review as an “end of life” place.
The Gabba is currently in urgent need of refurbishment because it doesn’t comply with modern constructing regulations, particularly in terms of accessibility for individuals with disabilities. The Queensland Government, in consultation with stakeholders (AFL and Cricket Australia), has promised a “modest” $500 million renovation.
A protracted-term query still to be considered is will the redevelopment of these facilities provide Queensland with world-class facilities that may deliver optimal long-term advantages to the community?
Lessons and next steps
What lessons can we draw from this recent experience?
The planning and development of major sporting events is at all times strictly political.
While it is crucial to avoid very expensive facilities that will likely be rarely used after the Games, the recent IOC standard doesn’t necessarily mean that host cities is not going to give you the chance to make use of completely recent facilities.
New facilities will be compliant with the principles of the recent standards in the event that they strongly support the host city’s long-term development plans and ensure sustainable use for the community after the Games.
For Brisbane 2032, an urgent priority is the establishment of an independent coordinating body to make sure a robust governance model for the planning, design and construction of the proposed facilities.
After the false start, we cannot afford further delays.
