7. Dr WAYNE MAPP (National—North Shore) Link to this
to the Minister with responsibility for Auckland Issues
What reports or papers, if any, has she presented to Cabinet for $320 million in funding on a national amenity to be built in Auckland?
Hon JUDITH TIZARD (Minister with responsibility for Auckland Issues) Link to this
All papers to Cabinet on this matter were from my colleague the Minister for the Rugby World Cup. I have passed on a range of proposals and have received regular briefings on the Auckland venue proposals.
Given that, apparently, the Minister has not given any papers, reports, or recommendations to Cabinet, why did she then tell the New Zealand Herald that all she had to do was convince her colleagues that they needed to invest $320 million in the Auckland waterfront?
Hon JUDITH TIZARD Link to this
The particular proposal—which, after all, is part of a New Zealand - wide Rugby World Cup—was for a rugby stadium in Auckland that can cope with 60,000 people. When the Government on 27 November made the decision to support the redevelopment of the Eden Park stadium, subject to resolution of design, funding, and governance issues, it seemed to me a good idea to lead a discussion in Auckland about the future of Government involvement on the waterfront, and that is what I intend to do. I will convince my colleagues, and they will still be the Government.
Madam SPEAKERGiven that the Minister is so convinced that she will convince all her colleagues to pay $320 million, how, then, does she reconcile her statement in the Auckland City Harbour News that she welcomes the decision to revamp Eden Park, with her statements in the same article that the waterfront stadium was “a lost opportunity” with “enormous potential” and that: “we should be developing a national stadium and centre in Auckland.”? That article was published on 1 December, not 27 November.
Hon JUDITH TIZARD Link to this
Golly, 1 December did, after all, come after 27 November. The figure I was referring to was the investment the Government made in Te Papa, which, as a foundation development of the Wellington waterfront, has indeed made a difference. I am suggesting that Auckland, as New Zealand’s main international city, should expect a similar investment from the Government, and I will work towards a suitable facility.
Keith LockeWhy did the Government pursue the much more expensive, poorly costed, and environmentally offensive waterfront stadium option when 6 months ago it had a full design for Eden Park and had detailed costings, adding up to $320 million, provided by WT Partnership, a highly reputable quantity surveyor—
What specific disagreements does the Minister have with the detailed costings provided by WT Partnership months ago?
Hon JUDITH TIZARD Link to this
I did not see any carefully costed, detailed plans for Eden Park. That option too was financially uncosted and unfunded. It was also environmentally offensive to many people in Auckland. The Government decided to make sure that the enormous public and private investment in any facility was well spent. I think what this Minister and this Government have done has now been thoroughly welcomed by everyone who has reflected on it, and it means that we might get some movement on the waterfront, as well as a suitable facility for the Rugby World Cup.
Does the Minister now believe that hundreds of millions of dollars should be spent on upgrading Eden Park and that we should also develop another national stadium—I am basing this on the article in the Auckland City Harbour News—also at the cost of hundreds of millions of dollars, on the waterfront; which is it?
Hon JUDITH TIZARD Link to this
The member opposite obviously has not caught up with the business and trade convention centre that has long been proposed for the waterfront. A number of other options are being looked at. It seems to me a really good thing that we meet our obligations to host the Rugby World Cup, given the more than $300 million economic benefit that will accrue to New Zealand as a result, and that Auckland gets the infrastructure it needs. I do not believe that those are mutually exclusive.
Given that the Minister is supporting a national convention centre, what discussions has she had with the Minister of Finance to spring $300 million from him to build the national convention centre on the Auckland waterfront?
Hon JUDITH TIZARD Link to this
I do not agree with the assertion that member makes, and, given that his major assertion for the benefit of Auckland was a tunnel under the harbour, I really wonder whether National Party members care about what happens in Auckland or in the Rugby World Cup. Come up to speed, Wayne.
Hon Trevor Mallard Link to this
Does the Minister accept that her discussions with the Minister for the Rugby World Cup were detailed, frequent, exhaustive, and exhausting?
I seek leave of the House to table the detailed costings on the Eden Park design that were provided some months ago by WT Partnership.
Hon Trevor Mallard Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I just want to check that the member is not going to do what he did yesterday when he tabled a document and got the date wrong by a year.
Peter BrownNoting the House’s interest in stadiums and stadium construction, I seek leave to table a document on the construction of the Arsenal Emirates Stadium, a magnificent stadium built under budget, within time, and at a cost of £390 million.
I seek leave to table an article in the Auckland City Harbour News dated 1 December, headed “It was time to shut up”, quoting Judith Tizard.
I seek leave to table an article from page 2 of this Tuesday’s New Zealand Herald in which various Auckland MPs, including Labour MPs, proposed how to properly develop the Auckland waterfront.