Page 327 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 31 May 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
It was a decision made only after consultation with R.A. Young and Associates, who were engaged to look at the possibility of covering the running track. They advised against it on the grounds of cost, physical level of the edge of the track and the effect on the subsoil, which would turn the area into a quagmire, and finally damage to the track when it was being restored for use on the occasions when it was required. In general, there is no prospect at all in the redevelopment proposal of retaining the track in those circumstances.
Mr Humphries referred to rugby league and again there was the misapprehension that rugby league was the only code that was to be played there. Rugby league will be played there for 12 home and away matches next season, and it will be available for all other sports - in addition to those 12 matches which will be played by rugby league.
Dr Kinloch raised the question of the national significance of the stadium. In 12 years there have been only two national sports events there. One was in 1977, and the World Cup in 1985 required a multimillion dollar upgrade before it was held and was run at an enormous loss. There is no future in the current situation. Quite clearly for an international meet to be held there would need to be a multimillion dollar upgrade because the track surface itself has deteriorated under our extreme weather conditions of heat in summer and cold in winter. It has deteriorated to the point where it is warping and bubbling, and it would require a complete relay for an international event. In relation to Mr Duby's remarks, clearly there is underutilisation.
MR SPEAKER: The discussion is now concluded.
Assembly adjourned at 4.22 pm
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .