Former premier Peter Gutwein says Hobart AFL stadium has been 'poorly' sold

It has seen thousands take to the streets in opposition or support, MPs defect from the Liberal government, and a premier put it all on the line.

Hobart's proposed waterfront stadium has dominated the political landscape for years, and now it is about to come to a head with Legislative Councillors days away from the crucial vote.

But little about the events of the past four years has surprised former premier Peter Gutwein, who always expected a new stadium was going to be "a challenging fight".

"The arguments that went on for a decade in Perth, the challenges with the Adelaide Oval.

"It was always going to be an easy target for people because it's very easy for those who oppose the stadium to point to the cost of it as opposed to other uses for that money."

The 23,000-seat stadium at Macquarie Point may be firmly associated with Premier Jeremy Rockliff, but it was Mr Gutwein who kicked it all off.

He was in the midst of negotiating with the AFL to secure the 19th licence — arguably the most serious push in a decades-long crusade for Tasmania to have its own AFL team.

But the 18 club presidents still had reservations.

"They were all well aware of what happened with the Gold Coast when it first came in 20 years ago," Mr Gutwein said.

"That attraction and retention of players and personnel was very difficult, and they had a revolving door simply because they didn't have the necessary infrastructure.

"That came at a cost to the entire league and to the clubs as a result."

On top of that, two reports had already recommended that Tasmania consider building a new stadium.

It was with this in mind that Mr Gutwein decided to announce plans to build a 27,000-seat stadium at Regatta Point.

Mr Gutwein resigned before the deal was finalised, and back then, the team was not contingent on a stadium.

"As negotiations progressed, it didn't surprise me that the two were linked together, but it certainly wasn't something that I had contemplated at the time," he said.

The former premier has mostly stayed out of the limelight since he left politics.

He has watched on as his good friend and successor, Mr Rockliff, has waged his way through stadium drama, but Mr Gutwein has not weighed in — until now.

"I think that they did need to stand up early in the piece and make the point that when looking at what had happened in recent history with clubs like the Gold Coast, a lack of appropriate infrastructure was detrimental to the club and to its growth and to its success.

"And that, importantly, the reason that the stadium was linked to the deal now was to ensure that Tasmania had the best opportunity for success from day one. That's never been clearly articulated."

Asked if the Tasmanian government had also sold the project poorly, Mr Gutwein simply said Mr Rockliff had had a "difficult road" and not a lot of clear air.

Stadium proposal led to Liberal defections

While Mr Gutwein said he always knew the stadium issue would be "brutal", there was one thing that surprised him — that it was turned into a Project of State Significance.

That was because of two former Liberal MPs: John Tucker and Lara Alexander.

When Mr Rockliff assumed the premiership in April 2022, negotiations were still underway, and the Liberals were in the majority.

The AFL at this point had become very keen on the idea of a stadium. It just wanted it in a different location — at Macquarie Point.

For Ms Alexander, it was the change of location and lack of detail around the eventual AFL agreement that started to raise concerns.

"You think, 'OK, well it's a capital development project, information will be made available,'" she said.

"So, I was seeking information, and there was no information.

"I didn't receive anything, and when I asked for it, it was basically just the one page of talking points."

In May 2023, Ms Alexander and Mr Tucker announced they would be quitting the Liberal Party and moving to the crossbench due to concerns about a lack of transparency around the stadium deal and Marinus Link.

"We tried to be honest, we tried to get information because this is a move that you cannot do lightly," Ms Alexander said.

"I mean, we were both very aware of the consequences."

In return for confidence and supply, the premier agreed to make the AFL deal public and put the stadium through the Project of State Significance process.

All the while debate around the stadium continued to intensify.

"I think that makes the politics more divisive and really difficult for both sides.

"It is a bit of a distraction in terms of the other issues that we perhaps should be discussing and grappling with."

Economist questions 'intangible' benefits

In September this year, after years of debates and protests, the Tasmanian Planning Commission (TPC) handed down its assessment of the stadium. It recommended the project not proceed.

That did not deter Mr Rockliff, who said he wanted to prove to the rest of the country that "projects such as this can go ahead".

"What the report has massively underestimated, though, is the economic and social value of such a precinct redevelopment," he said at the time.

Economist John Madden is sceptical about that argument.

"Did they underestimate those intangible benefits? It's possible, but gee, they would've had to underestimate by a long way to turn the story around on the stadium," he said.

Meanwhile, the estimated cost of the stadium has blown out from $715 million to $1.13 billion.

The government maintains it will put in no more than $375 million in capital; however, the Macquarie Point Development Corporation will take on almost $500 million in borrowings.

"Government debt is government debt, and that's a cost that Tasmanians will have to wear in the future," Mr Madden said.

"They've got a lot of debt to consider. This will just add a bit more to it."

The TPC report estimated the stadium will add $1.8 billion in debt over the decade. The state is already predicted to hit $10 billion of net debt by 2028.

"If you go on with the project, the state debt position will be a bit worse," Mr Madden said.

"It's not the major story, but it's not going to help.

'It's not just today's generation that will benefit'

But for Mr Gutwein, the cost of the stadium and the plan to fund it through borrowings is justifiable.

"I've never had an issue with intergenerational assets being funded by intergenerational debt," he said.

"We do that with bridges, we do it with hospitals. In terms of the stadium, it's not just today's generation that will benefit."

Watching from the bench for the past few years has been "excruciating at times" for Mr Gutwein, who is now the president of the Northern Tasmanian Football Association.

But that stress does not compare to how he will feel during the upcoming vote in the Legislative Council, which will seal the stadium's fate.

"[If it fails] it'll be the biggest lost opportunity that Tasmania has ever had," he said.

"We're on the cusp of changing the state, I think, for the better.

"If the vote is no, I think that will crush confidence.

"We will see significant challenges in Tasmania moving forward, and I think that we'll continue to see an exodus of young people looking for opportunities elsewhere out of the state."

Ms Alexander is a little "sad" when she reflects on how the stadium saga has unfolded.

"It's caused a lot of ruptures and frictions in Tasmanian society, in the community, and it shouldn't have been like that," she said.

"Projects like this should be about unifying people."

No longer in politics, she is well aware of the importance of Thursday's vote.

"Whatever decision they make is going to have such huge ramifications in the future," she said.