KEY POINTS:
Mayor John Banks appears adamant that Auckland City Council will contribute nothing towards the $240.5 million upgrade of Eden Park for the 2011 Rugby World Cup. This, he says, is the wish of ratepayers who returned him to power in October. They were unhappy with the $50 million set aside for the redevelopment by the previous council. Mr Banks, however, will have to have a strong nerve now that final plans for the revamp have revealed a $28.5 million funding shortfall. Much pressure is sure to be applied on both the city council and the Auckland Regional Council.
It is difficult, however, to see why they should be put under the hammer. Former Minister of Sport Trevor Mallard was fond of terming Eden Park a "regional edifice", as opposed to the national stadium that he favoured for Auckland's waterfront. On that basis, he implied, Auckland should pay. But it is not an argument that bears too much scrutiny, especially when others appear able to make up the shortfall.
Of the $240.5 million required for the redevelopment, $190 million will come from the Government, $10 million from the New Zealand Rugby Union and $12 million from the Eden Park Trust Board. Both the Government and the rugby union should be good for more. The Government could have found itself stumping up rather more than $190 million under the funding formula drafted for the $500 million-plus waterfront stadium. It would appear petty if, having failed to convince Auckland's councils of that idea, it became Scrooge-like over Eden Park. Likewise, the rugby union, the body that secured the World Cup, appears to have escaped lightly with a $10 million contribution. It could dig deeper into its reserves.
As it is, much attention is being placed on selling naming rights to Eden Park. A name change, like that at Lancaster Park and many other regional stadiums, has not been ruled out if a sponsor is prepared to pay enough. That would be an unfortunate development. Eden Park has a rich history, and its name resonates internationally as one of rugby's premier grounds. Sacrificing that heritage for the most short-term of objectives does not seem worthwhile. The value of the naming rights is, in any event, a moot point, given the International Rugby Board's demand for "clean" stadiums. Either way, the Herald, for one, and probably many fans would continue to refer to Eden Park.
Clearly, the plugging of the funding gap need not require such an ill-judged step. Nor need it involve Auckland's councils. Yet they cannot absolve themselves from responsibility for making the World Cup an outstanding success. So far, they have talked only vaguely about what they plan to do. Mr Banks says the city council will provide $20 million for economic infrastructure outside Eden Park, and has made sweeping statements about cleaning up the city's beaches for the benefit of World Cup visitors.
Even that surpasses the regional council which, ridiculously late in the day, has been more intent on pushing the claims of Mt Smart Stadium. It has yet to make a definitive pronouncement on a request for $21 million for the Eden Park upgrade, but seems in no mood to contribute. Its only other utterances have been vague statements about improving public transport in time for the World Cup.
That is far from adequate. If the two councils are going to hold their line on the Eden Park upgrade, they need to explain exactly what they will do as their contribution to the World Cup. There will be a regional profit from the redevelopment of the stadium and the tournament, as well as a national benefit. Auckland will be the focus of international attention. The need for a strong dose of galvanisation extends beyond the precincts of Eden Park.
