Independent ACT senator David Pocock has called on the federal Sports and Infrastructure Ministers to immediately rule out any plans to move the Australian Institute of Sport from Canberra.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
As revealed on Wednesday by The Canberra Times, new documents released under freedom of information laws show the Australian Sports Commission rejecting a plan to move the AIS to south-east Queensland due to a more than $1 billion cost and the risk of dashing athlete dreams ahead of the 2028 and 2032 Olympic Games.
The future of the AIS is understood to be a live issue for the Albanese Labor government.
Senator Pocock wants the AIS, founded in 1981 as the "national home of sport," to stay in the national capital.
"I am deeply concerned about any suggestion to relocate the AIS outside of Canberra," he said in a statement.
Queensland officials have been driving discussions about moving the AIS for several years, garnering support from former Australian Olympic Committee boss John Coates and former Australian Sports Commission chair John Wylie. However, Olympic swimming legend and ASC boss Kieren Perkins wants the AIS to stay in Canberra and has been seeking greater investment in the current campus.
The FoI documents reveal the sports commission considering three proposals as part of an AIS masterplan and presenting the options to the Federal Minister for Sport Anika Wells last year.
READ MORE:
The three options included a complete relocation to south-east Queensland, flagged to cost a minimum of $600 million, exclusive of land costs; decentralisation of the AIS to other states and territories, and; spending $200 million to upgrade existing facilities to keep the AIS in Canberra.
During 2023, around 5000 athletes and staff from 31 sports will use the AIS campus.
"The Australian Institute of Sport has been a global leader in fostering sports excellence," Senator Pocock said.
"For decades it was the envy of the world, and a template for them to follow, supporting thousands of athletes to compete at the elite level. We need to ensure we continue to invest in the AIS to support Australian sports and athletes."
The until now confidential AIS masterplan, which had been in the works for several years, shows the cost of moving the AIS assessed at a minimum of $600 million, exclusive of land costs.
For both relocation and decentralisation, the overall cost would end up higher.
"These options were estimated to cost in excess of $1 billion in initial capital investment and involved the development of new facilities as well as utilisation of some existing facilities," the document said.
But the officials rejected the idea to move the AIS, despite ageing facilities, as a relocation would have a "significantly high execution risk" which may impact athlete preparation for the 2026 Commonwealth Games as well as the 2028 and 2032 Olympics and Paralympics.
The preference was to stay in the capital with funding to upgrade the existing site estimated at around $200 million.
Senator Pocock will be writing to Ms Wells and the Minister for Infrastructure Catherine King about his concerns.
"Clearly more investment is needed to upgrade ageing facilities but as the FOI documents from the Australian Sports Commission show, upgrading existing facilities would be a far better option," Senator Pocock said.
"Upgrades would deliver much better value for taxpayers and also be less disruptive for athletes.
"I call on the federal Sports and Infrastructure Ministers to immediately rule out any plans to relocate the AIS."
A sports commission spokesperson told The Canberra Times that decisions regarding the future of the site are a matter for the government.
"The Australian Sports Commission is working with the government to consider the facilities required to support Australia's high performance athletes maintain their international competitiveness and be ready for Brisbane 2032," the spokesperson said in a statement.
The Minister for Sport and the Minister for Infrastructure were approached by this masthead but declined to comment on the contents of the documents.