I'm sorry but using stadia spending as some kind of criteria for marking Sydney as a great world city is hardly applicable, when compared and contrasted with the likes of New York, Paris, London, Berlin etc. These cities are great because they find a harmonious and even-handed view of recognising the value of art, culture, history, natural and built environment, food, music, sport, and overall quality of life. In this city we have shock jocks & pollies thinking that it's acceptable to promote the racing industry on the sails of the SOH, or knocking things down to help further the political careers of those the shock jocks endorse. Even bleak city south of the Murray River understand that, vis-a-vis they way they have incrementally redeveloped the MCG.
As for how our public infrastructure is viewed, it's not about one (stadiums) being built at the cost of other things (hospitals, schools, museums, roads, train lines etc). The problem is that this government (which has got its way) has a track record of cutting back, diverting, stuffing up and/or overspending on public infrastructure, with policies that are overtly political and not necessarily driven for or by the public good. I'm open to being called a hypocrite on this, however Wanderland 2.0 arguably has been built for some public good, however there is a cost that many people have either no knowledge of or don't wish to see related to this investment, such as the destruction of vocational education, the lost income from the sale of public assets and the deregulation of land management. I would argue that a more balanced policy that delivers multiple outcomes for the public good should not and never need rely on the empty hucksterism of politicians and media commentators who are in truth more concerned with their public image and political power, as demonstrated in the Ayres/Jones flim-flam over the SFS.
Finally, it seems rather ironic that a state government and various members of the right wing commentariat are all in favour of the government funding the SCG Trust's plans for the new stadium. Surely, based on their love on small government, reduced public expenditure and Private/Public Partnerships, why did the (re-elected) coalition state government ask for the Trust to take out a loan and act as their guarantor, or perhaps stipulated for a user pays finance model such as that which exists for transport and education? Why not ask for Transfield or a similar company to built it and have them negotiate with the Trust for reimbursement?
Went from roller skates in the mid 80's to roller boots / roller hockey in the late 80's early 90's and then the rollerblading..I did roller hockey on a Friday evening, everyone wanted to do that for a while and then the blades came in. More nostalgia thread than music sorry..