Practical ways, Pacific means: A 2032 Games for the Region
Many will recall, in the wake of Brisbane celebrating its host city appointment, Brisbane 2032 being framed as a “Games for the Region” and “for the whole Pacific”.
Yet over the intervening years, the Pacific 2032 concept has gone MIA, ostensibly due to uncertainty around core 2032 build timeframes, locations and venues.
With the Queensland Government’s revamped construction agenda, and over a year since the release of the 2032 Delivery Plan, the Pacific Regional 2032 Games idea is worth elevating and setting expectations around.
There are four ways to do this.
1. Aggregating
The first is aggregating — being clear on what fits in the ‘Games for the Pacific’ bucket and what doesn’t.
The most obvious fit is sport. The Australian Olympic Committee (AOC) has a PacificAus Sports program, aimed at supporting athletes from across all Pacific Island nations, not to mention the Federal Government’s Sports Diplomacy 2032+ pledge, which leverages the “Green and Gold Decade” of sporting events leading up to the Brisbane 2032.
But sport at a regional level can quickly become complex, often overlapping with visa, immigration, infrastructure and resourcing issues.
Further adding to this Aus-Pacific-sports web is the fact that all levels of government now possess some level of interaction with the 15 Pacific Island Countries (PICs).
While we often look to Canberra for external affairs, it is State and local governments also reaching out to Pacific neighbours, whether it be Trade and Investment Queensland (TIQ’s) dedicated Pacific team, or the City of Moreton Bay’s trans-Tasman bilateral trade efforts.
On the Pacific side, there’s also a mix of national and regional sporting fora — the Oceania National Olympic Committee (ONOC), national committees, federations and even regional sporting events — that further extends sports into the spheres of climate change, public health and sustainability.
Such a mixed picture will clearly need prioritisation, especially if it is to be relevant and genuinely leverage 2032.
One place to start may be utilising the Queensland Government’s legacy framework — as a guide — to filter the long list of Australia-Pacific commitments, given the emerging emphasis to now prioritise and focus on tangible statewide outcomes around Games-related opportunities.
The Council of Mayors South East Queensland (SEQ) has also undertaken considerable work on prioritisation and impact, which has served as useful counsel against a broad sea of well-intentioned yet expansive ‘Games’ and ‘legacy’ commitments.
2. Extending
The second way to elevate the Pacific 2032 concept is to extend.
And here I mean extending our imagination and thinking of the Games to include the Pacific.
For example, all parts of Queensland are focusing on training camps, acclimatisation, and other lead-up opportunities to play their part.
PICs will also do well here by thinking hard about their offering, especially given the proximity to Brisbane and regional Queensland Games venues.
This will put pressure on Pacific governments to incentivise, not just in terms of accommodation but also training camps and regional immersion — not a small ask, given resourcing and capability constraints.
3. Innovating
This is why the third element is so important — innovating.
We often hear of the term ‘sweating the asset’ when it comes to infrastructure.
PICs are no different.
Asset management in the Pacific is — quite literally — a critical issue, given dilapidated hospitals and medical facilities, not to mention the grim features of Pacific schools, roads, and utilities, and sanitation infrastructure.
Indeed, World Bank studies in the Pacific note that, over the life cycle, “public assets can be more than four times the capital costs.” It suggests mitigating this through the establishment of maintenance funds and capacity building programs “to plan, prioritise, and deliver the capital maintenance programs.”
Given that 2032 delivery partners are in the thick of ‘plan, prioritise and deliver’ — a shared and perennially tough space for Pacific nations — a technical exchange or ‘infrastructure twinning’ program for Pacific firms could be a relatively low-cost but timely strategy for industry to adopt or governments to sponsor.
This could focus on innovative cost-effective infrastructure solutions that mitigate persistent maintenance hurdles in Pacific environments that address capability gaps. And how to appropriately ‘sweat’ an asset to keep revenue coming through the door.
4. Competing
The fourth and final way to elevate a Games for the Pacific is by competing.
In 2019, I wrote a related piece on sport and development celebrating two things.
The Australian Sports Diplomacy Strategy — the first of its kind.
And the fact that Fiji had become back-to-back gold medallists in Rugby Sevens with very little technical infrastructure.
Indeed, it is beyond amicable that a nation with no sophisticated sports science regime — and a relatively small population — can dominate the global stage.
PNG and its rugby league expansion is another potential example, although the next few years will highlight just how difficult it is to sustain an elite franchise in a tough part of the world.
Competing means correctly bundling all the elements that make Brisbane 2032 unique — prioritising sport and other assistance measures, building capability, putting forward our collective best to the world, and creating shared wins for Brisbane, Queensland and our Pacific neighbours.
AUTHOR
Sean Jacobs is a Papua New Guinean-born Brisbane-based writer, government relations and public policy specialist. He is currently Policy Manager at Committee for Brisbane and Industry Fellow at the Griffith Asia Institute.