After two years, Auckland Council has finally picked a winner in the race to be the future New Zealand national stadium.  

Although it doesn’t really feel like a win. Just a little more clarity. And maybe not even that. 

The process was supposed to take three months - but on Thursday, Auckland Council finally picked between the final contenders - a new stadium on the waterfront or a renovated Eden Park - and confirmed their preference for Eden Park.  

It’s at this point we should acknowledged the stamina of those involved in the projects which answered Auckland Council’s call in 2023 for expressions of interest for a new or (in Eden Park’s case) upgraded stadium. I applaud their passion for bold ideas, and ambition to create a more vibrant city that will attract people, performers and financial returns.  

I just hope they’ve got a lot more stamina in them, because there’s still a fair distance to travel. 

That’s because after all this time and debate - dating back to 2006 when the council contemplated a waterfront stadium over Eden Park for the 2011 Ruby World Cup - there isn’t actually any public money available to get any of this done.  

The council doesn’t have any money budgeted for a ‘national stadium’; they’re passing the ball to central Government. But council support is important to the Eden Park Trust, as there are currently constraints on how it can be used, and there’s no point spending another cent on Eden Park if it can’t be used more as a multi-purpose venue.  

The council would also quite like Eden Park to repay its $58 million loan from the 2011 Rugby World Cup by its due date - 2029. 

Eden Park CEO Nick Sautner told Mike Hosking Breakfast on Friday he was confident about the conversation Eden Park could have with central Government. And why wouldn’t he be - the Prime Minister has made it clear he wants New Zealand to have a culture of saying ‘Yes!’  

$110 million is what Eden Park needs for the first of stage of development on the Lower North Stand construction - allowing removable seating and a fuller cricket field. According to Sautner, Eden Park is not looking for new money, but for the government to be more efficient with existing money. I’m not sure what this means - are they targeting Sport and Recreation’s budget or the infrastructure budget?  

• Live: ‘Just get on with it’ - Crunch day for Auckland stadium debate, showdown meeting under way
• Live: Big plans, big costs: Crunch day for Auckland’s stadium debate
• Eden Park CEO ‘delighted’ at PM’s call to abolish concert limit, Helen Clark criticises it
• Eden Park expected to be crowned Auckland’s main stadium today before formal vote next month
• Eden Park CEO's 'confident' there are funding opportunities for stadium's upgrade
• 'Delighted': Eden Park team pleased as Auckland Council endorses it as the city's main stadium

Sautner’s confidence likely dimmed a little by the end of the day when Associate Finance Minister David Seymour politely told Ryan Bridge on Newstalk ZB that everyone is a bit short of money these days, even the Government, and it’s hard to imagine they would put $110 million into a stadium.  

The Prime Minister added that putting money towards schools, hospitals and roading was more of a priority than helping fund an upgraded Eden Park.  

They might need to crack into a PPP for funding sooner than they’re currently anticipating, for Stage 2.  

So, while some celebrated that clarity had been provided - we’re sticking with the status quo - we haven’t really put the great New Zealand stadium debate to bed. Why? Because it didn’t really matter who the council picked, both options can continue regardless of the council’s decision. It comes down to who finds the money first. From what I’ve heard, the Te Tōangaroa consortium is continuing with its planning for the waterfront stadium.

No one can argue schools, hospitals and roads aren’t more important, but hopefully someone with the stamina and vision can pull off one of these options sometime in the next decade.  

I’m not going to hold my breath. 

LISTEN ABOVE