Brian Rudman: Cup wish list - electric trains, Queen St tunnel

After a weekend of counting the profits from the 2011 World Cup - $90 million extra tax take for the Government, $408 million for the economy, including $200 million for Auckland hoteliers, bar-owners and other tourist-related interests - it's time to come down to Earth and talk costs.

In particular, as far as Aucklanders are concerned, who is going to bankroll the $100 million to $130 million upgrade of Eden Park and the wish list of improvements to North Shore Stadium at Albany?

The good news is that talk of the white-elephant 75,000-seater, $400 million national stadium, which was floated back in May at the launch of New Zealand's cup bid, seems to have disappeared back into cloud-cuckoo land. But that still leaves $100 million plus to find to fund the expansion of Eden Park.

So far I haven't seen the hospitality industry bosses, or Sports Minister Trevor Mallard, or the Rugby Union for that matter, waving their chequebooks in the air, or coming out in support of something like a bed tax on hotel guests to help offset the costs.

One person who is expecting a call from park authorities seeking money is Cameron Parr, Auckland City's group manager of recreation and community services.

He says the city's message will be "that Eden Park is not just a local park, it's a national asset" and the cost of redevelopment "shouldn't all just fall on ACC ratepayers".

I couldn't agree more. It's a message we ratepayers should be ramming home from today.

What is to Auckland's great advantage is how closely the Government has identified itself with winning the right to hold the cup, and on the successful running of the event.

Prime Minister Helen Clark says it will help to raise New Zealand's profile worldwide, "showing that small nations can host these vast international sports events".

What's not been said is that the spring timing of the cup coincides with the next national election but one - another reason for national politicians (whichever party is then in office) wanting it to be a triumph.

All of which are reasons for Aucklanders - particularly the ratepaying ones in the big city - to play hardball when it comes to funding this sporting extravaganza.

This is as close to hosting the Olympics as New Zealand's ever going to get, and the Government hustled for it accordingly.

Now that it has won, we should stand back and let it do what any other Government in the world does having won such an international event - that is, fund it from state coffers.

And I'm not just talking stadiums. With 3.4 billion television viewers said to be gazing down on God's Own, what better time to increase the pressure for an upgraded rail system as well.

In China, in preparation for the Olympics, they've unveiled a bullet train that levitates above the tracks.

All we could offer the Barmy Army last season were tarted up old diesels which died some distance from the rugby park.

For 2011 we should be demanding a set of the levitating ones to zap the fans from Britomart to Eden Park. Wouldn't that silence the sheep-shagger jokes, and convince the world of our technological prowess.

But even if Helen Clark baulks at floating trains, at least we could insist on electrification of the network by 2011. We could also chance our arm and ask for the Queen St tunnel.

As it happens, we could have inside help here.

The head of the Government's World Cup bid office, set up last year, is one of its favourite Mr Fix-its, Brian Roche. The same Brian Roche who was installed as chairman of the Auckland Regional Transport Authority (Arta) to sort out the city's transport problems.

If anyone in Wellington can make a case for getting Auckland's train system running in time for the World Cup, it's Mr Roche.

In August, he wrote a foreword to Arta's recommended plan of action advocating that "the region move, as a matter of priority, to electrify the Auckland rail network [by] no later than 2011".

He added that "investment of this size and duration is beyond the capacity of the region. The full and active involvement of central Government will be necessary."

If it was a matter of priority requiring Government involvement before the World Cup announcement, then I'm sure Mr Roche will be able to argue there's now an even more compelling case.