Powerhouse big spending is at the expense of so much else

What people don’t see behind the eye-watering Powerhouse figures, tossed around like confetti, is the opportunity cost of missed chances (“ Powerhouse joins our troubled history of building public institutions ”, September 1). It’s amazing that the government can rustle up, at the drop of a hat, $70 million to spend on rugs, studio apartments, videos and other frivolities. Swept under a rug (not one of their $4000 ones) is the fact that many other worthy causes are being neglected. Take the Australian Print Museum at Penrith (recently reopened by the Hon Bob Carr) – a marvellous “working museum” that showcases the story of Australia’s print heritage. All the presses are kept running by an army of volunteers with not a penny from government. For 25 years we’ve been praised by thousands of visitors who are horrified when we explain that governments of both persuasions have ignored us. Their excuse being “we haven’t got the money”. Now, thanks to the Herald exposing what is a scandal of monumental proportions, we’ll approach the treasurer, safe in the knowledge the NSW government has bags of money. We should at least thank the Powerhouse management for alerting the rest of us to the fact that the state government is loaded with hollow logs just waiting to be prised open. James Cryer, Castlecrag

Apparently Powerhouse Parramatta is spending $70 million on opening exhibitions (“ Pressure builds on Powerhouse board”, September 1) and yet there exists a 147-year-old collection of objects across applied arts, design, fashion, craft and other areas that we rarely get an opportunity to view. One of the points of these new building projects was surely to allow more access to the collection for the public, students and academics. These collections are part of our heritage but are not even mentioned in this suite of lavish new exhibitions. Surely some of the $70 million could have been spent on supporting the Australian Design Centre in Sydney, which was unceremoniously defunded after supporting designers, makers and craftspeople for more than 50 years on a very small budget. Dr Ruth McDermott, Randwick

Pauline Hanson is absolutely entitled to protection from threats of violence, and those threats should be condemned without qualification (“ Hanson security boosted amid war of words with PM” , September 1). But her hypocrisy is breathtaking. After 30 years of a political career built around division, exclusion and fear of the “other”, Hanson now accuses Anthony Albanese of inciting violence because he describes One Nation as divisive. This from a politician who has long portrayed herself as a fearless champion of free speech, prepared to say the provocative things others supposedly will not. Apparently, free speech becomes dangerous when it is used to criticise Pauline Hanson. Barnaby Joyce’s defence only adds to the absurdity. Albanese did not call One Nation “evil”. He criticised its policies and argued that it divides Australians. That is political debate, not incitement. And it just happens to be true.