Linda Morris unravels years of backroom deals regarding the Powerhouse Museum (“Secret plan to sell off Powerhouse building”, September 5), reporting that “A government spokesman said Labor was committed to the Powerhouse Museum, including the Wran Building’s reopening in Ultimo.” The promise made by Arts Minister John Graham in March 2023, that the Powerhouse Museum was to be revitalised for $300 million, was never going to happen. It has also been confirmed that the interior of the old Powerhouse is now just an empty shell. What appears to have been swept under the carpet is that after 2020, when the Powerhouse was “saved”, millions were spent by the previous government in converting the Discovery Centre in Castle Hill into a mega-warehouse. Its purpose, to absorb the objects in the Powerhouse Museum, including the contents of the Harwood Building. A long time ago, the backroom declared that the Harwood Building had no historic significance and will eventually be not fit for purpose. Is it any wonder that, as Morris’ article reports, “Public Works is now undertaking a preliminary commercial assessment of the Harwood site’s market value”? Garry Horvai, Pennant Hills
How are we back to this stage, where once again they’re looking into selling of parts of the Powerhouse? Experts warned the government for years and years that this plan was going to be a costly disaster. Now the museum lies in ruins, stripped of its heritage and iconic features, and once again there’s talk of a sell-off. Sacking the executives is too little too late, unless these sackings are just the government giving the public someone to blame. To fulfil the election promise to save the Powerhouse, that needed to have been done as soon as the government got in. Was it just demolition by stealth all along? Thomas Walder, Cherrybrook
The community should not have to suffer because of mismanagement and overreach by Powerhouse Museum overseers. The Harwood building is essential to the heritage values of the Ultimo site. It’s time to strip back the expensive and unnecessary artist studios and accommodation to bring us a museum filled with design and technology collections, interactives and ideas. Judith Coombes, Lilyfield
The plan was never a secret. From the moment “developers” saw a nice little earner in the under-used Ultimo area, the writing was on the wall. Start by (literally) cutting off the bridge and monorail so no one could get there, then defund so that there was less to see and less working for those who did. Next cut the staff by a third, chiefly us educators and the curators who made it welcoming (funny how no directors or marketing got cut, at least until recently), then knock down a 30-year-old perfectly functional building during the holidays before it can be heritage listed. Finally, build a vote-buying white elephant in a politically useful area, filling it with overseas artists, and just before you open magically discover a bunch of problems to give you an excuse to sell the original much-loved Powerhouse to an overseas company that will never pay tax for building the gimcrack little boxy investment apartments no one will live in. This was always the plan, the only secret is who can we vote for to stop it happening? Allan Kreuiter, Roseville
One of Gladys Berejiklian’s pet projects for Sydney, most of which involved demolition of anything initiated during the premiership of Neville Wran, was the removal of the Powerhouse Museum in Ultimo. Enquiries to her office revealed the “desperate need” for inner-city housing. One could be certain that there were also potential sales of land to “desperate developers” with ready cash for the government’s balance sheet. Overseas, prime museums are usually in a city’s central area, in easy reach of tourists and locals. There is nothing wrong with having a branch in Parramatta, but the title of “Powerhouse” is meaningless. From all reports, it seems to be a riverside entertainment facility. Careful thought went into turning an old tramway powerhouse and its associated tram shed into a technological museum. The main area could have been less of a black maze, but that would have been easily remedied. The buildings could have been redone for a fraction of the current cost blowouts, but like the stadia and other “look at me” projects, cost seemed to be of no concern at that time. The point being next to the tram shed was not lost in the original plans for the museum, and Chris Minns should not remove this significance nor reduce this museum to a meaningless shell. Donald Hawes, Peel
I don’t think too many of us are surprised at the sudden reveal about selling off the Ultimo Powerhouse building. Several years ago, when the move to Parramatta was announced, that was my first thought. A nice little earner for the government, with only the taxpayers and tourists the losers. Margaret Grove, Concord
In 2015, I joined the phalanx of Herald letter writers demanding the Powerhouse be saved. Thanks in part, perhaps, to this expression of collective outrage, the Baird government backed down, proving a victory for the people and for common sense. Or so we thought. The time has come to remind the Minns government that nothing has changed and broken promises, regretful hand wringing and economic rationalism won’t cut it. Sydney’s shameful track record of demolishing its heritage in the name of shiny, commercial progress, in effect locked glass boxes, stops here. The Ultimo Powerhouse, formerly a real-life powerhouse, is the ideal setting, location and drawcard to exhibit our proud technological, scientific and cultural history on a human scale. Every great city has a similar institution to complete its cultural identity, and the Powerhouse, a diamond in our cultural crown, was conditionally removed to clean and polish under the firm understanding of its full restoration. Peter Farmer, Northbridge
What a mess the entire Powerhouse museum saga has become. The plan was always to sell this prime property to developers. This museum of the people and by the people was perfect as it was. Great site, wonderful displays and interesting for all. A Sydney gem. Some bright spark has decided it needs to be sold. Like privatisation, this is like selling off the most worthwhile, valuable assets. Like selling off prime defence holdings, this will come back to bite the government. Ashley Berry, Toolijooa
I have written letters to the Herald about the Ultimo Powerhouse Museum, three in 2023 and one in 2025. As with dozens (or possibly hundreds) of other letter writers who wrote in about the fate of this once-amazing establishment, I have watched with impotence and sorrow as it has systematically been destroyed. Now I read there is an $80 million budget overrun on the Ultimo rebuild. I am not at all surprised, but I am deeply saddened that incompetence, overreach and egotism have ruined the chances of this museum returning to anywhere near its former glory. So many experts and passionate supporters begged for the Powerhouse to be restored rather than redeveloped and now can only say, “We told you so.” Margot Vaccari, Berowra
Was this Sydney’s worst kept secret? Brian Collins, Cronulla
Lessons in reality for Canavan
Teaching is one profession where gender equality exists when it comes to salary (“Canavan’s rant on ‘feminised curriculum’ wide of the mark”, September 5). Having been on the odd selection panel for staff, I know these days they are very gender conscious. Matt Canavan’s comments simply seem to show his ignorance of the curriculum, teaching methods and the multiple issues confronting schools when they try to overcome ingrained behaviours already brought into schools by students. He seems to be totally unaware of how any new curriculum is constructed and implemented. Before he starts criticising, he should examine his attitude, which seems to point to someone who thinks males should be in power and equality non-existent. I have advice for Canavan. There is gender equality in public education between teachers, and they do their best to make sure it is there in their teaching, but they do have to teach to the mandated curriculum, not their own agenda. More male teachers are not the only answer to the problem; a change in society standards and parenting would have a much stronger impact. Augusta Monro, Dural
Conservative sexual ethics prioritise hierarchy over consent. As such, any education that says boys are not entitled to use girls against their will is regarded as “anti-boy”. Samantha Chung, Kensington
Matt Canavan should give up his day job and stay home and parent his four boys into good citizens. His wife would probably welcome it and he’d stop being an embarrassment to his kids when he opens his mouth. He may be welcome at their weddings and his prospective daughters-in-law or sons-in-law, as the case could be, would have a respectful relationship with him. The future arrives quickly, Mr Canavan. Wendy Atkins, Cooks Hill
Call me old-fashioned, but shouldn’t teaching kids about consent be the responsibility of parents? Of course schools should call out inappropriate behaviour occurring within the school walls, but primarily, the responsibility does lie with the parents. It seems to me teachers are now expected to take on parenting roles as well as their traditional role as educators. Susan Wilson, Freshwater
Memo from Anthony Albanese: “Dear Matt and Angus, my sincere thanks. As you know, recently I have been struggling to gain support anywhere. However, you have potentially delivered me a very handy and unexpected extra 250,000 votes. That’s the number of full-time female teachers in Australia. You insult female teachers by insinuating that the rise in boys’ sexual violence towards females is somehow caused by what happens in classrooms, where females represent 70 per cent of teachers, and your vindictive and baseless anti-female bias is once again greatly appreciated. Cheers, Albo.” Warren Marks, Long Beach
Religion’s manosphere
Julia Baird (“Of God, Dolly and Gloria Steinem”, September 5) exposes an extraordinary contradiction. Amid all our concern about the manosphere, the Sydney Anglican Diocese remains a legally protected exponent of one of its central beliefs: that authority properly belongs to men and women should submit to it. What would ordinarily be sex discrimination is legally protected when practised by religious institutions. Calling it “divine order” rather than misogyny does not change the message. The message that women are lesser. The manosphere is not just online. It is alive and well, and legally protected, in religious institutions. Marina Cardillo, Beecroft
It is depressing that the Sydney Anglican Church and like-minded Evangelicals still cling to male Headship and Julia Baird has to call on Dolly Parton and Gloria Steinem for counterarguments. It is 30 years since my late beloved wife and I left the Sydney Diocese over this issue. Of course, the sickening misogyny of the manosphere goes way beyond the church, but it is encouraging that at least some effort is being made to counter male chauvinism in the Adelaide church. Andrew Macintosh, Cromer
Souvenir thoughts
What a beautiful and balanced artist and human Tony Albert is (“Artist reframes painful historic kitsch for MCA”, September 5). His show Not a Souvenir is fantastic; it certainly opened my eyes to, once again, the appropriation of our indigenous people. Yet, Tony understands too that some Australians bought Aboriginalia “as an act of solidarity or identification with their adopted home”. Regardless, the exhibition and the artist encourage us to think and ponder. Thank you, Tony. Lisa Williams, Dulwich Hill
Academic refuge
In May last year, I wrote suggesting the federal government support universities in attracting talented researchers fleeing Trump’s anti-university campaigns. Nothing happened. Now comes news that the Canadian Government is allocating $500 million to do exactly that, taking on 64 high-ranking US academics, offering them the support no longer available in the US. Once again, I urge the Australian universities and government to open their eyes to this opportunity. Stein Boddington, St Clair
Hygiene brush-up
Talk about a solution for a problem we didn’t know we had (“This $800 Dyson toothbrush is selling out but is it really worth all the hype?” , September 5). It may show your dental problems, but what can you do about it except with a visit to the dentist? A decent cleaning regime with a good quality ordinary toothbrush (accompanied by six-monthly dentist visits) has worked well for my 75-year-old teeth. Fluoride as well. John Brown, Kianga
Every day we learn Australians are doing it tough and looking to One Nation to solve their financial woes. When I read that $800 toothbrushes are selling out I wonder if times are as tough as we are led to believe. Robyn Lewis, Raglan
- To submit a letter to the Sydney Morning Herald, email letters@smh.com.au. Click here for tips on how to submit letters.
- The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform. Sign up here.
Read the full article here
