I didn’t say anything about the career of Kerry Packer on his death, because I think it’s reasonable at such a time for family and friends to have an opportunity to mourn or celebrate the departed without interruption from others[1]. However, state memorial services are another matter. The provision of such a service, at public expense, implies that the person concerned has done substantial service to the public.
I’m not aware of any such service in Packer’s case. He was a man of great wealth and power, but he used his position almost entirely to accumulate more wealth and more power. Although the bulk of his wealth came from government-created licenses to print money (TV stations and casinos) he boasted of paying as little tax as he could. As Andrew Leigh notes, claims of great philanthropic activity also don’t stand up. Most stories of his generosity seem to reflect the grandiose largesse of the ‘big man’, also reflected in high-rolling gambling, rather than any real concern to do good.
In doing all this, Packer was no better and no worse than plenty of other people in business. The commentary on his death said that he was a good father despite having a miserable childhood himself, and obviously plenty of people liked and admired him. But if those were the criteria, we’d be having state funerals every day.
Packer justified his own tax minimisation by objecting to the waste of public money. Giving a memorial service to someone solely for starting out rich and getting a lot richer is a prime example.
fn1. There are exceptions. In 1953, Frank Packer’s Telegraph memorably, and rightly, ran the headline Stalin is dead. Hooray
John Quiggin 
Packer was a terrrific character and very successful. He was someone that many people, including ourselves (we said as much on our blog) greatly admired for his business acumen.
However, we too have problems with the offer of a state memorial. It appears to be not only unnecessary, but not even in keeping with whom the man was!
Hear hear.
From what I have read, he was a bit of a bully who used his money to overwhelm opposition. Australia is neither richer nor poorer for his passing as there are plenty of his like.
It seems to me to be another example of the excessive sentimental gloss that our society gives to events as it becomes increasingly less concerned with doing the ‘Right Thing’. Our pollys hand out more Australia medals (to bureaucrats for making policy), get teary eyed about ‘Out Boys Overseas’ (while screwing the vets on entitlements), declaim with trembling lip the virtues of the nuclear family (while giving power to corporations to take the breadwinner out of the home for longer periods), and give out state funerals to the rich and powerful.
As we become more callous and self-involved.
Regarding Kezza, overheard in a very down-market discount grocery by your honest reporter last year, from a lady at the counter: ‘No, I admired him, I really did. I hope young James can do as well’. True story.
Our beloved PM’s proposal to waste my money on K.Packer’s funeral is surely the most emetic to emerge from The Kirribilli in a long time. We should propose that the Canadians similarly canonise Conrad Black and that there be a joint Aust-US send-off for Rupert, Thane of Mordor, when he dies in 2067.
Dear Mr Howard: Grotesque. Bloody grotesque. There are elderly Canberra Mandarins in slippers and cardigans who are infinitely more worthy.
A State Memorial Service for Mr Packer is a very niggardly gesture on Howard’s part. Compare what Howard did for Sir Donald Bradman.
Bradman’s name and its associations are protected under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conversations Regulations 2000.
Now it is a undebatable that Mr Packer did much more for cricket than Sir Donald ever has.
And what better memorial for a man whose enormous wealth is vouchsafed by government monopoly than special protection under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Regulations 2000.
Come on Mr Howard. Stop being so unAustralian.
If this travesty proceeds, it should be funded with $5.4 million in gold bullion.
Here’s a horrible image: have the Packer remains stripped and lain out on Bondi beach. Then have worried-looking Greenpeace volunteers attempt to roll him out to sea.
Packer did do some public good, eg the introduction of World Series Cricket (that his motivation was private gain is not really relevant). And anyone who complains about Packer’s legal tax minimization should first volunteer how much extra they pay over the required amount.
However, I think Australia in general grants too many state memorials, funerals, etc. In Britain they are reserved for the Queen or King (although the current royal crop are probably far less worthy even than Packer). US Presidents by law get them (and I don’t know that they’ve had a non-presidential state funeral).
Problem Australia has is that we have no elected head-of-state, and no monarch of our own, although that doesn’t stop Canada having state funerals for their Prime Ministers and Governors General. Perhaps Australia should reserve state funerals for former Prime Ministers only – would remove all the controversy.
I am amused by people who condemn Packer for minimising his tax. Are there any readers of this article who choose to pay tax that they could easily and legally avoid? Anyone who sacrifices part of their salary into superannuation to reduce tax is doing the same thing that Packer did. The scale of the enterprise does not alter the principle. Condemn the architects of a tax system that is heavily biased in favour of those with great wealth, but don’t condemn those who find and use the loopholes.
Alan
I believe that the scale really does alter the principle. We would all like to avoid paying tax, but not all of us can afford to hire very expensive accountants who can make many millions for themselves by finding or creating these loopholes. Without wishing to accuse Packer of any violations (de mortus nil nisi bonum), it should be pointed out that many wealthy Australians were able to avoid all income taxes through the 70s and 80s.
The very rich are different from you and I. Yes, they escape taxation.
I notice that people generally take a positive view of people when they die. Partly out of respect for those close to them, partly out of consideration that those recently departed have no right of reply, partly through self-interest in preferring to live with favourable rather than unfavourable memories and partly, I suspect, from some kind of sunk cost principle. This is generally a positive attitude that I like.
Kerry Packer was no angel but he was a great character. His performance in front of that Senate Committee was stunning and confirmed the accuracy of his famous Golden Rule: viz ‘Those with the gold make the rules’. The pollies that day looked liked a bunch of kids being called to account by a stern headmaster and didn’t John Doe in the street love to see it being stuck right up the pretentious pollie dills.
I assume a publicly-funded funeral reflects risk-aversion on the part of politicians. The Packer clan remain a force of importance in the Australian political scene.
The main mechanism for avoiding _all_ income taxes was bottom-of-the-harbour schemes, which were made retrospectively a criminal offence (by none other than John Howard (at least, he pushed hard for the retrospective criminality of the offences)).
I don’t believe Packer was ever involved in any bottom-of-the-harbour schemes.
‘A character’ my foot. He was a pig of a man who, unlike Rupert Murdoch, was too gutless to venture outside Australia because while here he would never, ever meet a person who didn’t genuflect and assume the position, elsewhere it might be different. Eg in the USA the odd person might have stood up to him and suggested being a billionaire doesn’t negate the obligation to behave like a decent human.
Packer was the most indulged person in the country: every appalling behaviour tolerated because of who he was. Yuk.
Yes, Packer was interesting because Australia is a very small place and he occupied such a large volume of it, just by walking around: a few years ago in a coffee shop in Sydney I met a man who claimed to have been KP’s butler and told many stories about him. He was still in awe of Packer.
That said, Howard’s idea of wasting money on a state funeral for him is almost criminally irresponsible. Schapelle Corby is as deserving.
What exactly does a “state memorial service” involve? A state funeral involves the government assuming the not-insignificant costs associated with
burial and or cremation, conveyance to and from the funeral venue and military ceremonial if appropriate. If there’s no body involved – and I assume that KP won’t be disinterred for the occasion – what “cost” is the government actually picking up? Attendees will presumably gather in Sydney at a church where no doubt they would have done regardless of whether the government declared the gathering a “state” occasion or not.
To quote James Packer:
“My old man said you guys are finished if we don’t get it”
Chue Tey – what was the issue the quotation referred to? A hamburger?
Generosity. I read the story, many years ago, of KP accidentally bumping into a child in a wheelchair at a footy match and then shouting the family a trip to Disneyland. Two days ago, I read an obiturist who wrote of an entire row of children in wheelchairs, with an aircraft being reconstructed for the task.
One child or many? Kindeness or lunacy? Can anyone provide historical detail?
NO state commemoration (through gritted teeth).
Paul Kelly,
You are an exception to my claim that most people see the positive side of people when they die. To you Kerry Packer is a ‘pig of a man’ which doesn’t make sense since people are never pigs. To say KP had no foreign involvements is wrong too — he travelled constantly, owned large estates in Britain and Argentina and indeed made one of his biggest profits ever on a US mail insert business investment. He also unsuccessfully launched what would have been the biggest takeover in history with his mate Goldsmith of BAT. Generally I agree he liked to stick to Australia since he knew the scene here. He did run the most successful television network in this country and a string of magazines though this probably doesnt count. He also bought Crown Casino for what turned out to be about twice times earnings but again no big deal. And yeah that fiasco with Allen Bond re Channel 9 was probably mainly a media beat up — it was after all only $800 million in a few years.
But I am sure you’ve got it right in terms of judging decent behaviour — you must have since your statements carry the premise that you can make these judgements.
As I said KP was no angel but I am sure that at a dinner party he would be of greater entertainment value than any morally self-righteous, judgemental bore. KP was a character, warts and all.
Two things:
Firstly, it’s arguable that in heading the Nine Network, Packer did indeed perform a useful public service, if for no other reason than that he helped to create business opportunities for workers in the Australian media.
Secondly, I’m not sure that the Will de Vere’s suggestion (that the provision of state money for a state funeral is a ‘waste’) is entirely accurate. Presumably, the money is supplied by a specific government department, which in turn receives a certain amount of money every year to provide this service. Can this really be characterised as a ‘waste’? Would it really have been less wasteful for the money to just sit in the coffers of this department?
TimT has said
‘Secondly, I’m not sure that the Will de Vere’s suggestion (that the provision of state money for a state funeral is a ‘waste’) is entirely accurate.’
TimT: yes, it’s a waste, in the same way that withdrawing our bank account in $100 bills and then smoking them is a waste. Or the way that our support of our PM’s residence at Kirribbilli instead of Canberra is a waste. All those RAAF air fares.
All ceremonial occasions are ‘wasteful’, but some are deserving. Others are ridiculous. A State occasion for Packer would be a ridiculous waste: would the Packer family be prepared to finance John Howard’s funeral in 2014?
W. De Vere
“Firstly, it’s arguable that in heading the Nine Network, Packer did indeed perform a useful public service, if for no other reason than that he helped to create business opportunities for workers in the Australian media.’
The Nine Network was a government-created (one-third share in) a monopoly. It would have operated and created jobs in much the same manner if Packer had never been born.
As was observed upthread, Packer’s only real contribution (and a mixed one, since it cost us a couple of Test Series) was World Series Cricket. Better than Super League, I guess, but not enough to justify a state funeral.
What a strange idea TimT has of government accounting! Basically he’s saying that “if we didn’t waste the money on this we’d just waste it on something else”. And on Tim’s accounting, Skase is a great benefactor because he created business opportunities for workers in the legal industry.
KP was no better than he ought to have been. The questions about him raised by the Costigan commission have never been answered. And as John says, his philanthropy was of the sort provided by mafia dons and other “big men”. State support, even symbolic (tho I think actually some real $’s were involved), for his funeral is a disgrace.
He was a private citizen.
He was never a member of Parliament.
He was never a Public Servant.
He was in no way a statesman.
He gave a great deal to public hospitals, but he also gave a great deal to Las Vegas tables.
A State commemoration of this man would make the difference between the public and private citizen entirely arbitrary.
Twixt gnashed teeth.
Not a hamburger
http://www.gwb.com.au/gwb/news/packer/packer1.html
The Howard Government is clearly Machiavellian and entirely media-driven in its political instincts. Nothing about leadership. Look at its track record:
a) Loud noises about Iraq war, but send a small contingent
b) Out of proportion hysteria over refugees
c) Assistance for Schapelle Corby, but nothing for Hicks
and now state funeral for a “good bloke”. If PM Howard can win votes carrying a guitar and strumming “True Blue”, he’d be doing it now.
John, KP ran ( ‘ran’) the Nine Network and proved himself one of the most astute businessmen in Australia over several decades. You are very clever yourself as an academic. Can you not appreciate skills in another area that need not set out to pursue a particular political agenda?
Do you accept Will de Vere’s bigotry that State Funerals should only go to pollies and public servants and should exclude private citizens. Lord protect us from such nonsense! Ignore the KP issue for a moment, as a general prescription on who has social value this is crazy.
I have mixed feelings myself about some things about KP but I am surprised at the lack of generosity in some of the comments in this thread.
Harry Clarke has asked
‘Do you accept Will de Vere’s bigotry that State Funerals should only go to pollies and public servants and should exclude private citizens. Lord protect us from such nonsense! Ignore the KP issue for a moment, as a general prescription on who has social value this is crazy.
I have mixed feelings myself about some things about KP but I am surprised at the lack of generosity in some of the comments in this thread.’
Yes, ancient protocol should exclude private (and KP was nowt if not private) citizen’s corpses from this kind of commemoration. It isn’t nonsense, it’s tradition and good form. Even true-blue Anarchists would recognise that a State event for Packer would look – should look – corrupt.
Has anyone else here heard of the Askin Knights?
Oh, and if
Oh, and if KP is entitled to a state-funded send-off, we all are. You and me and everyone we know.
The PM is setting a very bad precedent, especially in my case.
Sorry about the earlier typo.
Will De Vere
I have heard it said that Packer was a great business man.
My understanding is that when his father died in the mid 1970s Kerry inherited a corporate empire worth $100 million. In todays terms (ie after inflation) thats a valuation of about $2 billion. At his death most reports indicate that packer was worth $7 billion. Over 30 years thats a growth rate of about 4% per annum which hardly seems like a stellar business achievement.
And I agree with JQs sentiments that a state funeral would be hard to justify in terms of public service.
An obvious question, already asked, but not answered, by Phillip Adams is whether Manning Clark got a state funeral. Whether or not you agree with him, he certainly contributed more than KP.
From this link, it would appear not.
Err, what exactly did Manning Clark contribute? 6 flawed volumes of history?
At least KP gave us Darryl Sommers and Dicky Knee.
‘And in BREAKING NEWS!!’:
Lefties still hate rich people!!
I never knew that the Nine Network was government created, JQ. We live and learn.
But what’s more important – that the Nine Network started this way? Or the way that it grew under Packer, thereby becoming an important sector of growth in the Australian media industry?
Derrida, I do lean towards the position that government involvement in the economy should be minimised in most cases. So yeah, I would be sympathetic to the position that most (if not all) government spending is ‘waste’.
When we start debating over whether someone is ‘deserving’ of a state funeral (as Will de Vere does), it seems to me that we’re in a bizarre position: should any government be put in a position to make moral judgements, such as this one? I would say no.
Oh, and, great point, Scott!
“He was a private citizen.
He was never a member of Parliament.
He was never a Public Servant.
He was in no way a statesman.”
When you put it like that, I could almost be convinced that Kerry Packer deserves a state funeral!
It is inappropriate for KP to be given a state funeral. Such an honour should be reserved for the few who have shown real personal sacrifice in important service to the nation. Whatever his contribution to Oz society may have been, KP definately does not fall into this category.
Furthermore, given his vast personal wealth, (built upon his very considerable inheritance), and his loudly voiced views on tax and government spending, it is doubly inappropriate to publicly fund his funeral.
I agree with Seeker. Given Packer’s own political views, I doubt very much he would appreciate people’s taxes being spent on paying some politicians to talk about him.
From John Howard’s p.o.v., Packer performed a valuable public service in putting his media empire in the service of the Howard campaign team in 1995-96. Using a publicly created monopoly to intervene in the political process does not, however, strike me as performing a public service. Compare Packer’s public works with those of, say, Essington Lewis or Hudson Fysh. Even Silvio Berlusconi puts in some time for the public of Italy.
For those arguing Packer performed a public service by creating employment, anyone with large amounts of capital does that. It doesn’t mean that helping the workers motivated them for one second, or that they would have hesitated for a moment sacking the lot of them if it would have increased profits. On the same logic, perhaps we should bring back the property franchise? And, like in Hong Kong, allow companies to vote? Hang it all, let’s repeal the Reform Act 1832.
Last – does the helicopter pilot get his kidney back now? We should be told.
Harry, I doubt Kerry would have been great value at a dinner party, unless you find someone dropping their cigarette butt on the carpet and rubbing it in a hoot. He was by all accounts socially inept, which is why he restricted himself to the company of sycophants. However, I’m sure that, had you had him over for dinner and he behaved like a pig you would have laughed. That’s what I mean: he restricted himself to the company of kow-towers to his power and money, not being able to rely on any inherent charm, of which he had zilch.
That’s a little unfair: can’t really blame Packer for the ACB’s hissy-fit. It was not Packer who forbade the WSC players from playing for Australia.
I still think the honour of a State Funeral should be reserved for those who have succeeded in getting elected to the highest office. Any other criteria is guaranteed to be controversial.
Good post and interesting discussion. Echoing the comments of Seeker and Yobbo above, I think that:
a) Packer would not have wanted a state funeral.
b) His line of work probably does not warrant one anyway.
Whatever we might think of Manning Clark, I believe that we should add many academics to the list of Australians who are genuinely deserving of state commemoration. Millions of Australians have been influenced, directly and indirectly, by teachers whose lives were spent writing, reading and researching. An obvious example: Australian scientists.
PrQ,
I have to agree with you wholeheartedly. There are a few people who probably deserve a state funeral. Kerry Packer, whether we believe what he achieved was good or not, was not (IMHO) one of them. I can only surmise that Howard is attempting to curry favour with one of the two large media groups in Oz.
I hope he will not do the same for Rupert whn he dies as he is not even an Australian any more.
A state funeral was offered for Don Bradman. I think the criteria seems to be pretty broad.
I doubt that John Howard is trying to court favour so much as he is trying to bait the left into saying something unpopular.
Ah, the old wedge issue. You may be right – I cannot imagine Beazley going to strong against Packer as the reaction at the next election might be unfavourable, but the left of the Labor Party might. I suppose the question then would be “unpopular with whom?”.
Andrew Reynolds has said:
‘I hope he will not do the same for Rupert whn he dies as he is not even an Australian any more.’
Yes, earlier in the conversation (Jan 2) I suggested that such a ceremony could be a joint Aust-US love-in:
‘We should propose that the Canadians similarly canonise Conrad Black and that there be a joint Aust-US send-off for Rupert, Thane of Mordor, when he dies in 2067.’
Today’s papers are crowded with alarmed citizens howling great curses at the idea of this proposed waste of their taxes.
I do not think Kerry (quite) fits into the same class as Black – after all, Kerry was never actually charged with anything, much less committed to trial. (Note, I am not saying he never committed a crime – nor am I saying that he did).
To equate Murdoch to Sauron is a bit steep, too.
Whoops, sorry; Roop, Thane of Glomborg, Laird of Loch Ness. Remember that in their time, these men were all Titans. Like Alan Bond over in….where’s that sandy place? He was roolly something, wodn’t he?
In memory of the many pensioners who depended upon Sir Robert Maxwell, another mighty whale.
Don’t worry, Will – I played my small part in putting Bondy away. Just wish he had stayed there.
It is just a pity not all the whales of that nature fail to swim.