The remarkable revelations of James Packer’s emails to key Nine Entertainment staff, including chairman Peter Costello, raises serious governance issues for the government’s Future Fund.
It’s important to note there’s a major distinction between what Packer claims about the role of Peter Costello, and what appears to have been the case. Packer describes Costello as “my secret Crown lobbyist”, saying:
In 2011 I personally paid you 300k (cph [Packer’s company Consolidated Press Holdings] did anyway you didn’t want the crown directors to know) to lobby for me, for Crown. Your job was to get me closer to Michael O’Brien…
O’Brien, last year ousted as Victorian Liberals leader, was a former senior Costello staffer in the Howard years, who in 2011 was Victorian gaming minister in the Baillieu government — the minister overseeing Crown in that state.
Costello had plenty of history with Packer at that point — the then treasurer was crucial to ensuring the passage of the 2006 media ownership changes, which ensured that Packer could sell the Nine Network to foreign private equity, funding his move into gambling.
There was nothing underhand and certainly not illegal about such a lobbyist role for Costello — even if it reeks of the same cosy state capture that was a constant feature of Crown in the 2010s — except that Costello was by then on the board of guardians of the Future Fund, having been appointed by Kevin Rudd to that role (to the fury of many within Labor).
If Costello was attempting to influence state government ministers on behalf of Packer while a director of the Future Fund, it would have been utterly inappropriate. Behind every word exchanged with a minister would have been the implication that Costello had a role in overseeing the investment decisions of what was then a $90 billion fund.
If it’s true, Costello’s position is untenable and he should depart the Future Fund forthwith.
But it’s not at all clear that what Packer says is true. Nine’s response to the Packer emails — it hasn’t been reported in The Sydney Morning Herald or The Age — is that Costello was an adviser to CPH in 2011, not a lobbyist. And crucially, O’Brien says Costello never lobbied him on behalf of Crown or anyone else.
An interesting question is whether O’Brien met with Costello at all during 2011, even if Costello wasn’t engaged in “lobbying” him, or whether Costello organised for Crown or CPH staff to meet with O’Brien. But there’s no evidence beyond Packer’s claim that Costello acted inappropriately. Even so, Finance Minister Katy Gallagher should request that the Future Fund clarify the extent of Costello’s interaction with O’Brien, direct and indirect, while he was a member of the board of guardians.
Peter Costello had a three-way conflict of interest as chair of a media company (one which has held fundraisers for the Liberal Party), head of the Future Fund board, and Liberal Party elder. But the most explosive claim of conflict of interest has emerged from a fourth and altogether more surprising direction.
Do James Packer’s emails to Peter Costello reveal a conflict of interest? Let us know by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.
