By Michael Rafferty
The 1980s have been called the decade of the femocrat. In the 1980s, women began to move through the management ranks of government departments and many large companies. Quite apart from the new middle class of "sisters in suits", as Marian Sawer termed them in her book, however, was the emergence of a smaller but perhaps more significant group of women — those who became major owners of capital.
The different stories of Janet Holmes a' Court and Robin Greenburg (of Western Women fame) each tell us something about capitalism in the 1990s.
With the sudden death of Robert Holmes a' Court in mid-1990, the remains of the Bell Group of companies were plunged into crisis. Holmes a' Court had sold much of the Bell Group to Bond Corp and the WA government in the aftermath of the stock market crash. The remaining assets were held largely in the family company, Heytsbury Holdings.
Heytsbury was still saddled with enormous debt, and continued to trade only with the grace of its bankers. A major problem was that there were many assets — private houses, cars, horses and the art collection — that did not yield any income and could not help in servicing the large interest costs.
The bankers wanted these assets sold to repay their loans. Holmes a' Court maintained that an orderly sale of assets was essential to prevent big losses of a hasty liquidation. At his death, the banks had converted Holmes a' Court from an accumulator into a reluctant salesman.
Upon his death, plans for an orderly disposal were again reviewed. But Janet Holmes a' Court had other ideas. She took over management of Heytsbury and has been even more ruthless in cost reduction, accelerating the asset disposal program to keep the bankers at bay. Gone are many of the planes, horses, cars, paintings and some of the mansions. More assets are currently on the market.
Such is the level of scrutiny now exercised over Heytsbury that apparently all major expense items have to be approved by its bankers.
Janet Holmes a' Court has also received significant support from state and federal governments. How significant this has been to the survival of Heytsbury so far one can only speculate, but it is known that she counts both Prime Minister Keating and former WA Premier Carmen Lawrence as personal friends. She also sits on
a number of government boards, the most notable being that of the Reserve Bank.
The Janet Holmes a' Court story does not just remind us that capitalism is a society divided primarily by class, not gender. It also tells us something of the institutional relationships between capitalists (banks and entrepreneurs) and between capitalists and the state. Survival at the head of Heytsbury will continue to be determined by whether Heytsbury meets the banks' repayment program and ensures that its remaining operations (like John Holland Constructions, the London theatres and the Sherwood Pastoral Group) are profitable.
With the virtual cessation of share trading by Heytsbury, this will entail turning these companies into income producing units. Stripped of financial jargon this means making the companies more efficient exploiters of labour.
The Holmes a' Court story also highlights the continuing importance of the state in sustaining entrepreneurs. Robert Holmes a' Court's first couple of million dollars came from plays with the heavily state-assisted Albany Woollen Mills in the late 1960s. Janet Holmes a' Court's success will hinge crucially on the construction company Holland winning some of the government's capital works spending.
Finally, the Heytsbury saga emphasises the increasing role finance institutions are now playing in the day-to-day operations of even private family companies.
The demise of the Western Women financial group a couple of years ago reveals another side to the story. Western Women was the company associated with the now fallen entrepreneur, Robin Greenburg. The company was a financial advisory and investment broker based in Western Australia. It grew rapidly in the 1980s by trading on its uniqueness as a financial service exclusively for women and run by women.
Western Women continued to haunt the WA Labor government right up until its electoral defeat. The Lawrence government (through its R&I Bank) recently accepted partial liability for some of the millions of dollars lost by the company. Western Women was given letters of introduction or recommendation from the government, some that even came out of Lawrence's own office. These letters have been interpreted as a form of state guarantee.
Greenburg misappropriated and mismanaged the money invested through Western Women, and the company failed in spectacular fashion in 1989. Greenburg disappeared without trace but later turned herself in, and in September last year was sentenced to 17 years.
The support and encouragement provided by the WA Labor government
are now the basis for action by disgruntled and dispossessed investors.
The Western Women story demonstrates one way that financial institutions and governments have become even more intricately bound up through the current recession.
We have also been shown yet again that through our taxes we will be paying for the spending spree or mismanagement of some errant capitalist.