Quantcast
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 4106

BFCSA: Royal commission into banking: The inquiry that could kill the Government

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

Royal commission into banking: The inquiry that could kill the Government

 

The onslaught has begun.

The television ads are in overdrive, the tame media commentators are barking and even the bankers themselves are putting on a parade, gracing as they did the stage at a "summit" last Thursday.

And all within a week since rumblings from Coalition members threatening a private members bill to bring on a royal commission into banking.

Those bloated profits from our financial institutions, they benefit all of us, we're told in soothing tones by reassuringly ordinary looking Aussies staring benignly from our television screens because, let's face it, we all own bank shares through our superannuation.

It's always handy to throw in a few threats for good measure.

As for a royal commission, well, if you believe the bankers, the real losers will be you and me because it will push interest rates higher.

Others claim, it's all a conspiracy theory, whipped up by populists for cheap political gain.

There was even a dismissive jibe that a full inquiry would serve no purpose because it would only dredge up things that have already happened, which is sort of the entire point of an inquiry.

But in all the noise being generated by their strident opposition, one question remains unanswered: What exactly is there to hide?

Quite a lot it would seem, judging by recent events.

The calls for a full inquiry have been relentless for years, emanating from a broad section of the community — from farmers, small business and households, jaded and disillusioned with the industry's rampant profiteering, fee gouging and blatant disregard for the law.

How many times can a Commonwealth Bank chairman sincerely apologise for a yet another breach of trust? What, pray tell, will be the cause of next year's?

But the overwhelming reason for an inquiry rests on just one principle — accountability.

What has been forgotten in the endless round of scandals in recent years is that the Australian banking sector is a taxpayer subsidised industry.

It's an industry that pays ridiculously bloated salaries to its leaders; that showers itself with massive bonus payments when profits are soaring but instantly demands taxpayer protection and support when the tide turns. More on that later.

One scandal after another

Let's backtrack just a little and examine our local industry's record on scandals.

Deutsche Bank analyst Mike Mangan, who now runs boutique funds manager 2MG, has compiled a neat summary of banks' transgressions during the past decade. It includes everything from the Storm financial crisis to rigging the Malaysian currency markets and providing bad financial advice.

Since the financial crisis, Australian banks have forked out more than $1 billion in fines and compensation from rorting their own clients.

There are a couple of observations to be made here.

The first is that, given our corporate regulator is notoriously slack at pursuing corporate malfeasance, the fines quite possibly are hugely light on.

And the second is that, despite that, no other industry in history has been so dogged in the pursuit of profit with such flagrant disregard for its customers and the community.

You're busted. A brief history of bank fines ($A million)

Mr Mangan hasn't limited his research to Australia. And this is where the horror becomes truly apparent.

Difficult though it may be to believe, Australian banks are among the world's best behaved, at least if you base it on total fines paid.

In the US, banks have forked out more than $206 billion in fines in the past decade, a further $116 billion in the UK and $76 billion in Europe.

Right now, however, there are three significant Australian cases either looming or before the courts.

The CBA's 55,000 breaches of terrorism financing and money laundering laws has attracted the most heat.

Then there is ASIC's case against Westpac over the alleged rigging of the domestic interest rate market which already has begun to shine a light on the inner workings of modern banking (ANZ and NAB ran up the white flag on that one).

But it is the recent sacking of more than 20 National Australia Bank employees and looming court action that has the potential to get to the heart of one of the economy's major flash-points; how our banks have helped artificially inflate the property market by aggressively pushing loans on to customers.

How the banks support democracy and avoid scrutiny

It should come as no surprise that our finance industry is a major political donor.

 

An ABC study early this year noted that finance and insurance interests donated $2.69 million to both major political parties last year, which skewed towards the Coalition but still delivered more than a $1 million to Labor.

 

That money doesn't come without strings. Despite the litany of offences over the years, both sides of politics have been more than happy, until recently, to run to the defence of our financiers.

Labor took a royal commission to the last election but only after a great deal of internal debate.

The Turnbull Government, meanwhile, has been resolute in its stance to avoid a formal inquiry but has been forced ever closer.

It's insisted on regular appearances of four main banking chiefs before parliamentary inquiries and supported greater oversight by regulators, including measures to restrict pay.

Now, with Liberal National Party Senator Barry O'Sullivan threatening to lob a motion to the Senate as early as this week, the gloves are off.

Senior Coalition members are terrified, having been forced for so long to walk the tightrope between hauling bankers into line and staunchly opposing an inquiry.

If the motion gets up, it would be a major loss of face for Mr Turnbull and the Government, with serious ramifications for his grip on leadership.

 

In a show of desperation, the banks have opted to go straight to the public, the area where they possibly have the least support, with a multi-million dollar propaganda campaign on free to air television and newspapers. And the fight is likely to get ugly.

The great Australian bank subsidy

Former prime minister John Howard weighed in last week, warning government members that any inquiry would be "rank socialism".

It was an odd choice of words. Our banks and financiers have been happy recipients of state sponsored socialism for the past decade.

Prior to the financial crisis, there was an understanding the Reserve Bank would stand behind any bank in trouble as a lender of last resort.

As the crisis took hold, however, almost every Australian commercial bank was in danger of collapse because they could no longer refinance their debts.

The Rudd government stepped in, guaranteeing all new borrowing by allowing the banks to use the Commonwealth's AAA credit rating.

 

 

As a result, taxpayers delivered a $120 billion bailout to our banking system as the banks refinanced their international loans.

Media player: "Space" to play, "M" to mute, "left" and "right" to seek.

 
 
 
 
 
 
VIDEO: Opposition Leader Bill Shorten calls for royal commission into financial services sector (ABC News)

 

It was the greatest industry subsidy in our history. And it continues.

That once implicit guarantee for individual organisations became an explicit guarantee for the entire industry, forever changing the relationship.

It's a guarantee the Reserve Bank has calculated to be worth about $5 billion a year to our big four banks.

It didn't stop there. Short selling of financial stocks was banned temporarily, following furious lobbying, particularly by Macquarie Bank.

As an added bonus, the Rudd government guaranteed deposits up to $1 million in an effort to stop any run on the banks.

Those guarantees have remained in place ever since although the deposit guarantee has been wound back to $250,000.

They are an insurance policy — delivered free of charge courtesy of the taxpayer — that the banks have happily accepted ever since. Not that there has been any gratitude.

When Treasurer Scott Morrison announced a bank levy on bank transactions in the May Budget, the outcry from the banking sector was deafening.

Once upon a time, this type of behaviour was laughingly referred to as agrarian socialism — maximise your profits and socialise your losses — because it largely was confined to the rural sector.

 

There's a certain irony that it took an LNP Senator to call out the big end of town.

HAVE YOUR SAY

Please read our house rules and terms of use.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-27/how-bad-are-our-banks/9194984

 

 

162 comments
357 people listening
 
which bank previous staff member4 hours ago
 
 

 

As a previous staff member at one of the big4, I support a full Royal commission into sales targets( with Criminal charges laid against wrong doing by executives, including the CEO). This Royal Commission has also been promoted by the Finance Sector Union(FSU). The culture is driven by the CEO and executive team and ends up with team leaders bullying staff to hit unrealistic targets.

 As an example, to hit your targets we needed to sell overdrafts, to people on government benefits, if we didn't sell these products we would get a please explain form our team leader.  For which Bank, profits before people as they are just a number.

 

 At my time at this bank meant that if I didn't sell overdraft accounts to those that could not afford it,  I would not have a job. Other staff and myself have suffered anxiety, panic attacks on the way to work and even been sacked, performance managed for not selling on each call.  Definitively not needs based or service based selling. Would you sell if this was you, so you can pay your mortgage???????  .

 

6Like
 
 
FredSmith4 hours ago
 
 

 

Ian Verrender notes the bank deposits guarantee to the big banks -- effectively a $5 billion annual subsidy. What he fails to ask is whether that guarantee will be worth anything if GFC2 occurs. 

 

At the 2014 G20 Summit Australia agreed to implement further changes to the bank "bail-in" provisions proposed by the global regulator, the Financial Stability Board (FSB) based in Switzerland. In any future financial markets meltdown and insolvency by the banks ordinary savings bank deposits will be regarded as bank assets and ordinary savings bank depositors as just creditors. Under the FSB proposals agreed to by our government, bank derivatives debts will be paid out ahead of every other creditor. Now derivatives are just IOUs, usually with an asset backing of 1%-5% of the face value. They are play money, fictional debts that should never be paid out ahead of ordinary bank savers with their hard earned cash. What's worse, Australian banks have a $12.3 trillion level of exposure to this toxic garbage. Why our government has signed us up to this abusive financial agreement is beyond me.

 

 

 

 

5Like
 
 
donald duck4 hours ago
 
 

have a look at the banks in Ireland post property splurge or Royal Bank of Scotland in the UK if you doubt where these stories end, joe taxpayer will foot the bill when the cards fall, always the same, fining the banks means nothing - they pass onto the customers ,if we give them loans or free insurance guarantees  accept equity in the banks in return and use this to build up a national fund for future health /super liabilities

1Like
 
IrishCloherty4 hours ago
 
 

We will always be punished for the actions of the high and mighty. Why do we as taxpayers have to do the heavy lifting? Because there is next to no accountability for the perpetrators, and plenty of legal and financial loopholes for these cretins to hide their money.

5Like
 
 
IrishCloherty5 hours ago
 
 

 

The behavior of our banks at the present time is almost identical to the behavior of US investment banks leading up to the GFC.

Our "Big 4" have been colluding to hand out home loans and credit cards like candy to consumers, knowing that unsustainable debt levels will be a major concern. But it isn't a concern, because the banks will pound the Reserve Bank and Government for bailout (me-cry-poor-handout).

Our regulators will always be hampered by the full force of the Financial Lobbyists, Banks and Policymakers. The US Government came up against the same problems trying to make regulations to prevent another GFC.

These problems are not new. For nearly 40 Years, beginning with the Ronald Regan Administration, the US Government and the successive Presidents since Regan have progressively wound back legislation Eisenhower brought in to prevent another Great Depression.

The behavior of all parties involved is the same; Australian Government, Australian Banks and Regulators, and all of the US counterparts. These people care only about their selfish interests.

And when the houses of cards come crashing down, these people want us as taxpayers to foot the bill.

We need urgent regulatory overhaul in the financial sector immediately, before all the fat cats drain us dry, then blame us for it.

 

7Like
 
 
Chris2486 hours ago
 
 

Easier still, take the CBA in lieu of the fines and establish as a govt owned peoples bank. It is the only way to keep them honest

6Like
 
pollywaffle4 hours ago
 
 

 

@Chris248 

Nationalisation would be the way to go as they were pre Keating. 

 

 


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 4106

Trending Articles