Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

The Greens support the thrust of this bill and will be supporting amendments (1), (11) and (12), after they have been moved, because they are sensible technical amendments—for reasons that have been outlined—that make sense and will make it easier to implement this bill. But amendments (2) to (10) cannot be supported. It is another form of backdown. Amendments (2) to (10) remove some of the strict liability provisions and they also have the effect of removing default and supplementary buffers.

It is notable that the strict liability provisions were not raised once in the report of the Standing Committee on Economics. The committee did not see fit to recommend any change to these provisions and one presumes that the committee thought that these provisions were important for the enforcement of some very important protections. One can only surmise what would have happened, but in the meantime lenders have come and lobbied the government and perhaps lobbied others and successfully managed to remove some of the strict liability provisions, despite the committee never having said that these provisions should be removed. In fact, the committee supported the passage of the bill as it stood.

The minister has said that the reason for the removal of the default and supplementary buffer is that it was sought by consumer groups. The committee heard that argument and the committee heard conflicting views. The committee heard from one charity that said that the default and supplementary buffer provisions that are now proposed to be removed were important and they did not believe, on balance, they should be removed and that they did not agree with the submission of the Australian Bankers Association that these ought to be removed because they said they were important protections for consumers.

Again, what has happened is that, since the report was tabled, some lobbying has presumably gone on and the Australian Bankers Association has got its way with respect to the removal of those parts of the default and supplementary buffers that are referred to in amendments (2) to (10). For that reason, whilst we support the bill, it is disappointing that a very good, welcome and important reform is at the eleventh hour being watered down after some last-minute lobbying by the banks.

Question agreed to.

See this speech in context