Tim Hammond (Perth, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Before I get to articulating the ways in which this government has failed to protect consumers from the economic power of the banks, let me put into context the importance of getting it right. What does it look like on the ground? Well, the impact and the necessity and the importance of getting it right are stark when you look at the sheer number of customers held by the big four banks—those consumers affected by the ways in which the banks go about conducting their business: 3.15 million customers with the NAB, 3.8 million customers with Westpac, five million customers with the ANZ and 7.4 million customers with the Commonwealth Bank. That is almost 20 million Australians who bank with the big four and, when we look at the market share of the big four, when combined with their subsidiaries'—Westpac's St. George brand, the Commonwealth's Bankwest brand and NAB's UBank—the big four have a total market share of somewhere just shy of 75 per cent. That is why it is just so important to get this right, and it highlights why it is such a tragedy that this government continues to drop the ball when it comes to managing relationships with the banks.

Let me make it clear that there is one party, the Labor Party, that understands the need to have confidence in banks and financial institutions. The Labor Party understands how important it is to deal with unethical behaviour that compromises that confidence. It is the Labor Party that understands the importance of having a healthy banking and financial services sector, and it is the Labor Party that supports a strong banking and financial services sector. But what we will never support, for as long as we have breath in our bodies, are practices, systems and cultures that allow consumers to continue to be ripped off, small business owners who are working hard and doing the right thing to lose their livelihoods, and retirees to lose their life savings.

If we are truly honest with ourselves we know, and if those on the other side are honest with themselves they will confess to the number of constituents who come through their doors on a daily basis with stories of predatory behaviour and harsh treatment by the banks in the sector. What they should admit but what they fail to admit is how this government is failing those constituents in relation to truly protecting their interests.

One need look no further than the paltry, inept approach—tinkering around the edges, at best—taken by this government in the recent budget in relation to dealing with the banks insofar as they affect consumers. The government has attempted a no-net-red-tape approach, increasing regulation in some areas but decreasing regulation in others. And of course who could go further than looking at this attempted trojan horse, commonly known as a levy on the banking sector. We can try as hard as we might to make the numbers stack up but once again they fail dismally.

We will see, while one is drilling down into the detail of these so-called attempts to deliver benefits to consumers, the need for a royal commission to truly get to the bottom of what is at heart in order to ensure consumers are protected from predatory behaviour from the financial services sector. The so-called $6 billion levy on the banks—what a wonderful trojan horse this is: falling apart at the seams before you even get into the gates of Troy. It is a poorly designed attempt at trying to protect consumers, for these reasons: not because it is not important to make sure the banks give back to the community but because of the fact that when you look at all the other paltry changes attempted to be made by this government it risks achieving no net benefit. There is absolutely nothing in this rushed attempt to win over the electorate that would stop the banks passing on the costs of this levy to mums and dads, consumers and small businesses.

The ink is barely dry on this budget and we already know that the shortfall in relation to accruing the so-called benefits of this levy adds up to something in the range of $2 billion. For Westpac, the $260 million annual liability under the levy represents a $68 cost on each of their 3.8 million customers. How is that possibly delivering a benefit or a protection for consumers in the banking sector? The cost of the new banking levy has pushed up borrowing, making it even harder for new entrants to establish new banks undermining the budget measures. Now, it is true that we have no objection to the banks paying a levy, but what we have here is a rush job. There is a clear discrepancy between what the banks are actually saying they will raise and what the government is telling everyday Australians.

Look no further than yesterday in parliament. On three separate occasions, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer would not confirm how much money the banks were actually able to claim back in deductions. Only a frustrated, desperate, panicked government, trying so hard to be something they are not, would come up with a scheme which on one hand says they are going to tax the banks and on the other hand is going to let the banks claim the costs of paying the tax in the form of a deduction. If they were serious about wanting respect from the financial services sector—the only thing that these banks will respect in government is when they have a government prepared to give them a royal commission, and this government is pulling up short.

Meanwhile, at the same time, talk about Robin Hood! While the government is giving a $65 billion tax cut to big business, of which over $7 billion will be given to the big four banks, they are imposing a $6 billion levy with absolutely no guarantee or protection for consumers that they will not be hit with the cost. This is a government literally taking money out of the pockets of banks' consumers, only to give that money back to the banks in the form of a tax cut.

We have here the Minister for Small Business, who has come along to listen to what we have to say here in relation to the ways in which small business operators are also affected by the big four banks. He is not doing much listening and he is not doing much acting. He comes up here off the long run yesterday in question time and cannot work out why, he says, that 'Labor hates small business'. 'Why is it that they hate small business?' he asks. Well, Sunshine, there is one party in this town that protects small business and it is the Labor Party.

It was the Labor Party that went to the election in 2016 ensuring a policy that would make life better for 95 per cent of small businesses. Count them: 95 per cent of small businesses would have benefited from a tax cut with a turnover of up to $2 million.

The truth does hurt and the numbers hurt. This is just fantastic! This is where the government gets it so wrong. They think that, by doing a deal to make the top end of town like them more, somehow they are landing on the focus group initiative of fairness. That is right: 'What is going to deliver a benefit to consumers? What is going to deliver a benefit to small business? I know! We are going to give the big banks a $7 billion tax cut.' Even if they got this levy right, even if they got the $6 billion water tight, so consumers were not going to have to lump the cost, it would still see the banks $1 billion in front.

Go figure! That does not sound like the great protector of small business, to me.

While the minister is concentrating so hard on sticking up for the big end of town, we on this side have actually been working for consumers. We have been working to make sure that consumers were protected. It was the Labor Party who went to the last election advocating for consumers, to make sure that, under the Australian Consumer Law, penalties for companies engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct would be commensurate to their conduct and we would actually see those penalties increase to $100 million.

This minister has done very, very little. On budget night, the Minister for Small Business got up to profess:

My most important job as the Minister responsible for Consumer Affairs is to ensure Australians are protected from being ripped off or misled, so people can make purchases with confidence.

I would like to ask those who are playing this game at home to go back through the minister's press releases and press conferences and try and work out how many times he has actually mentioned the word 'consumer'. How many times has he actually mentioned the word 'consumer' out of—count them—29 media releases? Apart from a bit of lip-service on budget night, not once. That's right: not once—you win the prize! As far as failing goes, we are seeing them failing to get the bank levy right and failing by giving a $7 billion tax cut. As far as report cards go, it is an 'F' for failure. (Time expired)

See this speech in context