Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

Right around Australia there are people who look to those of us who work in this House to right wrongs, to assist them in difficult circumstances and to give a voice to the voiceless. I understand that not every problem is fixable. People by and large do not expect miracles, but they do expect their elected politicians to try to fix things, to make things better for people who have been wronged. It's this parliament's place to do what can be done so that they can have their say and their chance to have that wrong fixed. Despite all the distractions and occasional theatre that happen in this House, our job, at the end of the day, is to be focused on those issues.

Those of us who've been involved in the area of banking and financial services for some time know that those who've been victims of scandals in the financial system need that help. I have been seeing and meeting with these people for a long time now, first as shadow assistant Treasurer, then as Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Financial Serves, Superannuation and Corporate Law, briefly as Treasurer and as shadow Treasurer. I've been meeting with these people for 10 years, looking in their eyes and hearing their stories. I know these people deserve a chance to put their case before a royal commission, and nothing short of a royal commission. These people have committed no crime and have done nothing wrong, but have accepted advice from people they trusted in the financial system. In many cases they have lost huge amounts of money—and not just money; in some cases they have lost their dignity and their happiness as a result.

These people last week probably felt for a period a sense of relief and then a sense of bitter disappointment. I think they probably felt relief when they heard that, after years of calls, the Prime Minister had finally called for a royal commission into the banking and financial sector in this country, but I suspect very quickly that relief was followed by bitter disappointment and a sense of betrayal when they heard the details of the Prime Minister's announcement. We know what the Prime Minister and Treasurer really think about this royal commission. I'm often critical of the Prime Minister, the Treasurer and this government, and I have on occasion accused them of dishonesty, but I do not on this occasion, because on this occasion they told us what they really thought. They told us they think this royal commission was 'regrettable'. They don't want to hold this royal commission. They don't understand the need for this royal commission. This royal commission, for this Prime Minister, is all about politics and is all about his job—his wellbeing, not the wellbeing of the victims of financial scandals. We know what the Treasurer thinks about this royal commission, because, again, he told us. He told us, in fairness, before he called for it, but he said the royal commission was 'a political exercise for a political hack'. Well, it is for him; but it is not for us and it is not for the victims of the financial scandals.

We know they didn't want to do it. When Labor called for a royal commission more than 600 days ago, the government said no. When the victims of Storm Financial, Timbercorp and all the financial scandals called for a royal commission, this government said no. When the former staff and whistleblowers of the banks and financial services companies called for a royal commission, this government said no. But when the big banks called for a royal commission, they said yes straightaway, without hesitation. They were straight out the door to give them the royal commission.

We've had 18 wasted months when it comes to the banking and financial services royal commission. For 601 days, Labor called for this royal commission. We asked the government to convene it and said we would work with the government to get it. We were told we couldn't possibly hold a royal commission because it would take too long. Well, if this Prime Minister had listened when the Leader of the Opposition asked him to call a royal commission, it would now be over, we'd be discussing its recommendations, its proposals would be being implemented. But this Prime Minister has ignored those calls and he has ignored the scandals and the victims of financial services crises. This Prime Minister has twisted and turned for 18 months. He told us:

No, we're not having a banking royal commission.

… … …

… there is not going to be a banking royal commission …

… … …

We have made it very clear that we are not going to establish a royal commission …

He said it with all his normal authority, confidence and gravitas—almost as much as when he told us what the High Court was going to hold. With almost as much self-confidence and gravitas, he told us that there would never be a royal commission.

Now we know why, because this government has form. This is a government which has spent much of its first term working so hard to try and undo the financial reforms which I and the now Leader of the Opposition implemented when we were consecutively assistant treasurers, the Future of Financial Advice reforms. This is the mob who actually tried to repeal the requirement for financial advisers to work in the best interests of their clients. I didn't think that was a particularly controversial measure when I introduced it. I didn't think it was particularly radical—it's not part of a socialist agenda to say, 'You've got to work in the best interests of the people who are paying you'—but this government does. That's how much they hated it. They actually tried to repeal a prohibition on financial advisers keeping payments in perpetuity for doing nothing. That was their big priority.

Now we know that they don't want to hold a royal commission. And when they finally get a royal commission, they bring out weak, unacceptable terms of reference for it. This is a government which can't help itself. Instead of focusing on the victims of financial scandals, what have they focused on in the terms of reference? Industry superannuation funds. Of all the things they could find to worry about in the financial services sector, they have focused on industry superannuation funds! The minister for immigration, of all people, belled the cat. He said, 'Yes, we're going to have a good look at industry superannuation funds because they've got union officials and whatnot on the board.' I'll tell you what the 'whatnot' is. They are employer representatives. That's the 'whatnot'. Such a scandal are our industry funds that they are the best-performing superannuation funds in Australia when it comes to returns for their members! That's the big scandal. They've to get to the bottom of these outrageous returns that the industry funds dare to produce for their members, some of whom are rumoured to be members of a trade union. The scandal! It's an outrageous thing that this government is going to focus on. 'There are members of unions who are having a dignified retirement. We must get to the bottom of this at once,' the Prime Minister has ordered.

We know that this government is calling the royal commission because it was inevitable. We know that they're calling the royal commission because they were facing humiliation on the floor of this House. We know that this government is calling the royal commission not out of leadership but out of fear and out of desperation to avoid what has been so clear now for 18 months is necessary in the best interests of Australia's financial consumers. But this government can't help themselves. Even in the face of the most humiliating backdown and backflip we have seen in a long time—which is a big call for this Prime Minister!—we see them squirming for political purposes and engaging in juvenile and partisan political witch-hunts against people who dare to belong to a trade union in this country.

This nation deserves better than this government. Most importantly, the victims of financial scandals deserve better. They deserve their day before the royal commission. They deserve to be consulted on the terms of reference. I made the point that the Labor Party should be consulted. There's no convention about that. But since we've called for this royal commission for 18 months you'd think the government might come to us and say: 'We got this wrong. You got it right. Let's work together on the terms of reference.' But, no. I wouldn't care that we weren't consulted if they did consult with the people who have had the most to lose—those who have committed no crime other than to trust people in the financial services industry but have paid a big price. This government have ignored them. We on this side of the House will never— (Time expired)

See this speech in context