Julian Leeser (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I like the member for McMahon. He is in many respects the hope of the other side. I don't agree with him on many things but he writes highly readable and often quotable books. He is a protege of Paul Keating. But to use Paul Keating's phrase, this MPI is 'all sizzle and no substance' and is very much beneath the member for McMahon, because here, effectively, we have an MPI that's all politics, and that's been the Labor Party's problem in relation to banking royal commissions right from the start. When we talk about failures in the banking sector, we have to look at those opposite, particularly the Leader of the Opposition and the member for McMahon when they held the Treasury portfolio during the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years and did nothing but preside over banking scandal after scandal.

I have been concerned about customer complaints relating to the Commonwealth Bank's takeover of Bankwest, which occurred in 2008 under Labor's watch. The Commonwealth Bank's conduct in the aftermath of the global financial crisis has seen it accused of impeding healthy Bankwest loans and forcing customers into foreclosure. It's been a long-running issue, and dates back to the Labor days. Labor had six years to act on banking misconduct but did nothing. When Storm Financial collapsed and other crises hit Australia under Labor, how did Labor respond? Their silence was deafening. When the coalition proposed a financial systems inquiry in opposition, how did Labor respond? They refused to support it.

Despite what others say on that side of the House, when those opposite sat on this side of the House they were a government defined by inaction. As we have seen time and again, it takes a coalition government to respond in a reasonable and responsible matter. The opposition leader has pursued a political circus on the issue of banks, preferring politics over people. He's led a campaign where political point scoring has drowned out victims' voices. For all the opposition leader's talk, where was he when Labor was in power? If only the opposition leader had been in a position to act, perhaps in his capacity as minister for financial services. Be it the opposition leader or the member for McMahon, Labor repeatedly rejected the need for a royal commission. Their contrast from rhetoric to record couldn't be clearer.

For all Labor's boasting and bank bashing, they didn't have terms of reference for an inquiry they were suggesting, so it is bizarre to hear the member for McMahon talking about Labor being involved in the design of terms of reference for a banking royal commission when they have been talking about this matter for years and haven't put anything up. They have effectively been acting in a way that gives false hope and misleads the victims of banking misconduct. They falsely flagged a royal commission and suggested it was a mechanism that could deliver compensation. While a royal commission may uncover instances that lead to recommendations of compensation, aggrieved customers rightly want action now.

Yet again we contrast Labor's legacy of inaction with this government's approach. The new Australian Financial Complaints Authority is a speedy solution, providing victims with redress—not just rhetoric. On the topic of rhetoric, the opposition should be ashamed at the way they have undermined Australia's financial stability through their alarmist attacks. In irresponsibly bashing the banks they have put politics above people and their own egos above the economy. Our major banks represent almost nine per cent of Australia's GDP and employ more than 400,000 people. The vast majority of Australians are not only customers of the banks but they have a direct stake in them through their superannuation. Labor has gone about this debate in a way that's damaged the economy. They've put at risk the very system that supports Australian employment and wages.

No-one in Labor has done more to bash the banks than Senator Sam Dastyari. Senator Dastyari's calls for a royal commission predate the official Labor Party position by some two years. Where Senator Dastyari has gone, the Leader of the Opposition has dutifully followed, so many are right to question whose policy this royal commission policy on the other side is. Is it the Leader of the Opposition's, is it Senator Dastyari's or is it the demand of some donor? You just can't tell with the Labor Party these days. Senator Dastyari's credibility is in tatters, alongside Labor's reputation as responsible economic managers.

Time and again it's taken a coalition government to pick up the mess left behind by Labor. The failure of past Labor governments to adequately support victims of banking misconduct is reflected in their do-nothing approach. They didn't support a financial systems inquiry. They didn't respond to the victims of Bankwest or Storm Financial. They didn't even bother to write terms of reference for their witch hunt of a royal commission. Shame on Labor for leaving a legacy of inaction. Once again it's taken a coalition government to pick up the pieces with the establishment of things like the Australian Financial Complaints Authority, the creation of the Financial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority and the Banking Executive Accountability Regime.

This side of the House is proud to call a royal commission and has a strong record in relation to economic policy. (Time expired)

See this speech in context