Michael Danby (Melbourne Ports, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Hansard source

It's some 601 days since Labor called for a banking royal commission. The timing of its announcement only confirms public perception of collusion. On the very day the members for Wentworth and Cook announced their policy U-turn, the banks produced a media statement acquiescing to this banking royal commission. Let's remember that the government voted against the establishment of a royal commission 23 times in the parliament—23 times over 18 months. Let us remember that, just one week before the announcement, the Prime Minister said in three separate interviews 'No, we're not having a banking royal commission', 'There is not going to be a banking royal commission' and 'We have made it clear that we are not going to establish a Royal Commission'.

The Treasurer called it 'a political exercise for a political hack'. He said it was 'nothing more than crass populism seeking to undermine confidence in the banking and financial system'. Having said that a royal commission undermined confidence in Australia's banks, after the U-turn the Treasurer went on to say it would restore confidence in Australia's banks. What did the body language and faces reveal? The word 'regrettable'.

This royal commission will last only 12 months—in my view, not long enough for a serious inquiry into the vast damage that some of the banks have caused many hundreds of thousands of Australians. If the government had listened to Labor 18 months ago, the royal commission would have come back with its recommendations already. As the member for Riverina, the Minister for Small Business, admitted, Australians have been badly served by some of the banks, but it's only after a revolt by members of the National Party, including the member for Dawson, sitting here, that the government caved in. It was political circumstances and not the hurt of the Australian people that caused them to do the right thing in the end, or partially the right thing.

In October 2016, ASIC's Financial advice: fees for no service report revealed that Australia's big four banks had spent years charging over 200,000 customers fees for services they did not receive. ASIC's report said they were going to have to pay nearly $180 million to customers. The report found customers who had initially signed up for financial services had been charged fees for services they did not receive, in some cases years after they had been in any contact with their bank. There were great systems in place to record incoming revenue but very little to ensure customers were actually getting anything in return for the fees being charged. Customers were even charged fees for advice from financial advisers who had left or retired, and for services involving nothing more than unanswered telephone calls.

All members of parliament have had to deal with outraged constituents affected by Timbercorp or Storm Financial. A person in my electorate, Giulia Mandarino, lost her Port Melbourne home after her former fiance Leonard Anderson encouraged her to take out a $200,000 loan at a meeting with a Commonwealth Bank official, Mr Jordanou, on 3 March 2006. Ms Mandarino said the loan was increased to $450,000 without her consent and, as a single mother of two children, she had no means of repaying the debt. These people knew what they were doing. She said: 'They have financially ruined my life, and jeopardised my children's future. At one point I had four sheriffs at the door and the bank was after my blood.'

In May this year, the figures were revised upwards. ASIC revealed the four big banks were now having to repay over $200 million for services not provided. Another striking example was in August 2017, when, under cover of the announcement of Ian Narev's impending resignation, CBA quietly disclosed a list of more instances of bad behaviour by the banks.

Let's remember one of them that shocked all of us, whatever side of politics we were on: the failure to report ATM deposits of over $10,000 that should have been automatically reported. This is a terrorist financing issue, where people can wash money into the banking system. Ten-thousand-dollar deposits—how many breaches were there? Fifty-three thousand breaches by the Commonwealth Bank. This is an absolute disgrace to Australia. How could a bank with a licence from the Australian parliament and the Australian people be so negligent of its responsibilities that it would allow 53,000 deposits of more than $10,000 to be washed through the system?

The CBA also reported it would have to refund $10 million to 65,000 customers. And it reported a sharp increase in the number of superannuation— (Time expired)

See this speech in context