House debates

Monday, 15 February 2021

Bills

Financial Sector Reform (Hayne Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2020; Second Reading

4:01 pm

Photo of Peta MurphyPeta Murphy (Dunkley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The speaker before me made the assertion that Labor never talks about small business. Let me start my contribution on the Financial Sector Reform (Hayne Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2020 by talking about not just a small business but the human beings behind that small business, whose financial interests, health and welfare have been devastated by the action of a bank and the failure of this government to make sure processes are in place so they get proper restitution. It's a shame that the member who spoke before me has walked out as I rise to speak on the subject that he said no-one from Labor ever speaks on.

My constituents Mr and Mrs Furneaux, small-business people, had a business loan from the NAB of about $240,000 in September 2006. They started to struggle. It was an interest-only loan, and they thought that would continue for two years. Something happened. The banks said they weren't meeting their contractual arrangements, and they tried to negotiate with the bank about how to deal with it. They looked at their private properties and they looked at whatever they could do try to service their loan. The bank says they were served with a notice of default, but they never received it. That led to years and years of nightmare in the Supreme Court, trying to negotiate with the bank and trying to keep their heads above water. As a result of the way they were dealt with by the bank, they've lost both of their residential properties and their business. The Furneauxs aren't people who are just complaining because their business has failed; they're people who have been doing everything right to try to get a resolution for this problem with the bank. They haven't had any help from AFCA. The negotiations with the bank, which were supposed to be done in good faith, fell through. They don't know what to do now. They've pleaded with me to raise it in this parliament as an example of victims of bank misconduct who to this day, in 2021, are still struggling for an outcome.

They're not the only constituents of mine who have complained about their dealings with AFCA. Stephen has contacted me a number of times. As he said to me in one of his most recent emails: 'It's very disappointing that a government agency is so unhelpful and unable to do what it is meant to do. It's past time when more action is needed. I've done all I can and I need assistance.' AFCA's caused a lot of extra work for all involved, with significant delays. It's a matter that has been before them for many months, and the delay is entirely due to AFCA, but Stephen said he is given just seven days to reply. He can't get the help he needs.

It's about time this government looked at what is happening at AFCA. It's interesting that the current chair of AFCA is also the chair of Crown. Perhaps it's about time the government took an approach to dealing with institutions and appointments that is something other than jobs for former Liberal politicians or their mates. It's also time this government told the truth about its lack of implementation of the recommendations of the royal commission. After voting against the royal commission 26 times, the government finally bowed to pressure and introduced a royal commission into banking and financial institutions. I don't think anyone in Australia can forget the image of the Treasurer trying to shake Commissioner Hayne's hand when the recommendations were handed down, or his Academy-Award-winning performance of outrage at the way hardworking Australians had been treated by the banks—his scathing assessment of the banks' behaviour. The Treasurer of Australia said the banks were driven by a culture of greed that breached the law and the price paid by the community was immense. The Treasurer spoke of the broken businesses, the emotional stress and the personal pain of thousands of victims, and he promised change. That is what he promised the Australian people.

All you need to do is go to his website and have a look at his press release of 19 August 2019. The Treasurer said:

The need for change is undeniable, and the community expects that the Government's response to the Royal Commission will be implemented swiftly.

According to the Treasurer back in August 2019:

Excluding the reviews that are to be conducted in 2022, under the Implementation Roadmap:

    2019—

        last year—

            According to the Treasurer:

            For measures contained in legislation introduced into the Parliament before 1 July next year—

            2020—

            the Government expects the majority to commence by 1 July 2020 or Royal Assent.

            According to the Treasurer:

            Given its scale and complexity, this represents an unprecedented response.

            I'm not sure how you can have an unprecedented response to a royal commission that had just handed down recommendations, but we'll move on. According to the Treasurer:

            It demonstrates the Government's commitment to strengthening consumer protection laws and empowering Australia's financial regulators to enforce the law.

            Well, on the government's own measure, on the Treasurer's own measure of the demonstration of the government's commitment, they get a big 'F' for failing, because what would actually demonstrate the government's commitment to strengthening consumer laws and empowering Australia's financial regulators to enforce the law is delivering on it.

            I know: 'There was COVID. Doesn't everybody know there was COVID?' According to the member for Goldstein, in his hyperbolic and tremendously loud contribution to this debate, that meant the government was focused on other things. Apart from the things that this parliament supported and that went through, like JobKeeper and JobSeeker and JobMaker, he didn't really say what else the government was focused on. He didn't, for example, highlight that the government was focused on doing the exact opposite of recommendation 1 of the royal commission, which is to keep the responsible lending laws.

            Apparently, all of last year, for the times that the government didn't cancel parliament and parliament was actually sitting, the government was able to bring in legislation to establish an integrity commission for cheaters at university, because that was urgent, as opposed to an integrity commission for this parliament and the Public Service. So they could do that. They could bring in legislation which changed the fees for courses at universities, which has the impact of making it harder for students and young people from poorer families to go to university because they can't afford to leave with a $50,000 debt. The government could do that last year. It could introduce substandard environmental protection laws. It could introduce legislation which established a pale alternative to a royal commission into veteran suicides, which is what the defence community would like. It could introduce legislation to extend the racist cashless welfare card system onto more vulnerable Australian people. This parliament could have introduced 181 pieces of legislation last year, including private member's bills, which, fair enough, by the standards of what the previous Labor government was able to do during the global financial crisis, is pretty poor. It could introduce 181 pieces of legislation but couldn't focus on implementing the recommendations of the royal commission into banks and financial institutions. That's the real measure of this government's commitment to making banks follow the law and protecting Australian small businesses and individuals who have been the victims of malpractice.

            I just mention the member for Goldstein—and I know he's not in the chamber, but I'm sure he is sitting avidly watching my contribution. I want to put in the Hansard that he noted that at one point, during his contribution, my shoulders were shaking. It's true: they were. But not for the reasons the member for Goldstein suggested. I was just trying to get the ringing out of my ears that was caused by the volume of his contribution. I would suggest that, if it's possible, Hansard records that contribution. I've suggested previous speeches be recorded in capital letters. Maybe they want to put the one delivered today in bold and italics. I don't know how you're going to record the hyperventilating in HansardI'll leave that up to the experts.

            This legislation introduces reforms which are needed and which are supported. There is no doubt about that. They are overdue, but it's good that they are happening now. What needs to happen is more of an actual commitment. We heard horrific stories from person after person after person who went before the royal commission and bared their lives with some of the most devastating experiences they have ever had to go through in the hope not only that would they get some recompense but that it wouldn't happen to anyone else. We need to honour what they did for the rest of the community and the work that the royal commissioner and everyone at the royal commission put in with the recommendations and get them implemented. The way to do that is not to strip away responsible lending laws. The way to do that is not to blame having to deal with COVID—which, by the way, the states did a lot of, but that's another speech. The way to do that is for the Treasurer to do his job. There are a lot of recommendations outstanding, and I look forward to the flurry of legislation that must be about to come to implement them. Thank you.

            Comments

            No comments