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

My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, the Liberal government cut ASIC funding by $120 million and ignored 41 warnings by ASIC on its need for greater powers and resources. How can Australians possibly trust this Prime Minister to deal with high-profile financial scandals when the Prime Minister's own record shows he would rather cover up misconduct in the banking and financial services industry than stand up for ordinary Australians?

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The last part of that question is out of order. It reflects—

Ms Henderson interjecting—

The member for Corangamite will not interject, particularly when I am addressing the chamber. The last part of that question is completely out of order. I am going to give the member for McMahon one opportunity to rephrase that. I remind him of my earlier warnings that I will not have endless patience on this subject in question time.

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

My question is to the Prime Minister. The Liberal government cut ASIC funding by $120 million and ignored at least 41 warnings from ASIC that they need greater powers and resources. How can Australians possibly trust this Prime Minister to deal with high-profile financial scandals when his government has failed to stand up for victims of those scandals?

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the Prime Minister for the opportunity to respond to the member. The member opposite should particularly recall that in the economic statement released in 2013 before the last election the Labor government announced an increase in the efficiency dividend for ASIC from 1.25 per cent to 2.5 per cent. That was a $38.2 million reduction in funding over the four years that was announced by the member opposite. I also remember that it was those opposite who opposed the implementation of a financial system inquiry. When we were in opposition the shadow Treasurer at the time tabled terms of reference for that inquiry which I tabled in this place yesterday. Those opposite were saying yesterday that you cannot work up terms of reference in opposition; you have to wait until you get into government. When we put forward a financial systems inquiry proposal, we tabled terms of reference—something those opposite refuse to do in their proposal for a commission on this area which has no definition. They just keep saying, 'We need a royal commission into banks.' It is always the same phrase. They think that is a policy. It is crass populism, as the member for Lilley reminded us all yesterday. I note the member for Lilley is not here today, but he referred to that type of politics as 'crass populism'. The Leader of the Opposition should reflect on that.

It was the financial systems inquiry that we put in place that made the following recommendations that have been adopted by the government: product intervention powers to enable ASIC to modify or ban harmful financial products; the power to ban individuals from managing a financial service business; the power to approve changes of licensee control; the power to consider a broader range of factors in determining whether an applicant satisfies the fit-and-proper-purpose test to be granted a licence; the power to place conditions on firms to address concerns about internal systems relating to serious system misconduct; and powers to increase penalties for those who offend in all of these areas and more.

We have a proposal from those opposite that does not address the concerns of Australians. It is a proposal to delay any consideration of their concerns for years. The only interest that their proposal is seeking to protect is that of the Leader of the Opposition. That is the only interest it is seeking to preserve. They are saying that they would rather invest $50 million in a process that would make them wait years and years and years. I note what the former governor of the Reserve Bank and former Treasury secretary Bernie Fraser said. He said, 'I think there are real problems, but I wouldn't myself be rushing into a royal commission at this stage, mainly because I think the basic problems are pretty clear, but more importantly, because it would take so long for a royal commission to get the point of recommending.' What they have is hot air.