Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

The Treasury Laws Amendment (Consumer Data Right) Bill 2022 process may have been initiated under the coalition, but I want to remind the chamber that, in 2017, it was the Greens that proposed measures for bank account portability. I remember asking former senator Cormann several times back in 2017 how we could achieve it, and I had a quick look at the Hansard before to remind myself of that.

There were issues around the sharing of consumer data, but the coalition did say they were open-minded at the time to measures that could increase portability of accounts. Of course, the fundamental problem was that banks knew that their customers were, as a general rule, what were classified in the industry as 'sticky'. They didn't tend to move, and there were a lot of barriers to customers moving. For example, if they weren't happy with the service from their bank, their mortgage rates or their fees and charges, they would look at better options, including in the non-bank financial intermediary sector, not just the other banks or big banks. Competition was very important, but the banks knew that it was very, very hard for customers to move.

That's why this bill has been sitting on the Notice Paperas has been pointed out by a number of speakers—for nearly 17 months. And that's why it's taken seven years to get legislation that can actually allow bank account portability and make it easier for Australian consumers of financial services to move. Of course, the banks see customer information as their intellectual property. They have the arrogance to assume that they own this information about Australian citizens and customers—but of course they don't. Essentially what this data right framework will allow is the transfer of information between financial institutions. I would like to put on record, as I know my colleagues have done today, that we need greater safeguards to protect consumer privacy in the consumer data right framework, to prevent scams and financial abuse, and that concerns have been raised around the sharing of information.

I think it's fair to say that this chamber played a very important role in the last decade in getting a royal commission into misconduct in banks and financial services in this country, which made a number of recommendations that were supported by the government at the time. It led to over 70 pieces of legislation being introduced in this place to try and protect Australian customers and consumers and battlers—people doing it tough. I think the royal commission was shocking in its revelations. Even the critics of that royal commission—some of them in this place—agreed, when the evidence became clear and was provided to the commissioner, that they were shocked by some of the revelations and that we needed change.

That came about because the Greens stood up to big corporations. We stood up for battlers, for Australians that were being ripped off and for victims of financial crime, and it became patently obvious that we needed change and reform. When I think about state capture—blimey! How many years did we have of asking questions, where the previous government refused to acknowledge that there was corruption in the banks and that we had a corrupted political system where politicians and political parties were benefiting from financial donations from banks? We're seeing the same thing in the fossil fuel industry right now. The big problem we face right now is state capture, writ large. If we're going to take action on climate change, we need to change the political system that facilitates the revolving door between fossil fuel companies and parliamentarians and the donations that we see being made to the major parties by big polluters.

I was very disappointed to see that, after some of the debate we have had on the Browse project in Western Australia and the plans for Scott Reef, the leaked report from the Western Australian EPA just two weeks ago has led to legislation being introduced in the Western Australian parliament to remove the independence of the NPA. If that is not state capture, what is? (Time expired)