Government’s continued refusal to establish a Royal Commission into the banks

SENATOR KATY GALLAGHER, SHADOW MINISTER FOR SMALL BUSINESS AND FINANCIAL SERVICES: I just want to make some comments. Yesterday in Question Time the Treasurer said the allegations around the Commonwealth Bank were very, very serious and he is certainly right about that. We have Australia's largest bank facing charges of thousands, tens of thousands of breaches of  anti-money laundering laws and laws around counter terrorism financing laws. This is an extremely serious situation. We have been calling for a Royal Commission for well over a year now. That is not just to do with these allegations but to do with years and years of scandal and rip-offs from Australia's banking system. In the last 15 or 18 months alone we have seen fines or penalties or compensation over $300 million awarded against Australia's banks and banking system for failures, for misconduct, for unethical conduct, for breaches of the law, for over charging, for services never provided. And yet we still have a government that is refusing to call a Royal Commission.

 

So yesterday the Treasurer acknowledged that he found these allegations very, very serious. He said he was going to look at all options – that the Government is considering all options. Well the only option before the Government now is to call a Royal Commission. They have been seeking advice from various regulators and agencies for some time now in their quest not to have a Royal Commission. I would say to the Treasurer what is it going to take for you to accept that in order to restore trust and confidence in Australia's banking and financial system, we need a Royal Commission? This is the only option available to the Government now. You can no longer tinker at the edges of regulators’ powers or amendments to certain laws when you have these very, very serious allegations that go to the heart of how our banking system is operating and the strength of our banking system. And seemingly, if these allegations are proven to be correct, and they have obviously to go through that court process. A very large company, whilst aware that there were concerns with the technology they were using , continued to use it, indeed went on about it in their news to shareholders in terms of forecasting their results, about how active these machines were, how well they were operating, at the same time while knowing that there were these serious concerns around how these machines were being used. So I would urge the Government – stand with other politicians in this place, with banking consumers, with consumer groups, and seemingly with sections of the finance sector now who all accept that the only way forward is a Royal Commission. 

JOURNALIST: Do you think Ian Narev should step down from Commonwealth Bank? 

 

GALLAGHER: Well I think it is fair to say from Labor's point of view that trust and confidence in Australia's banking system as a whole has been shaken. I think trust and confidence in Commonwealth Bank has been shaken with the allegations over the past few weeks and I think there are questions about whether the Commonwealth Bank is being well led. I think that is a fair question to ask. 

JOURNALIST: Just on the plebiscite, isn’t there some pressure on Labor to support a full plebiscite when the alternative is a postal plebiscite?

 

GALLAGHER: Labor's position has been clear. We don't support a plebiscite. We have gone through the reasons for that. We don’t believe that peoples’ relationship should be subject to a popular vote before action is taken by the Parliament to ensure that there is equality.

This matter went to the High Court by the ACT Government, years ago. It was taken by the Commonwealth Government to the High Court. The High Court found very clearly that it is the Australian Parliament that needs to determine this. Labor won't be changing our position. 

JOURNALIST: Today is the International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples. Is the Government doing enough to advance the outcomes of the Uluru Convention.

GALLAGHER: Well I think everyone in this place would accept more needs to be done to address the gap for Indigenous people in terms of a whole range of outcomes. In terms of health, education, justice – we’ve been putting through a pretty comprehensive agenda in terms of our own policies around that, particularly around Indigenous incarceration and justice targets. But, a day like today is a reminder to continue to take efforts to address Indigenous disadvantage. I don’t think anyone would say we’re anywhere near getting the job done.

JOURNALIST: I think it was Pat Anderson who said we need another committee like we need a hole in the head. But that’s just what Bill Shorten has proposed to come up with a referendum question. Is that the right approach then?

GALLAGHER: Well what Bill’s said is that he’s responded to what the referendum council has come back with. They’ve come back with a range of suggestions. And I think Bill has very sensibly outlined a pathway to explore those further. It wasn’t about referring it off to a committee to the never-never. It was about having a very short, sharp committee. This has also a decision that’s been taken with the advice of our Indigenous members of Parliament who’ve been working closely with the Indigenous community on these issues. We definitely need a way forward. We can’t just put our hands up and say, well this is a new idea now, we’ll have to take time to think about. We actually need a process and a vehicle to move forward and address the recommendations and see what can be done.

 

JOURNALIST: Senator Leyonhjelm was just outside talking about a proposal to remove GST from energy bills. What do you think of that proposal, of that idea?

GALLAGHER: Well I haven’t heard any detail about that, but I’d have to talk to David Leyonhjelm first.