25th Nov 2016
FONT SIZE: A+ A-
Banks still getting away with bad behaviour, committee a “toothless tiger”
Banks still getting away with bad behaviour, committee a “toothless tiger”

A Parliamentary committee led by Coalition MPs, previously referred to as “a friendly cup of tea and a chat”, has had strong words to say about big banks, but words are all it is.

Liberal and National MPs ‘slammed’ the big four banks for failing to fire any executives after a series of financial scandals.

A report issued by the Standing Committee on Economics was highly critical of the “oligopoly” of the big four banks and the “poor compliance culture” of banks that “repeatedly failed to protect the interests of consumers”.

“This is a culture that senior executives have created. It is a culture that they need to be held accountable for,” said committee chairman Liberal MP David Coleman.

The report was the result of a Coalition-led three-day hearing into the financial sector, which was held by the Government in place of the royal commission proposed by Labor and the Greens.

According to The New Daily, Australians are angry at the banks’ record profits, delays in passing on rate cuts to customers and a series of other banking scandals. There has been much public support for a royal commission, and there may even be more, especially after a hearing which has been characterised by the Finance Sector Union (FSU) as the equivalent of “calling bank bosses to Canberra for a friendly cup of tea and a chat”.

Labor says the report fails to deliver and called the whole process a “stage managed circus”.

“This inquiry was established by the Government to avoid a royal commission into Australia’s banking industry,” wrote Labor MPs.

“This inquiry has confirmed that the big four banks enjoy a cosy and privileged position in Australian society, making large profits off the back of the kind of implicit (and explicit) taxpayer support other businesses can only dream of,” wrote Greens MP Adam Bandt.

“We need a royal commission to take a long hard look at Australia’s banks’ financial [planning] sector and make recommendations about proper reform,” said FSU National Secretary Julia Angrisano. “But instead of a serious inquiry Malcolm Turnbull has established a toothless tiger that won’t result in the changes banking and finance workers and customers desperately need.”

Luckily, the big four banks don’t enjoy ‘oligopoly’ status when it comes to super although, for years, the banks have lobbied for policies to give them the same market share in super that they have in retail banking.

David Whiteley, Chief Executive of Industry Super Australia said the report’s findings were a “stunning rebuke of the banks’ efforts to redesign super to suit their business models”.

“Fortunately for Australian workers and retirees the banks don’t have oligopoly status in superannuation, with not-for-profit funds including industry, public sector and corporate funds having a superior track record when it comes to governance, performance and member focused culture,” said Mr Whiteley.

“The only thing standing between the savings of millions of Australians and a bank-owned fund oligopoly in superannuation is not-for-profit super funds, overseen by representative trustees.”

When it comes to superannuation policy, Mr Whiteley hopes that the Government will not give the banks “a leg up”.

"Everyone knows what will happen when the banks get hold of their super.”

The last time Australia had a royal commission into banking was in 1936-37, do you think it’s time the big banks were hauled in for a ‘reset’? Would you be comfortable with the banks having more sway when it comes to superannuation policy?

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    jackyd
    25th Nov 2016
    10:15am
    No, a Royal Commission won't achieve anything.
    What this does show is Malcolm's fragile leadership and that Bill Shorten is all over him on just about every matter.
    Old Geezer
    25th Nov 2016
    12:35pm
    Bill Shorten is just your typical opposition leader nothing more.
    jackyd
    25th Nov 2016
    1:02pm
    True but Malcolm Turnbull is no national leader!
    Rae
    25th Nov 2016
    1:02pm
    Yes OG and isn't it a pity politics in Australia has turned into a team sport. Imagine if they worked together to sort out the financial, social end environmental mess we are in.
    Anonymous
    25th Nov 2016
    5:21pm
    jackyd

    Sorry but I think that a Royal Commission would achieve LOTS!

    It is has legal oomph and can force these big mongrels to supply documents and also to allow full investigations into their affairs.... even to have their 'dirty underwear' aired in public is a good thing.

    They will be questioned, NOT by pathetic sympathetic Govt reps & pollies that don't WANT to ask anything difficult, as they don't want to hear the answers but by EXPERTS that know what to ask and what areas to look at.

    I agree that Shorten is way ahead of Turnbull in ability and strength. I just get a tad worried with Shorten whenever the USA becomes involved... that tends to be the area that he becomes a little whimpy. Mind you, Turnbull is like a puppy dog rolling on his back to please, so even then Shorten would be better.
    jackyd
    26th Nov 2016
    12:22am
    Fair enough, cheers.
    BrianP
    25th Nov 2016
    10:33am
    Laws need to be changed to prevent banks hurting customers.

    Stop the political arguments and do something about it. Put people first.
    Old Geezer
    25th Nov 2016
    12:37pm
    When are the customers going to wake up and realise that it is their own greed that is the main problem? Remember if something is too good to be true it usually is.
    TREBOR
    25th Nov 2016
    2:13pm
    Greed guided by often shady advice - people repose their trust in advisors, and the name of the game is supposed to be organising your finances so as to attain some sort of independence in your old age... is that really greed?

    Is it greedy to seek investments, OG? Does that make you greedy?
    Old Geezer
    25th Nov 2016
    3:28pm
    It does make you greedy when you expect big returns with big risks and you don't even understanding what it is let alone the risks involved.

    I sometimes buy lottery tickets but not with my life savings. This is what people did.
    moke
    25th Nov 2016
    4:06pm
    I would like to know why the Banks could not pay some ones Housing Commission rent directly the Bank wanted $9.00 each 2 weeks because they advised they would have to send a cheque from the persons bank account
    The Building society handled it with no charge. Who would want to use a bank when there are other options available. Definitely not me
    Old Geezer
    25th Nov 2016
    4:17pm
    It would be easy to set it up online as a periodic payment. I do it all the time.
    auldtic
    25th Nov 2016
    10:38am
    As a retiree who planned for my retirement with an industry super fund I'm gravely concerned at the long term and ongoing drive by some to undermine what is a very successful system. Kelly O'Dwyer's recent suggestion regarding changes to how super boards are configured suggests an ideological bent, to dilute member representation and make 'my super fund' more like a bank or insurance company. God forbid.

    It appears that the powerful can see a large amount of other peoples retirement funds as something they'd like to get their hands on, i.e. shareholders & dividends.

    We who depend or superannuation for our retirement and or are accumulating superannuation should be eternally vigilant. Be aware, talk to others, contact MP's ect.
    dougie
    25th Nov 2016
    10:44am
    No a Royal Commission takes too long and is too open to it being a non event. What we need is a section of the ACCC to be set aside for investigating complaints against the banks and to develop a data base of those who push the envelope too far as well as the ways and means that they do this. Then to be able to come down hard - prosecute and see that the banks are forced to withdraw and to pay a compensatory payment to those who have been taken advantage of. Name and shame the banks in court and you will do much to ensure that the banks treat their customers as an asset not just a number that they can swindle for whatever. Those banks with employees who steal or fraudulently misappropriate from customers accounts must bear the responsibility and cost plus compensatory payments which should be set by a court.
    Do not just wave a big stick - apply in it in a very severe manner. The Banking Ombudsman is ok for minor matters but give the big stick to the ACC and see that they use it. This would then remove the banks from Politics and force them to be good corporate citizens.
    grounded
    25th Nov 2016
    10:51am
    Yes...most definitely, thought more in the form of a permanent Judicial Board of Review....with the same powers as a RC, if not further enhanced....along with a stringent inbuilt mechanism that ensures that this Judicial Board HAS to perform.

    Would Pig Trough Shorten and Hard Labor, along with Waffling Turnbull and his Liebrils allow this to happen. "Ah, quick mum, look - up there, another flock of flying fat porkers".
    TREBOR
    25th Nov 2016
    11:59am
    I am ideologically (sic) opposed to fattening porkers, handing out 'jobs' to mates etc, as a kind of political Right ™, and there is always a concern that setting up such a body will only generate another pack of Troughers entering the Fat Zone For Life..... maybe there should be a tax on their 'sugar'...... we don't need another flock of flying porkers or a flock of unicorns doing a fly-past at the funeral of Australia....

    We need an organisation separate with some cojones, and as free from political influence as possible... once you appoint a crony, you are guaranteed that you will always have a part of the 'old mate's network' working for you....not much else.

    Maybe an appointee and two electees.... I steer clear of clean-cut types wearing ties, though.... the clothes and hair-cut maketh not the man/woman seeking the job. We need at least one Hanging Pensioner on the Board with a sharp razor mind and tongue.
    Rae
    25th Nov 2016
    1:14pm
    I like the idea TREBOR. At least one fund member in retirement phase would be fair.

    My Nana told me to run out the back real fast and hide well if a suit or uniform came knocking at the front door and to stay hid until Pop came track me down.

    Strange how a wolf in sheep's clothing is still a wolf.
    TREBOR
    25th Nov 2016
    2:16pm
    My Irish Catholic mother always used to tell me to steer clear of the authorities and men in suits.... with a Protestant father's family involved in police and fire and army and assuming all such were 'family', I took a while to begin to understand what she was on about.

    I had no idea how terribly corrupt this country is......
    grounded
    25th Nov 2016
    5:23pm
    @Trebor....We are on the same page. No....I don't advocate building another bureaucracy to wax fat in the sun.

    No more than 30 forensic accountants and 20 odd compliance integrity officers, inclusive of part time, hands on head honcho's ....mainly watching over the Big 4...though available; with short term contracted help, to scrutinise sections of other merchant and trading banks/entities.

    4 Big Banks...each receiving 3 months of ongoing annual scrutiny by a taskforce of 50.....that has got to go a long way towards keeping the b....... honest and ethical.
    Gee Whiz
    25th Nov 2016
    10:55am
    I wouldn't expect anything else from the Malcolm Turnbull circus. Nobody was fooled by Turnbull saying a Royal Commission wouldn't prove anything. Everybody knows Banks are simply Robber Barons with a banking licence. A Royal Commission could could find some of the Banks executives facing charges of "conspiracy to defraud the public". Wouldn't that be justice well served.
    Rae
    25th Nov 2016
    11:26am
    A Royal Commission would be a waste of time and money. People need to be less gullible, move banks if necessary even though it is a pain and make official complaints to the banks and ombudsman and local members of parliament.
    Old Geezer
    25th Nov 2016
    12:41pm
    I agree. Some of the things people did prior to the GFC was just greed. Mortgage your house to the hilt and invested in leveraged products. I was shown some of these get rich schemes and told how good they were. One fellow was very surprised when I said they were too risky for me.
    TREBOR
    25th Nov 2016
    2:17pm
    I would have said the same, OG.... never did trust any of those schemes.
    Tom Tank
    25th Nov 2016
    4:10pm
    I disagree as I believe a Royal Commission will, or at least I would expect it to, expose the underhanded and possible corruptness of the banking system as a whole.

    What is the point of changing banks when they are so similar under a veneer of competition.

    Yes many people were greedy but the majority were taken advantage of by snake oil salesmen posing as their helpers, i.e. financial advisors who were not only supported by the Banks but encouraged by them. It should not be forgotten that many people have no experience in handling large sums of money and trusted those salesmen. It is about time the victims were no longer blamed for what was dome to them.

    The LNP would never expose the Banks for what they truly are because as the old saying goes "you never bite the hand that feeds you".

    I will never forgive Hawke and Keating for privatising the Commonwealth Bank because as long as it was owned by us, the people, it acted as a brake on the excesses of the other banks.
    Anonymous
    25th Nov 2016
    4:32pm
    Many years ago I had a bloke try and sell me a pair of Emus I think they were $60000.00 each, they where going to do wonderful things with these animals.
    As I picked myself of the ground from laughter I showed him the door.
    Just another con job that cost a lot of people a lot of money and believe me a lot of pilots where in on it.
    All get rich schemes are con jobs, don"t get caught.
    Old Geezer
    25th Nov 2016
    6:37pm
    I agree. It really doesn't matter how creditable someone might be if something is too good to be true it usually is. So it's buyer beware in all circumstances. Financial advisors are and will always be salesmen. So treat them like anyone trying to sell you anything. You don't trust a used car salesman so why trust a financial advisor?
    TREBOR
    25th Nov 2016
    8:27pm
    For Sale with Reserve Price - One Sydney Harbour Bridge/Opera House as a job lot... enjoy the New Year's fireworks from the balcony of your own opera house residence while contentedly surveying your very own bridge! Guaranteed to be absolute waterfront and definitely NOT under water at high tide... (all foreign investors welcome to bid - Starting Price $100Bn - reasonable reserve - cash cheque or bank transfer on closure of deal)...
    Anonymous
    26th Nov 2016
    11:27am
    Sounds a good deal to me TREBOR just give me your account number and I will pop the money in.
    bob
    25th Nov 2016
    11:31am
    There is no way that the LNP no matter who is titular head will harm any of the big political donors,so banks ,oil companies,etc, are exempt from any serious investigation.If you want collusion just look at the compulsory re-introduction of E10 fuel made mostly by one of little Johnnys best friends.a fact that he boasted about when he tried to make it compulsory the first time,and he is still a big LNP donor
    Big Kev
    25th Nov 2016
    11:34am
    Turnbull's Flying Circus produced no action. Meanwhile banks extort credit card holders and offshore jobs overseas where our personal details are sold. All in the name of bonuses and profits. A Royal Commission can demand answers proving there is no basis in fact for some of their charges. It can show that banks put their bosses pay and shareholders before their customers, that they don't protect our data and that they are failing service standards. It can produce recommendations that must be enacted into law. Unlike the Productivity Commission this Royal Commission must include an Assistant Commissioner experienced in social impacts, not just dry economics that causes the Productivity Commission to be such a failure.
    Kali-G
    25th Nov 2016
    11:36am
    Sadly Turnboll is not a toothless tiger.....he is just a weak administrator. Zero leadership !
    Keen to entertain moslems at the Lodge, yet screwing pensioners...Bignoting about the banks, yet cannot fix the petrol gauging by Big petrol companies. he is useless. Sadly though the opposition is even more destructive...GOD SAVE AUSTRALIA!
    TREBOR
    25th Nov 2016
    12:07pm
    Zero fighter? One grave weakness, soon exploited by Allied pilots, was its inability to do a meaningful turn to the right... due to control surface size and engine torque in a relatively light frame... it could only turn left with any despatch, and Allied pilots could turnright away and swing back quickly...

    Pretty much all you say is true, Kali - it remains a race to the bottom with no meaningful policy platform in sight on either side apart from pushing their very narrow agenda handed to them by their branches stacked by self-interest and special interest groups. I'm afraid their time has gone in this country, and it is time for a new direction....
    Retired Knowall
    26th Nov 2016
    8:04am
    My petrol gauge works well.
    jackie
    25th Nov 2016
    11:47am
    Regulating the banks would put an end to their out of control profiteering practices. Before deregulation banks made profits and so did their customers.
    TREBOR
    25th Nov 2016
    11:48am
    Somebody needs to draw the teeth of this toothless tiger before it bites someone....
    TREBOR
    25th Nov 2016
    12:09pm
    Perhaps a Royal Tiger would do the job...

    http://www.mark-1-tank.co.uk/jpgs/1-4-king-tiger-3244b.jpg
    Peanuts
    25th Nov 2016
    11:50am
    Only the Greens can criticize the banks. Labor had six years to institute a Royal Commission.
    Almost every worker in Australia's super will be invested in the banks.
    We need to be careful that we are not cutting the branch off that we are all
    standing on.
    Tarzan
    25th Nov 2016
    1:08pm
    Couldn't agree more Peanuts, great returns for the super industry and my shares, this site is full of rusted on lefties who can't see past the end of their noses, if your not happy come up with something better than abuse, you don't have to use banks, there are other ways of managing money
    TREBOR
    25th Nov 2016
    2:21pm
    Oh, no - not that 'lefties' word again.... I thought this discussion was about the lack of teeth in the LNP scheme to watch over the banks.... Labor's failings we will get to in the fullness of time...

    I'm neutral here - I shoot back both ways....
    Charlie
    25th Nov 2016
    11:54am
    Not happy with NAB, they changed their on line banking system and the new one is missing some functions, like being able to change the size of the print on the screen, so if they favor teeny weeny, I have to squint until they find a way of fixing it.
    Old Geezer
    25th Nov 2016
    12:09pm
    My screen has a plus and minus sign so that you can make the print bigger or smaller.
    Old Geezer
    25th Nov 2016
    12:33pm
    There is noting wrong with the banks. They provide a service like any other business and it is up to the customer to make sure they pick the right bank and services for their needs. Customers need to do what they do with everything else in life. Do their research and test drive products. Now you wouldn't buy a car without a test drive? If anything is wrong with the banks then it is the customers who are not doing their research and getting what they want.
    Rae
    25th Nov 2016
    1:29pm
    Yes and kick up a fuss if the service is not up to scratch. A well worded letter of complaint documenting the objectionable behaviour works well. If it doesn't time to move on to a new bank.

    The big 4 are not the only game in town and often not the best.
    Old Geezer
    25th Nov 2016
    1:42pm
    Sure I have had banking mistakes but they have been fixed and even compensated very quickly by all the banks I deal with.

    Have you heard the saying don't put all your eggs in the one basket. Well I wouldn't even just bank with one bank. In fact I bank with all 4 majors plus a couple of smaller ones. The deals I get from doing so are good as well. Banks are negotiable on everything even though they might say they are not.
    Old Geezer
    25th Nov 2016
    1:44pm
    That said I did have a problem with a bank that took some time and effort to fix. It was an off shore bank. Now if you think Australian banks are bad you aint seen nothing yet.
    TREBOR
    25th Nov 2016
    2:21pm
    No.. NO! Not a thing wrong with the Bank Robbers - it's all just rumours and innuendo put about by their enemies to bring them down....
    Old Geezer
    25th Nov 2016
    3:26pm
    Exactly right Trebor.
    Tom Tank
    25th Nov 2016
    4:13pm
    I wish I had enough money to be able to deal with as many financial institutions as OG.
    Anonymous
    27th Nov 2016
    2:32pm
    Agreed, Tom. And sadly those with less money are going to struggle to get banks to treat them with respect. Those that give the banks profitable business will always be in a stronger negotiating position.

    I knew a pensioner once who got a very raw deal from the bank and when she complained, respectfully and justifiably, they said ''Sorry. Can't help.'' A neighbour rallied some 20 farmers to tell that bank manager they would withdraw all their business if the pensioner's funds weren't reinstated immediately. The bank obliged. See, it's about power. The privileged always THINK they are superior and blame other people's failings for problems. They are WRONG. If they ever found themselves in the circumstances of the people they condemn as ''greedy'' or ''lazy'' etc., they would discover that nothing is as these self-opinionated privileged pretend. Those who are rendered powerless by circumstance often have their gripes ignored - regardless of the merit of their complaint.
    Bonny
    29th Nov 2016
    6:31am
    Obviously this pensioner didn't push hard enough with the bank over this issue. You simply just don't accept anything you disagree with. People give up at the first no. Don't give up.
    Not Senile Yet!
    25th Nov 2016
    12:35pm
    No need for a Royal Commision paid for by already broke taxpayers......Just a Government who will admit that De-Regulation is Responsible for their Corporate Greed.....the put the funding in place so the ACCC can re-hire the Staff to go after the Individuals responsible within the Banking Sector.....people actually are responsible for this Corruption.....the Banks simply employ them!
    Stop cutting the Funds to the Regulators.....then we might get some Action!
    libsareliars
    25th Nov 2016
    12:49pm
    Yes, there absolutely should be a Royal Commission.
    leigh308
    25th Nov 2016
    1:34pm
    strong words, weak government... Obviously our 'democracy' is a sham when our 'leaders' cower under the 'gunboat diplomacy' of the corporate world...
    Old Man
    25th Nov 2016
    4:39pm
    Bank bashing is a national pastime but politicians are not prepared to do anything to help. I recall Swan telling the assembled media that he was "keeping a close eye on them" when asked about the banks. Shorten wants a Royal Commission but he won't give any idea as to what the Royal Commission's guidelines should be or what information they should be looking for. Turnbull has raised a Tribunal which will probably be as much use as Swan's "keeping an eye on them".

    Interest rates have always been a big problem for both borrowers and investors. Prior to the Hawke government deregulating the banks, any interest rate change was mandatory for the banks to implement. The banks always raised interest rates the next day after the announcement but somehow found it difficult to lower rates until the end of the month of the announcement because of "bookkeeping problems".

    Before deregulation, it was generally accepted that the difference between loans and investments was about 1.5%, fees were generally low and mainly applied to cheque accounts. Other fees for services were limited,eg. no fee to stop payment on a cheque. Now the difference between loans and investments is much larger than the 1.5%, fees are charged for almost everything including cashing one's own cheque instead of using an ATM. These are the main gripes but how a Royal Commission can stop a bank charging a customer for a service is beyond me. The market should even these things out but all banks charge the same scale of fees so there is no real competition. Banks have been investigated for possible collusion in the past but either there is none or they are too smart for the investigators. A Royal Commission may not be able to do what the ACCC has been unable to do in this area.

    I believe that Shorten is merely playing politics with this and other matters because Turnbull has shown himself to be a weak leader with a very slim majority and a very small grasp of politics.. Turnbull has started to become a little tougher but only time will tell if he can maintain the toughness and begin to lead. On the other hand, Shorten is making mistakes because, I believe, he is getting too cocky and he has to be reined in, show some more discipline and listen to the advice of tacticians in Labor.
    Old Geezer
    25th Nov 2016
    5:45pm
    Banks need to be left alone to run their business like other businesses in Australia. If they satisfy the regulations then what is the problem?

    Yes I know some people lost lots of money due to their own greed and now want to blame someone but themselves for their losses. Sorry folks if you go into something with big returns it has big risks. If you didn't understand it way back then why did you commit your money? My answer was you were starry eyed with the big returns offered. So lesson learnt time to move on.
    Old Man
    25th Nov 2016
    6:00pm
    I can't agree Old Geezer about those who lost money and whom you classify as greedy. Banks have a reputation as being conservative and those who lost money were taking advice from employees who, as it has turned out, gave bad advice that only benefited the employee, not the client. Banks have admitted as such. It is a world of difference if one goes to a seminar and invests with people who are working for themselves and promise extremely high returns, those investors are greedy.
    Old Geezer
    25th Nov 2016
    6:57pm
    There is no difference at all. It is up to people to be understand what they are investing in and the risks involved.
    Anonymous
    27th Nov 2016
    2:40pm
    Yes, OG. I suppose when I walked into the NAB and sat in an office in their building looking at a man wearing a shirt with a NAB emblem and accepted a business card from him with the NAB logo, I should have known that he was a completely independent businessman whose conduct was not in any way monitored or regulated by NAB, and that the person who referred me to him was lying when she said there was no fee for his advice? I should have known when he looked up my accounts on the computer that NAB hadn't authorized his access to my private data - especially since the computer was on the NAB network, in a NAB office, and he had a NAB swipe card to identify himself!

    Entirely my fault, of course. The bank did NOTHING wrong allowing this FRAUD to occupy their premises, wear their shirt, hand out their business card, access their computer, PRETEND to be a genuine NAB adviser, and then charge fees that NAB claimed would never be charged.
    Bonny
    29th Nov 2016
    6:34am
    And you trusted him that his recommendations would return you a zillion percent. A fool and his money are soon parted.

    25th Nov 2016
    5:41pm
    As our big four (4) banks are OWNED (between 42% & 49%) by four (4) main FOREIGN institutions (yes, the same ones and in the same order) they are controlled by these FOREIGN Interests, who do NOT consider Australia at all. Their only concern is controlling Australia's financial market and EXTRACTING as much profits as possible to take overseas and out of Australia's economy, whilst paying as little tax as possible.

    I speak only of the big four (4) banks but many others are also owned by FOREIGN INTERESTS that sit on the boards of many banks, directing their practices (dirty or not)..... insider knowledge and control of all of the banks they are involved in gives them so much more power over Australia's financial system AND hence over our governments.

    No our banks need to be put into GLASS enclosures, so that everyone can see what they are doing and WHO is doing it.

    Start with a Royal Commission to get rid of the ROT that is already there and then either set up GOVT Banks or LEGISLATE to ensure that the BANK's POWER & WEALTH can not be used against Australia and its people or its government.

    BEST THING for BANKS
    I would prefer to return to when we had FEDERAL & STATE Government BANKS who controlled Australia's economy and financial system. These government banks operated along side PRIVATE banks to offer services and financial assistance. The Commonwealth Bank was once a Federal Govt Bank and each State had a state Bank, that have been privatised and control given to foreign interests and the wealthy elite.

    How much better would this be at ensuring control over something as important as our financial system... rather than FOREIGN megacorps and WEALTHY ELITES who couldn't give a damn about Australia... they just want to fill their pockets with OUR WEALTH and SCREW us and our country, as much as possible.

    The Australian Govt would be making the BILLIONS now, instead of PRIVATE (foreign) interests... our taxes would be lower and our social systems and benefits and services..... especially HEALTH & EDUCATION would be well and truly funded!!!!

    ANSWER to the BANKS being dirty and controlled by foreign interests..... START UP FEDERAL & STATE BANKS to COMPETE with them.

    I know I would swap over to govt owned banks in a flash! What about you???
    Old Geezer
    25th Nov 2016
    5:55pm
    What a lot of rubbish! None of the big 4 bank have any substantial shareholders so they are not owned by 4 foreign institutions.
    Anonymous
    25th Nov 2016
    6:42pm
    what else can you expect of a dodo like mussolini!
    KSS
    25th Nov 2016
    7:59pm
    Mussitate; please name the 4 foreign institutional owners of Australia's Big 4 banks.

    Perhaps it would better to invest in the organ grinder rather than the monkey.
    MICK
    26th Nov 2016
    1:16pm
    Good post mussitate.
    I had another look at the shareholders for the big 4. Interesting reading. They have removed this information at least from the Commsec site.
    So who are the above posters advertising for? Both of you would know full well that the big 4 have foreign ownership in the 40%+ range and it is clear this has now been hidden the same as Turnbull and rich Australians are now able to avoid scrutiny with their business dealings.
    Sounds like the corporations dictatorship is well under way.
    MICK
    26th Nov 2016
    1:21pm
    Here is a 2 year old break-up before the fraudulent hiding of ownership came in from this government:

    https://blog.creditcardcompare.com.au/big-four-ownership.php

    As you said mussitate the big 4 are essentially foreign owned, or at least American banks have the biggest stake.
    Welcome to the Turnbull government acting for its big business owners. Fraud by any other word!
    Anonymous
    27th Nov 2016
    2:35pm
    Yes, things were better when there were government-controlled banks. And I know elderly folk who think that is still the case. They trusted the Commonwealth Bank - not because of ''greed'', as that nasty OG alleges - but because they honestly thought it was government owned still and therefore trustworthy. Sad that some in the community justify taking advantage of the vulnerable, and then blaming them for their own misfortune. A little empathy would be nice in this troubled world.
    PlanB
    28th Nov 2016
    7:16am
    Muss makes one laugh at the ignorance of some people does it not
    Anonymous
    28th Nov 2016
    12:22pm
    FOR ALL THOSE THAT WERE UNBELIEVING ABOUT AUST. BANK OWNERSHIP BEING MOSTLY CONTROLLED BY FOREIGN INTEREST....

    **CBA link:
    https://www.commbank.com.au/about-us/shareholders/shareholding_information_fr.html?ei=gsa_generic_biggest-shareholders

    **all Banks & the connections with the SAME foreign shareholders:
    https://blog.creditcardcompare.com.au/big-four-ownership.php

    Just copy and paste these links.

    The SECOND LINK is excellent as it explains everything with a Chart and then gives you details of how things are.



    Old Geezer
    Hope that helps

    KSS
    Hard to believe our Govt.(s) has allowed this to happen aye!



    Heemskerk99
    Both Old Geezer & KSS made comments which were in disagreement or were unbelieving and had their say which is all OKAY.
    However, YOU simply attacked me personally with disgusting rearrangement with my online name to a fascist mongrel that is more in line with YOUR POLITICAL VIEWS than mine will ever be.... you being very much down the US neo con fascist road.

    Anyway, enjoy the links - one of which is the OFFICIAL CBA website ......... and YOU call ME a DODO (chuckle).
    floss
    26th Nov 2016
    7:57am
    Malcolm turn on his rich mates I don't think so.Malcolm was put there to screw ordinary Australians and is doing a good job of it.
    Anonymous
    26th Nov 2016
    6:02pm
    great posts by those so aptly named looney and labor/union delegate mick
    MICK
    26th Nov 2016
    8:32pm
    Yeah right wing troll/stooge heemsjerk. Your posts are amusing and readers would understand that they come from Liberal Party HQ. I see you are plugging away for hiding the crooks from the public gaze........so that they can behave even more corruptly. You will fit in well with the emerging dictatorship heemsjerk. What a peice of work.
    Anonymous
    27th Nov 2016
    6:38pm
    micky, micky the hatred for anything not in your leftist believes is getting to your brains, jury is still out on that one, that is you having brains, banks are not like lollies you can suck dry, they are there as a business and if you don't like their service go to another one or get several as normal people do and play one against the other, nobody dealing with clients want to lose one, as for a royal commission into the banks, your labor party shows how much they are lacking of running a commercial enterprise, it is that simple even you should be able to understand the principal, no profit means no firms, more workers on the scrapheap, less competition, with other words services will be more expensive, I am quite happy with to-days banking arrangements, I know I'll have to pay for some of my dealings through the bank, do you expect also not to have to pay for an electrician, a plumber, carpenter, bricklayer, cleaner etc for doing a job you asked for, I can tell you who is cheaper, micky, micky wake up and start living in the real world


    who is cheaper,
    Anonymous
    28th Nov 2016
    12:49pm
    heemskerk99
    Again, you are deriding other commenters quite disgustingly. Drawing other commenters to retort... but I can honestly say that you are the best at ugly aggressive comments. Quite a style you have there!

    Now to respond to YOUR comment:

    The last Labor Govt, not only showed they could run an enterprise they showed the WORLD that they could put a 'young' country like Australia at the VERY TOP of the WORLD. This was during the worst of the GFC!!!!

    - internationally acclaimed the BEST ECONOMY in the WORLD beating USA, China, Russia, EU, UK, etc
    - in that international assessment Australia ticked ALL the good boxes which has never been done before
    - attained a triple AAA credit rating for the first time ever
    - Aust. currency was included in the International mix for the first time ever
    - Labor's NBN was considered a 'world wonder'. One of the BEST NBN systems in the WORLD was to be put into EVERY property in Australia... so that no child missed out on this incredible technology and innovation. All at a fully costed and audit $45billion which would have paid itself back by 2040

    You see, the Rudd Labor Govt didn't follow the USA's AUSTERITY economic (sick) plan but implemented a robust economic revival and actually PLANNED (something the current govt. seems to be unable to even comprehend which is probably not that surprising, as they don't even know how to manage and implement a budget). They undertook short, medium and long term plans to rejuvenate and maintain a robust economy.

    The WORLD nations actually recognised Australia's economic system and there were more nations that defied the USA's directions for austerity and tried to implement the Australian economic system BECAUSE IT WORKED!!!!!!

    The MINISCULE Govt Debt, Labor used to rejuvenate the economy was drastically reduced once the economy got going again and was nearly back to normal just prior to this mob of LIBERAL MISFIT (corrupt) CLOWNSgot in and MO RE THAN TRIPLED the Govt Debt BUT WITH NOTHING TO SHOW FOR IT...
    ... EXCEPT A NBN THAT IS UTTER RUBBISH AND USELESS AND IN SHAMBLES THAT IS COSTING US OVER $90billion WITH NO WAY OF RECOVERING ANY OF THIS MONEY.... EVER (it is too slow).
    PlanB
    28th Nov 2016
    1:55pm
    Once again Muss I bow b4 you -- you have it ALL dead right once again.

    No one gives Rudd the credit for what he did --if it had been the Libs, we would all have been begging poor --during the GFC -- Rudd also had the GUTS to say SORRY to the Indigenous people for which I also respect him for.
    PlanB
    27th Nov 2016
    7:59am
    Have not read the other posts BUT IMO darn right they need a royal Commission -- to sort out the corrupt goings on, BRING IT ON!
    Anonymous
    27th Nov 2016
    6:56pm
    read my opinion above, let us know where the corrupted goings are, typical comment of a blind labor follower, as usual never had to think for him/herself, the party does that.
    PlanB
    28th Nov 2016
    7:14am
    For your information heemskerk, I am not a labour follower and if you can't see the corruption then you are blind!
    If you think a Banker such as Turnbull would want a RC -- he will do all in his power to avoid it
    rodex
    27th Nov 2016
    12:54pm
    Same old, same old, our useless pollies hitting each other and not hitting the banks for taking us all for a ride
    Anonymous
    27th Nov 2016
    6:57pm
    enlighten us, what ride?

    28th Nov 2016
    2:40pm
    Heemskerk99

    Thank you for being here..... without your comments backing the big (foreign) boys without any qualification AND anything the Liberal Party does..... we wouldn't have the opportunity to tell it how it REALLY is.

    Now, all we have to do is get the agro comments that are directed at other commenters, toned down and you will be perfect.


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

    • Receive our daily enewsletter
    • Enter competitions
    • Comment on articles