Now you see crackdown on banking fraudsters … now you don’t
Hidden in the fine print of the planned overhaul of financial misconduct penalties is the Federal Government’s consent to removing imprisonment as punishment for 375 offences under the Corporations Act.
Known as “strict and absolute liability offences”, they relate mostly to the provision of information to the public and the regulator, compliance with Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) and court/tribunal directions, and the holding of funds on behalf of others, according to the ASIC taskforce.
The taskforce provided the 50 recommendations behind the Government’s stricter penalties for financial breaches. But ASIC, itself, said it did not agree with dropping jail for white-collar criminals convicted of the specified 375 offences.
Unfortunately, the regulator was overruled by the taskforce. In addition to a variety of mandarins, the taskforce ‘expert’ panellists were as follows: Gerard Brody from the Consumer Action Law Centre (who told YourLifeChoices he personally agreed with ASIC’s position), Stuart Clark from legal firm Clayton Utz, Ross Freeman from legal firm Minter Ellison, Pamela Hanrahan and Dimity Kingsford Smith from the University of New South Wales and Ian Ramsay from the University of Melbourne.
Another curious recommendation supported by the Government is that there should be ‘appropriate limits’ to private litigants accessing material seized by ASIC under search warrants.
Do you think that placing limits on access to material could disrupt any potential class action against the Big Four banks and AMP?
What is meant by a "variety of mandarins?" Are you saying the taskforce consisted of a variety of people from China?