Letters: Banking royal commission strikes cautionary note

Readers have their say on the final report of the Hayne Royal Commission into banking and the need to build more dams to store floodwaters.

Royal Commissioner Kenneth Haynes has issued banks a rebuke. Picture: David Geraghty/The Australian.

YOUR Editorial on the banking royal commission (C-M, Feb 4) struck a wise cautionary note.

The Hayne commission has disclosed scandalous conduct in some leading financial institutions and misconduct that should have been discovered and punished by regulatory bodies and/or superiors if they were not asleep at the wheel.

Those responsible must be appropriately punished.

Yet, as you warn, wholesale draconian measures risk severe economic damage to the nation. Banks must be more careful to whom, and how much, they lend.

But they, and we, must be careful not to unnecessarily cut off the vital lifeblood credit flow on which business, especially small business, so crucially depends.

And we must not forget that for most of us the health and prosperity of our banks is of paramount concern, not only for employment but also for superannuation funds that hold so many of their shares.

More generally, I sometimes ponder the necessity for so many royal commissions.

True, they provide rich pickings for talented lawyers. But may they not occasionally mark an abdication of responsibility by our politicians who, together with police and other regulators, should not themselves be asleep at their respective wheels?

John Kidd, Auchenflower

THE final report of the Hayne royal commission is out for public scrutiny.

But is the job really done and dusted?

I do not think so, if Treasurer Josh Frydenberg’s comments are any indication.

Words like “accept the recommendations” or “will take action on them” are to my mind cop-out statements.

There is a big difference in political spin language between “taking action” or “accepting”, compared to “implementation”.

“Action” and “accepting” can have any amount of interpretations and outcomes. Mostly, they mean nothing will be done.

“Implementation”, in this instance, to me, means a clear path based on concise compliance with the recommendations of the report to deliver an outcome for the better.

I do not believe that the Morrison Government, in the run up to a federal election in May, has the will or tenacity to do anything but stall, question and waffle on about the intent and interpretation of the Hayne report.

The public, who, after all paid for the royal commission, should now demand swift action against all those who perpetrated illegal activities, including the chairmen/women and board members of any financial institution referred to or mentioned negatively in the report.

The buck stops with that lot.

Whether it is the LNP or the Labor Party, if they take power after the May election, is not the point. This job has to be done and successfully completed. Let’s hope it does not take forever.

This report has only been in the public arena for less than 48 hours and already the Big Four banks are whingeing and wobbling in defence of their disclosed illegal actions in an attempt to nullify the fallout.

Les Bryant, Durack

IT’S been a long time coming for the four major banking institutions to be held accountable for some of their unscrupulous and greedy actions in the past.

So it was gratifying to read, after a scathing royal commission, that many suffering victims will share in the expected $1 billion in overdue compensation.

I now hope that the ANZ will stop charging me administration fees for a credit card account l closed three years ago.

The royal commission has made 76 recommendations which, when implemented, will change the banking sector forever and for the better.

Commissioner Kenneth Hayne has made 24 referrals to regulators for potential criminal and civil charges. Bring it on.

Rudolf Bojtschuk, Brisbane City

I’M NOT defending the banks from the criticism by the Hayne Royal Commission finding that they have been overcharging their clients.

But Australian banks compete in a fiercely competitive market for investor dollars.

And if investors, including mum and dad investors, and superannuation funds think they can get a higher return from one bank than another they will swap banks.

Readers must remember that banks in a capitalist society such as ours operate in a free market environment.

Unless we nationalise banks, like communist countries do, we can’t dictate how they run their business.

By all means regulate the banking industry to better protect their customers, but be mindful not to stifle its growth.

Without investment, no new infrastructure, no new businesses and no jobs can be created.

Peter Pak, Rochedale South

IF THE royal commission into banking has found ASIC and APRA were negligent in their oversight of the avaricious banks, shouldn’t the heads of these two organisations be the first to roll?

Trust in banks cannot be restored if there is no trust in the overseers.

Lyn Fryer, Ferny Hills

ONE fully expects to see several days of froth and bubble from those outraged by the behaviour of our apparently demonic banking and financial system.

As usual, with such vituperance, this is only a part of the story.

Banks have caused much undue grief. Of that there can be no dispute.

But how many “victims” were, by their own admission, astonished by their bank’s largesse while happily accepting it?

We all cried when we heard about the ageing mother who lost her house to heartless financiers, but we ignored that the house was collateral for her daughter’s business loan.

And banks have succeeded in supporting the financial dreams of millions of Australians over many decades, not to mention employing many thousands.

Rightly, we expect changes to the finance environment, and Commissioner Hayne has made many sensible recommendations.

But, in the end, if you want your bank to stop treating you like a fool, isn’t at least part of the answer to stop behaving like one?

Stephen Morgan, Carina Heights

**********

LOTTERY NEEDED TO FUND BUILDING OF MORE DAMS

RON Sandilands and Irene Shanks (Letters, Feb 5) raised good questions about our lack of dams.

Yes, we need to secure reliable and cheap power and water for our growing population.

We need at least two projects, similar to the Ord River scheme, in north Queensland and the Northern Territory.

The Asian market is calling us and these projects would create jobs, as well as flushing our river systems, many of which start in these areas.

How would we pay for them? We had a Sydney Opera House Lottery. Why not a Dam Project Lottery?

I know the public would gladly get behind that.

John Edwards, Broadbeach Waters

I WILL give my vote to the party that guarantees to prioritise the drought-proofing of Australia.

I don’t care how much money it costs us. It will be money well spent and a perfect investment. No more excuses. Let’s do it.

Michael Jones, The Gap

AUSTRALIA is a land of floods and fire.

We have to live with this fact, but that doesn’t mean we cannot do something about it.

Some real estate developments were completed on known flood plains. Who allowed this to happen?

Surely there is a duty of care to potential buyers for the authorities to at least tell these people that at some point the land they are buying was flooded and let them make an informed decision.

This should also be done in areas where bushfires are a regular occurrence.

The cost to the community is too great for this not to be done.

Greg McKay, Dalby

JUST about every time we have bad floods, and the TV channels do a live cross to their reporters, there are some irresponsible people in the background frolicking in the floodwaters, disregarding the many warnings about the dangers of storm drains and debris in rapidly flowing torrents.

They are tragedies just waiting to happen.

Peter Corran, Wakerley

**********

Join the conversation. Send your letters to couriermail.com.au/letters or email to [e-mail]