This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2016/apr/20/coalition-strengthens-corporate-regulator-to-head-off-calls-for-a-banking-royal-commission-politics-live
The article has changed 14 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 12 | Version 13 |
|---|---|
| Bill Shorten says Malcolm Turnbull has 'sold out Australians' in favour of the banks – politics live | Bill Shorten says Malcolm Turnbull has 'sold out Australians' in favour of the banks – politics live |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| 6.42am BST | |
| 06:42 | |
| I think that will do us for now | |
| Well delightful people, given it’s now all quiet at the #auspol ranch (famous last words) I reckon that will do us for today. I’m not quite sure when I’ll be back with Politics Live, certainly budget week, if not before. | |
| Until then, let’s review Wednesday. | |
| So straightforward, we can do it in two points. | |
| That was really the long and short of things today. | |
| Thank you to my colleagues and thank you to the readers for your company throughout this special sitting of the parliament. It’s been tops. See you again soon. | |
| 6.13am BST | |
| 06:13 | |
| I’m going to have to wrap this up soon, but time for a few more. | |
| From @SEdwards0108: The gov’t says the banks will fund ASIC to the tune of $120m- will the banks raise fees/interest rate and pass cost to customers? | |
| KM: Let’s see what they say, but I can’t see how they won’t. Other costs of doing business are passed on. Can’t see how this one wouldn’t be. | |
| From @Jansant: Why did media mostly fail to report the astroturfing of #rsrt repeal? #qt | |
| KM: I don’t know what the media did, was flat out myself reporting what was going on over the last few days, so I haven’t done a meta analysis. Sorry. | |
| From @preciouspress: Why hasn’t media presented facts re. effect on owner/drivers of RSR Tribunal, rather than just report Govt/Oppn positions. | |
| KM: At the risk of contradicting the answer I gave just a moment ago, I do know what we did at Guardian Australia, because I showcased it on Politics Live. My colleague Paul Karp did at least two pieces of news/analysis working through the expert evidence which were pieces designed to cut through the political rhetoric. As for what others did, I can’t tell you with total accuracy because I was focussed on our effort. | |
| Now last one, from @reddishraven: Grand Strategy or Random Tactics? Is there an LNP brains trust or just everyone firing madly from the hip? | |
| KM: Hello Ben – a bit of both I think. There’s certainly a brains trust. Planning for the budget and the campaign is on in earnest, and some experienced hands sidelined during the Abbott period are back in the mix – but there’s certainly a bit of firing from the hip, and cross current and contention, which does give the appearance of chaos. | |
| Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the notice paper. | |
| Thanks for playing folks. You rock. | |
| 5.59am BST | 5.59am BST |
| 05:59 | 05:59 |
| From OnceWasAus in the thread: Katharine, here’s a question. Do the boards, senior editors or parliamentarians such as the PM calling the ABC or PMs having dinner with media moguls influence how a story is reported, the tone of the story, what has to be left out, the type of rhetoric the story contains and how much each sides version gets written? | From OnceWasAus in the thread: Katharine, here’s a question. Do the boards, senior editors or parliamentarians such as the PM calling the ABC or PMs having dinner with media moguls influence how a story is reported, the tone of the story, what has to be left out, the type of rhetoric the story contains and how much each sides version gets written? |
| KM: There is no blanket answer to this question, and, obviously, not being privy to such exalted dinners myself as a lowly journalist, I can’t tell you from close observation. I can share my own lived experience of twenty years though, which might help answer the question. I’ve worked at Fairfax, at News Corp, and for Guardian Australia. I’ve never been directed by an editor to write a story in a certain way. I might have been helped by news editors to find the most significant point in the story, but that’s part of a process of learning as a journalist, that’s not editorial slant. I’ve had headlines on my stories which I haven’t appreciated over the years, but I think that’s a common experience among journalists. Different publications have different intrinsic interests. The Australian Financial Review has a different audience to Guardian Australia, so the two publications are interested in different issues. But again, that’s not editorial slant – it’s understanding the interests of the different audiences, a business audience wants different content to a broadsheet audience. That said the editorial tone of the two publications are obviously different. Like I said, I can only share my own experience. | KM: There is no blanket answer to this question, and, obviously, not being privy to such exalted dinners myself as a lowly journalist, I can’t tell you from close observation. I can share my own lived experience of twenty years though, which might help answer the question. I’ve worked at Fairfax, at News Corp, and for Guardian Australia. I’ve never been directed by an editor to write a story in a certain way. I might have been helped by news editors to find the most significant point in the story, but that’s part of a process of learning as a journalist, that’s not editorial slant. I’ve had headlines on my stories which I haven’t appreciated over the years, but I think that’s a common experience among journalists. Different publications have different intrinsic interests. The Australian Financial Review has a different audience to Guardian Australia, so the two publications are interested in different issues. But again, that’s not editorial slant – it’s understanding the interests of the different audiences, a business audience wants different content to a broadsheet audience. That said the editorial tone of the two publications are obviously different. Like I said, I can only share my own experience. |
| 5.42am BST | 5.42am BST |
| 05:42 | 05:42 |
| From Aaron Murphy (no relation): Hey Murph (nice surname), you must be relieved that the extraordinary sitting finished up after two days? Or are you depressed that it just added an extra two weeks of unofficial campaigning? | From Aaron Murphy (no relation): Hey Murph (nice surname), you must be relieved that the extraordinary sitting finished up after two days? Or are you depressed that it just added an extra two weeks of unofficial campaigning? |
| KM: No Aaron, not depressed. I’m very hopeful that the opportunity of stepping out of Politics Live mode for a bit can allow me to complete some things I really need to get done before the election. *Happy dance*. | KM: No Aaron, not depressed. I’m very hopeful that the opportunity of stepping out of Politics Live mode for a bit can allow me to complete some things I really need to get done before the election. *Happy dance*. |
| From @Gwillaumau on Twitter. Is Jon Snow really dead? | From @Gwillaumau on Twitter. Is Jon Snow really dead? |
| KM: Love never dies. | KM: Love never dies. |
| 5.36am BST | 5.36am BST |
| 05:36 | 05:36 |
| From Erin Quinn: Didn’t the government already have a DD trigger? Why the big whoop about the ABCC when they could have just used one of their other triggers for the same purpose? | From Erin Quinn: Didn’t the government already have a DD trigger? Why the big whoop about the ABCC when they could have just used one of their other triggers for the same purpose? |
| KM: Thanks for this question Erin. Yes there were other options but the government wanted this one, not from the point of view of voters, who I suspect don’t know or care very much about the building industry inspectorate, but to rally the base. Think about an election campaign like armies massing for battle. This week we’ve seen everyone massing for battle. Getting the senate to vote down the ABCC allows for some fighting words about trade union power and influence, which is one of the things that gets the Liberal party faithful doing little fist pumps. It makes them feel good, having an enemy to fight. It inspires people to go to quiz nights and hand out how-to-vote cards and sell raffle tickets. It’s particularly important for a Liberal party leader like Malcolm Turnbull to speak to the base. He’s under internal pressure to speak to the base. Turnbull is, I suspect, more interested in speaking to the political centre than the conservative base of the Liberal party but it’s the price of admission if you are the leader of the Liberal party. Hope that sheds some light. | KM: Thanks for this question Erin. Yes there were other options but the government wanted this one, not from the point of view of voters, who I suspect don’t know or care very much about the building industry inspectorate, but to rally the base. Think about an election campaign like armies massing for battle. This week we’ve seen everyone massing for battle. Getting the senate to vote down the ABCC allows for some fighting words about trade union power and influence, which is one of the things that gets the Liberal party faithful doing little fist pumps. It makes them feel good, having an enemy to fight. It inspires people to go to quiz nights and hand out how-to-vote cards and sell raffle tickets. It’s particularly important for a Liberal party leader like Malcolm Turnbull to speak to the base. He’s under internal pressure to speak to the base. Turnbull is, I suspect, more interested in speaking to the political centre than the conservative base of the Liberal party but it’s the price of admission if you are the leader of the Liberal party. Hope that sheds some light. |
| 5.28am BST | 5.28am BST |
| 05:28 | 05:28 |
| From Blair Barker. Campaign orthodoxy holds that the issues funnel down over an election, from broad narrative on many topics to the one or two points at the finish line…do you agree? And has this been flipped by MT by putting out there … “who do you trust with the economy” so early – could be an interesting election if he gets innovative? | From Blair Barker. Campaign orthodoxy holds that the issues funnel down over an election, from broad narrative on many topics to the one or two points at the finish line…do you agree? And has this been flipped by MT by putting out there … “who do you trust with the economy” so early – could be an interesting election if he gets innovative? |
| KM: Hi Blair. Campaign orthodoxy always holds until it gets turned on its head. The thing about this campaign that’s notable compared to recent political history is its length. We haven’t had such a long campaign since the 1980s, and that environment is more unpredictable. More time to fill means more time for things to go wrong when the voters are watching. In terms of your substantive point – flipping to the economy, the Coalition would always open with its strongest suit (economy or security, looking at Turnbull you’d think economy), and Labor always lags the Coalition on economic management. The government also has to build from the special parliamentary session to the budget week, which I reckon is even more critical than usual. If the government sticks budget week, that’s a good springboard for the campaign, if its an omnishambles that’s a problem. I think it will be an interesting campaign. Genuinely. So much of the policy agenda is unresolved, we are going to learn things. That’s always a good position to be in. | KM: Hi Blair. Campaign orthodoxy always holds until it gets turned on its head. The thing about this campaign that’s notable compared to recent political history is its length. We haven’t had such a long campaign since the 1980s, and that environment is more unpredictable. More time to fill means more time for things to go wrong when the voters are watching. In terms of your substantive point – flipping to the economy, the Coalition would always open with its strongest suit (economy or security, looking at Turnbull you’d think economy), and Labor always lags the Coalition on economic management. The government also has to build from the special parliamentary session to the budget week, which I reckon is even more critical than usual. If the government sticks budget week, that’s a good springboard for the campaign, if its an omnishambles that’s a problem. I think it will be an interesting campaign. Genuinely. So much of the policy agenda is unresolved, we are going to learn things. That’s always a good position to be in. |
| 5.17am BST | 5.17am BST |
| 05:17 | 05:17 |
| I’ll start with the questions from Facebook. | I’ll start with the questions from Facebook. |
| From Grant Nowell. Do you think the right of the Coalition will stop causing problems for Turnbull during the lead up to the July 2nd election? | From Grant Nowell. Do you think the right of the Coalition will stop causing problems for Turnbull during the lead up to the July 2nd election? |
| KM: Hmmm. It’s a bit hard to say just at the moment. Before 2010 I would have said of course they will all calm down during an election campaign, but sadly we are all post-2010 now. We’ve seen political parties lose their sense of reason in the middle of a civil war. Once seen, never forgotten. My instinct says the government is less likely to go fully nuclear than Labor did, however the prime minister is still facing leaks and acts of destabilisation, including a budget leak this week. Doesn’t bode well. | KM: Hmmm. It’s a bit hard to say just at the moment. Before 2010 I would have said of course they will all calm down during an election campaign, but sadly we are all post-2010 now. We’ve seen political parties lose their sense of reason in the middle of a civil war. Once seen, never forgotten. My instinct says the government is less likely to go fully nuclear than Labor did, however the prime minister is still facing leaks and acts of destabilisation, including a budget leak this week. Doesn’t bode well. |
| From Steve Pye. At 9.12 this morning, you wrote: “There are big, serious, important debates at the global level that aren’t really penetrating in this country at all. We are still locked in sound bites, signifying very little.” My question to you is, why are we still there? I don’t subscribe to the view that the media is simply rolling over and giving one side or the other (or apparently, based on comments, both sides, somehow) an easy ride. But, if you and other colleagues recognise this is part of the problem, how do you think you can draw the more serious, important debates out of the news cycle? | From Steve Pye. At 9.12 this morning, you wrote: “There are big, serious, important debates at the global level that aren’t really penetrating in this country at all. We are still locked in sound bites, signifying very little.” My question to you is, why are we still there? I don’t subscribe to the view that the media is simply rolling over and giving one side or the other (or apparently, based on comments, both sides, somehow) an easy ride. But, if you and other colleagues recognise this is part of the problem, how do you think you can draw the more serious, important debates out of the news cycle? |
| (Did I mention I LOVE readers question time.) | (Did I mention I LOVE readers question time.) |
| KM: Thanks, Steve. This is a very difficult question to answer for the simple reason is the answer isn’t straightforward. The news cycle now runs like a waterfall. Its fuel is the new, and sometimes the ‘new’ can crowd out the important. Sounds strange, but it is true. Nothing sticks in the modern news cycle, everything just washes through – big and important things, and trivial, completely inconsequential things. It all flutters away. The environment makes it hard for politicians to govern, and hard for journalists to persist and plough away without having to peel off and deal with the next thing. There really are no simple answers to this question. From the journalism perspective, I can only do the best I can, and try, particularly in projects like Politics Live, to inject some weight as well as chasing the breaking cycle. And politicians would help themselves by keeping it simple: say what you mean and do what you say, and hope the voters notice that you are trying to serve the public and be a force for good. | KM: Thanks, Steve. This is a very difficult question to answer for the simple reason is the answer isn’t straightforward. The news cycle now runs like a waterfall. Its fuel is the new, and sometimes the ‘new’ can crowd out the important. Sounds strange, but it is true. Nothing sticks in the modern news cycle, everything just washes through – big and important things, and trivial, completely inconsequential things. It all flutters away. The environment makes it hard for politicians to govern, and hard for journalists to persist and plough away without having to peel off and deal with the next thing. There really are no simple answers to this question. From the journalism perspective, I can only do the best I can, and try, particularly in projects like Politics Live, to inject some weight as well as chasing the breaking cycle. And politicians would help themselves by keeping it simple: say what you mean and do what you say, and hope the voters notice that you are trying to serve the public and be a force for good. |
| 5.02am BST | 5.02am BST |
| 05:02 | 05:02 |
| Readers question time | Readers question time |
| As the House of Representatives speaker Tony Smith would say, it being 2pm .. | As the House of Representatives speaker Tony Smith would say, it being 2pm .. |
| I will deal with a bunch of questions from you. Stay tuned. | I will deal with a bunch of questions from you. Stay tuned. |
| 4.39am BST | 4.39am BST |
| 04:39 | 04:39 |
| I’ve called for submissions on the twits and Facebook but I’ve forgotten to do it here. Given there’s no question time today I’ll hold a special readers edition of #qt on the blog today. If you have a question about politics, sing out. I’ll take questions from folks in the thread until 2pm. | I’ve called for submissions on the twits and Facebook but I’ve forgotten to do it here. Given there’s no question time today I’ll hold a special readers edition of #qt on the blog today. If you have a question about politics, sing out. I’ll take questions from folks in the thread until 2pm. |
| 4.28am BST | 4.28am BST |
| 04:28 | 04:28 |
| Q: Is $126m enough? | Q: Is $126m enough? |
| Greg Medcraft | Greg Medcraft |
| Yes. | Yes. |
| 4.22am BST | 4.22am BST |
| 04:22 | 04:22 |
| In Sydney, the Asic chairman Greg Medcraft is having a media conference in the wake of the banking announcement. He says the Turnbull government has shown confidence in him by extending his term, and the organisation accepts the findings of the capability review. | In Sydney, the Asic chairman Greg Medcraft is having a media conference in the wake of the banking announcement. He says the Turnbull government has shown confidence in him by extending his term, and the organisation accepts the findings of the capability review. |
| Medcraft is asked whether he’s nervous about having to go cap in hand to the banks for funding. | Medcraft is asked whether he’s nervous about having to go cap in hand to the banks for funding. |
| Er, no. I’ve been pushing for this user pays funding model for years. | Er, no. I’ve been pushing for this user pays funding model for years. |
| Medcraft says there should be a price signal, which acts as an incentive for businesses to behave properly. If they have to pay for their regulation, then they will be less inclined to act improperly. | Medcraft says there should be a price signal, which acts as an incentive for businesses to behave properly. If they have to pay for their regulation, then they will be less inclined to act improperly. |
| We want to have an incentive for them to do the right thing. Why should taxpayers be funding a market regulator? | We want to have an incentive for them to do the right thing. Why should taxpayers be funding a market regulator? |
| (I’d say for the same reason as taxpayers pay for police forces, and defence forces, and even journalists through ‘market failure’ broadcasters, like the ABC. To keep various bastards honest. That’s why.) | (I’d say for the same reason as taxpayers pay for police forces, and defence forces, and even journalists through ‘market failure’ broadcasters, like the ABC. To keep various bastards honest. That’s why.) |
| Medcraft says there are user pays models for regulators overseas. | Medcraft says there are user pays models for regulators overseas. |
| 4.06am BST | 4.06am BST |
| 04:06 | 04:06 |
| A risky swerve into heteronormativity a moment ago from the sex discrimination commissioner. That won’t go down well at the next senate estimates. | A risky swerve into heteronormativity a moment ago from the sex discrimination commissioner. That won’t go down well at the next senate estimates. |
| Kate Jenkins | Kate Jenkins |
| We still live in a community that has a dominant narrative of a white, heteronormative role for men and women in what they do at home and at work. | We still live in a community that has a dominant narrative of a white, heteronormative role for men and women in what they do at home and at work. |
| Yet that doesn’t reflect our lived experiences and it’s certainly not meeting our national expectations. | Yet that doesn’t reflect our lived experiences and it’s certainly not meeting our national expectations. |
| 3.56am BST | 3.56am BST |
| 03:56 | 03:56 |
| While I’ve been thundering about regulators Australia’s new sex discrimination commissioner, Kate Jenkins, has been speaking to journalists at the National Press Club. She’s referred in passing to a famous anti-discrimination case in the 1970s – Deborah Jane Wardley versus Ansett. | While I’ve been thundering about regulators Australia’s new sex discrimination commissioner, Kate Jenkins, has been speaking to journalists at the National Press Club. She’s referred in passing to a famous anti-discrimination case in the 1970s – Deborah Jane Wardley versus Ansett. |
| Reg Ansett. A true marvel. | Reg Ansett. A true marvel. |
| Kate Jenkins | Kate Jenkins |
| In short, Mr Ansett argued that he wasn’t prepared to risk the safety of his passengers with an emotional, unpredictable woman in the cockpit. The High Court listened to that argument and recognised it was time for change. | In short, Mr Ansett argued that he wasn’t prepared to risk the safety of his passengers with an emotional, unpredictable woman in the cockpit. The High Court listened to that argument and recognised it was time for change. |
| Deborah Wardley won and even as an11-year-old that I was then, I knew that news story marked an important milestone and like many kids around me, I saw a future in which discriminatory attitudes about women as the weaker sex were being replaced by the recognition that men and women were equal. | Deborah Wardley won and even as an11-year-old that I was then, I knew that news story marked an important milestone and like many kids around me, I saw a future in which discriminatory attitudes about women as the weaker sex were being replaced by the recognition that men and women were equal. |
| 3.50am BST | 3.50am BST |
| 03:50 | 03:50 |
| I suppose I have an in-principle view about funding regulators: it’s an investment that’s worth making in any civil society and functioning democracy. I’m a pro-market person. I think markets work more then they don’t work, which is a deeply unfashionable view at this juncture. But I’d add an important caveat to that principle. I think markets work best when consumers have good information and when they are policed by well funded, independent, courageous regulators. Australia got through the global financial crisis in part because our regulatory system delivered for consumers. You can’t say the same of the regulatory system in other countries. Regulation is worth investing in, it’s not an inconvenience that needs to be outsourced to someone else. | I suppose I have an in-principle view about funding regulators: it’s an investment that’s worth making in any civil society and functioning democracy. I’m a pro-market person. I think markets work more then they don’t work, which is a deeply unfashionable view at this juncture. But I’d add an important caveat to that principle. I think markets work best when consumers have good information and when they are policed by well funded, independent, courageous regulators. Australia got through the global financial crisis in part because our regulatory system delivered for consumers. You can’t say the same of the regulatory system in other countries. Regulation is worth investing in, it’s not an inconvenience that needs to be outsourced to someone else. |
| 3.39am BST | 3.39am BST |
| 03:39 | 03:39 |
| Bernard Keane at Crikey has just posted a piece which also raises similar concerns on my theme of regulatory capture, and the failure to confront systemic problems. Bernard raises an issue I didn’t think of: the problem associated with walking around public service hiring regulations (which was one part of today’s response). | Bernard Keane at Crikey has just posted a piece which also raises similar concerns on my theme of regulatory capture, and the failure to confront systemic problems. Bernard raises an issue I didn’t think of: the problem associated with walking around public service hiring regulations (which was one part of today’s response). |
| Another area of concern is that Asic will be freed up from restrictions relating to public service secondment employees from industry, pitched by Morrison and O’Dwyer as better enabling Asic to go after banks. | Another area of concern is that Asic will be freed up from restrictions relating to public service secondment employees from industry, pitched by Morrison and O’Dwyer as better enabling Asic to go after banks. |
| In fact, such secondments raise very serious concerns about industry capture of the regulator and were the subject of recommendations by the committee in light of the evidence of James Wheeldon – a former ASIC employee. | In fact, such secondments raise very serious concerns about industry capture of the regulator and were the subject of recommendations by the committee in light of the evidence of James Wheeldon – a former ASIC employee. |
| You can read Bernard’s analysis here. | You can read Bernard’s analysis here. |
| 3.21am BST | 3.21am BST |
| 03:21 | 03:21 |
| Some thoughts on the banking package | Some thoughts on the banking package |
| I mentioned earlier today something about precedents. The government is concerned about the precedent of a senate inquiry calling a cabinet minister (Arthur Sinodinos) before it, concerns that would sound a lot more valid had the government not itself opened the door by setting up royal commissions that required two former Labor prime ministers, Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard, to turn up and answer questions. | I mentioned earlier today something about precedents. The government is concerned about the precedent of a senate inquiry calling a cabinet minister (Arthur Sinodinos) before it, concerns that would sound a lot more valid had the government not itself opened the door by setting up royal commissions that required two former Labor prime ministers, Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard, to turn up and answer questions. |
| It’s a bit the same with this sortie on the banks. Scott Morrison over the past few days has been intent on making an argument that royal commissions deliver nothing concrete, an argument which rather exposes the government’s past practice in relation to the royal commissions Tony Abbott established essentially to settle score with his political opponents. Royal commissions are terrible unless they are our royal commissions. | It’s a bit the same with this sortie on the banks. Scott Morrison over the past few days has been intent on making an argument that royal commissions deliver nothing concrete, an argument which rather exposes the government’s past practice in relation to the royal commissions Tony Abbott established essentially to settle score with his political opponents. Royal commissions are terrible unless they are our royal commissions. |
| Bit silly, that argument, isn’t it? Can lead you into all sorts of internal contradictions. Perhaps the major parties could try and draw up some armistice on royal commissions if they are now deemed to be inconvenient. | Bit silly, that argument, isn’t it? Can lead you into all sorts of internal contradictions. Perhaps the major parties could try and draw up some armistice on royal commissions if they are now deemed to be inconvenient. |
| Now is Labor being populist? Of course it is. Is Labor trying to wrong foot the government on the eve of an election? Of course it is. Is Labor leaving itself open to questions about why it’s only just clicked into gear on the royal commission into the banking industry? Of course. These are all solid rebuttal points. | Now is Labor being populist? Of course it is. Is Labor trying to wrong foot the government on the eve of an election? Of course it is. Is Labor leaving itself open to questions about why it’s only just clicked into gear on the royal commission into the banking industry? Of course. These are all solid rebuttal points. |
| But they mean very little if the voters don’t buy your alternative. Let’s look at that for a minute. The government is getting the banks to pay $127m, a tax if you like, to pay for the cost of the regulator. That looks like stirring stuff, bastard banks, that’ll learn them, serves them right – until you start to think about it. | But they mean very little if the voters don’t buy your alternative. Let’s look at that for a minute. The government is getting the banks to pay $127m, a tax if you like, to pay for the cost of the regulator. That looks like stirring stuff, bastard banks, that’ll learn them, serves them right – until you start to think about it. |
| Shouldn’t there be a strict line between a regulator and the businesses being regulated? Isn’t there an intrinsic problem with blurring that line? I think there is. And I think the problem is pretty obvious when you think about it for more than five minutes. There is also the problem that restoring this funding isn’t actually an increase in funding if you consider that the government withdrew the same amount of funding from Asic. It’s just undoing a silly decision at someone else’s expense. | Shouldn’t there be a strict line between a regulator and the businesses being regulated? Isn’t there an intrinsic problem with blurring that line? I think there is. And I think the problem is pretty obvious when you think about it for more than five minutes. There is also the problem that restoring this funding isn’t actually an increase in funding if you consider that the government withdrew the same amount of funding from Asic. It’s just undoing a silly decision at someone else’s expense. |
| Then there’s the pass through problem. Passing off responsibility for funding the regulator to the banks will see the banks pass through the costs of that to their customers. In what universe won’t that happen? How can the government stop it happening? Finger waggling from the treasurer isn’t much of an enforcement mechanism, let’s be frank. But that’s the enforcement mechanism we were pointed to today: the treasurer’s fury. Not particularly terrifying. | Then there’s the pass through problem. Passing off responsibility for funding the regulator to the banks will see the banks pass through the costs of that to their customers. In what universe won’t that happen? How can the government stop it happening? Finger waggling from the treasurer isn’t much of an enforcement mechanism, let’s be frank. But that’s the enforcement mechanism we were pointed to today: the treasurer’s fury. Not particularly terrifying. |
| Then there are the cultural problems. All the evidence to date suggests there’s a systemic problem in the banks. How will that be addressed by blurring the line between them and the regulator? | Then there are the cultural problems. All the evidence to date suggests there’s a systemic problem in the banks. How will that be addressed by blurring the line between them and the regulator? |
| So I don’t think the government has fixed its political problem today or the practical problem – which is banks being insufficiently attentive and responsive to the needs of their customers. | So I don’t think the government has fixed its political problem today or the practical problem – which is banks being insufficiently attentive and responsive to the needs of their customers. |
| Sorry Scott, but no banana. | Sorry Scott, but no banana. |
| Updated | Updated |
| at 3.22am BST | at 3.22am BST |
| 2.40am BST | 2.40am BST |
| 02:40 | 02:40 |
| A conversation that has just happened between myself and Magic Mike. | A conversation that has just happened between myself and Magic Mike. |
| KM: “You’ve gone all moody.” | KM: “You’ve gone all moody.” |
| MB: “I was so over the Blue Room I cannot tell you.” | MB: “I was so over the Blue Room I cannot tell you.” |
| KM: “Entirely understandable.” | KM: “Entirely understandable.” |
| PS: Aren’t we lucky Bowers is completely over the Blue Room? Now we have this. | PS: Aren’t we lucky Bowers is completely over the Blue Room? Now we have this. |
| While I’m posting dark and stormy press conferences, Donald Trump has just won the Republican primary in New York. | While I’m posting dark and stormy press conferences, Donald Trump has just won the Republican primary in New York. |
| 2.33am BST | 2.33am BST |
| 02:33 | 02:33 |
| Treasury to review the Kidman sale | Treasury to review the Kidman sale |
| Readers with me earlier today know the prime minister got a question about the Kidman sale on Adelaide radio this morning. Morrison told reporters just before he’s made an interim order to prevent it from proceeding for a period of 90 days from the date it was gazetted. | Readers with me earlier today know the prime minister got a question about the Kidman sale on Adelaide radio this morning. Morrison told reporters just before he’s made an interim order to prevent it from proceeding for a period of 90 days from the date it was gazetted. |
| This is what he said about that decision this morning. | This is what he said about that decision this morning. |
| This provides time for me to consider the national interest implications of this complex and sensitive acquisition. I intend to do this on the Kidman matter as I did on the previous consideration of the transaction. | This provides time for me to consider the national interest implications of this complex and sensitive acquisition. I intend to do this on the Kidman matter as I did on the previous consideration of the transaction. |
| National interest considerations of proposed transactions should not and will not be rushed on an important matter such as this. | National interest considerations of proposed transactions should not and will not be rushed on an important matter such as this. |
| I have today instructed treasury to put in place an independent and external review of the sale and tender process in relation to Kidman because I want to be absolutely confident when I finally consider this matter that Australians have had every opportunity to be participating in that process and so we’ll continue to work through that process. | I have today instructed treasury to put in place an independent and external review of the sale and tender process in relation to Kidman because I want to be absolutely confident when I finally consider this matter that Australians have had every opportunity to be participating in that process and so we’ll continue to work through that process. |
| I will not be rushed into this. I will make a careful consideration on these matters. Many of you know this is what I do and it is a very big transaction and it is important we do the right thing by the national interest and that’s what I intend to do. | I will not be rushed into this. I will make a careful consideration on these matters. Many of you know this is what I do and it is a very big transaction and it is important we do the right thing by the national interest and that’s what I intend to do. |
| (I’m sure it is a very complex decision that shouldn’t be rushed. I know the Nationals will have very strong views about it. I can also note that 90 days will also put the decision on the other side of the election.) | (I’m sure it is a very complex decision that shouldn’t be rushed. I know the Nationals will have very strong views about it. I can also note that 90 days will also put the decision on the other side of the election.) |
| 2.24am BST | 2.24am BST |
| 02:24 | 02:24 |
| Bill Shorten says Labor is not going to let go of this royal commission issue. A royal commission can get to the heart of the matter in terms of the facts, it can get to the bottom of a culture of arrogance, it can get to the bottom of whether banks put people or profits first. | Bill Shorten says Labor is not going to let go of this royal commission issue. A royal commission can get to the heart of the matter in terms of the facts, it can get to the bottom of a culture of arrogance, it can get to the bottom of whether banks put people or profits first. |
| Now, I’ll go back and clean up on Kidman and Co before I pick apart the implications of today’s developments on the banks. | Now, I’ll go back and clean up on Kidman and Co before I pick apart the implications of today’s developments on the banks. |