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 https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2018/nov/22/westpac-macquarie-commonwealth-bank-bosses-pay-royal-commission-live

The article has changed 13 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 8 Version 9
Asic head tells royal commission banking CEOs 'have forgotten they're dealing with people's money' – live Banking royal commission: Asic head told 'you are not naming enough names' – live
(35 minutes later)
Orr picks up on Shipton’s use of “timely” and asks him to consider whether Asic has been “effective” and asks him to consider it through the lens of what has been revealed at the royal commission so far.
Shipton:
Yes. So I think if I was looking at the word “effective” through that lens, I would anchor that - my response on deterrence, both specific and general. And I think, both through being informed by the - the work of the Royal Commission, but also in my observations returning to Australia, that the utilisation of tools with a particular and robust deterrent capability is something that needs to be utilised more frequently, more often, and, as I said earlier, more quickly in relation to larger financial institutions as well as others.”
Rowena Orr then moves on to what the government expects from Asic:
The government expects ASIC to use its full regulatory tool kit and to direct a substantial proportion of its resources to surveillance and enforcement, timely and effective enforcement strategies will deter misconduct and maintain confidence in the financial system.
ASIC should clearly articulate publicly when it will and will not take certain enforcement action, so as to manage the public’s expectations and to promote confidence in ASIC.
Now, Mr Shipton, can I ask you, firstly, in the time that you have been with ASIC, do you consider that ASIC has used its full regulatory tool kit and directed a substantial proportion of its resources to surveillance and enforcement in the way contemplated by the Statement of Expectations?
James Shipton; The starting point is yes, but I do believe that there could be builds and improvements.
... I believe that we need to be using our enforcement tools more effectively and more - on a - on a more timely basis moving forward, amongst other things, and I also believe that we should be utilising new types of regulatory tools like supervision - on site supervision, the close and continuous monitoring program that no doubt we will speak about later.
Essentially, after some back and forth, James Shipton doesn’t concede the point – that Asic provided Westpac with its draft recommendations before releasing the report, because it wasn’t a “back and forward” conversation.
Shipton:
Well, there was a discussion but what I am - the - what I am trying to make the point of is that often there is one-way discussions. Often, a matter can be put to us which we reject.
In fact, that happens to us in our - in our - in our existence on a very frequent matter.
There are representations and submissions made to us. I cannot - I cannot conclude with the - the documents before me that there was a back and forth discussion, a full connotion of a full back and forward discussion.
That’s why I wanted to be quite precise about the one - the apparent one-way nature of this interaction.”
James Shipton responds:
I don’t think it’s inconsistent.
...I - I would point out - I point out that these are briefing notes of a meeting that I didn’t attend.
...I point out that the conversation about that feedback was in October in 2017.
...And if there was - if there was a back and forth, I’m - I’m not aware of it, and I do not know what happened in relation to that correspondence or that interaction.
...I would also...I would also point out that often is the time that - it’s very often the case that financial institutions put us - put to us many things that we don’t necessarily...take on board.
Orr: But I asked you earlier if ASIC ever discusses the recommendations or findings in these reports with the entities prior to publication. This shows that in this instance, that sort of discussion did occur?
Shipton: Well, let me - let me - let me emphasise the point. Not that I was aware of. And I was also talking about at the time - during the time at my tenure here at ASIC. So that was the context in which I was responding to your question earlier.
Orr: Did you review this document before you gave evidence, Mr Shipton?
Shipton: Yes, I did look at this document before I gave evidence, but I reviewed - had to review thousands of pages of documents before I gave evidence.
So it’s difficult for me to know - have knowledge of each and every paragraph in each of those documents.
Rowena Orr makes reference to a particular document:
Orr:
Following a review that we see under the table had been commenced in April 2017, which involved five banks, including Westpac.
... Now we see the two pages as they appear in the report, Mr Shipton. And under ASICs review and report, the second dot point we see that:
**DCI met with Westpac on 18 October 2017 to discuss the practices we observed across all banks in the review.
Following the meeting, Westpac wrote to ASIC setting out its position on the findings and recommendations, and rejected some of the recommendations.
ASIC has not responded to this yet as we are finalising the report.
Shipton: Yes.
Orr: Do you see that?
Orr: So this was in June this year, engagement with one of the entities who was the subject of the review about the findings and recommendations resulting in Westpac writing to ASIC with its view of those findings and recommendations prior to publication?
Shipton: Yes.
Orr: Do you wish to comment on that? That appears to be inconsistent with the answer you gave earlier?
But then....
Orr follows up with a question about whether Asic discusses any of its recommendations with the banks and institutions before it makes its finding public.
Orr: Has ASIC at times discussed the recommendations that it proposes to make in these reports with the entities involved in the review?
Shipton: Not that I’m aware of.
Orr: Does ASIC invite at any time the entities involved in the reviews to comment on the findings in the review before finalisation of the report?
Shipton: Not that I’m aware of.
So the regulator lets the institutions it is meant to be policing, advance knowledge of its reports findings, and that the entity will be named, before it makes its finding public.
Which, and admittedly, I am just a pleb, seems outrageous to me.
Rowena Orr seems to be having a little bit of trouble understanding the reasons why, as well.
Orr: Why do you need your regulated entities awareness of these matters before you release them to the public?
Shipton: I - as I said, I - I would regard it as - as a matter of fairness.
Orr: Well, I just want to try and understand this more and why you’re concerned about fairness with your regulated population, when you have brought in information that yields very disturbing results about the conduct of your regulated population, why are you concerned at that point to be fair by giving them advance notice of your findings?
Shipton: I - I do not believe that giving advance notice of our intent to publish their names in any way distracts from the importance and the impact of this particular report. And as an administrative body, I - and as an - as the administrator of an administrative body I, and I know my colleagues keep in mind, in procedural fairness type concepts in the execution of our work. I do not believe that providing notification - advance notification that we are going to publish this in any way detracts from the impact or the importance of it.
Orr: Does this come back to the relationship that you’re trying to cultivate and maintain with the entity, Mr Shipton?
Shipton: Absolutely not. Absolutely not. I see it as the exercise of professional judgment. I - I see it as ensuring that we are tough, we are resolute, we are strong, but we also apply principles of fairness and - and follow due process. I - I do not see that there is an inconsistency in those two concepts.
Now we find out that Asic lets the institutions it is regulating advance notice of its findings. James Shipton says he does it, out of “fairness”.
Rowena Orr: Does ASIC discuss the findings in these sorts of reports with the entities involved before it releases the findings?
Shipton: I believe in this particular case, in the interests of fairness, we informed the financial institutions, yes.
Orr: I want to understand that. So what do you mean “in the interests of fairness”? You’ve exercised your compulsory information gathering powers to bring this information in. You have analysed it. You have prepared a report. Why is it in the interests of fairness for you to discuss the results of the report with the entity before you make those results public?
Shipton: I wouldn’t say “discuss”, I would say notify so they have an awareness so they have an awareness we’re going to publish their names.
Rowena Orr: I want to be very clear, Mr Shipton. I put to you you are not naming enough names.
James Shipton: Well, I think you made a good point, Ms Orr.
Orr is moving to reports Asic has issued, where it has detailed reviews where it has used its compulsory powers.
It details the numbers of institutions. But, in some reports, it doesn’t name names. Rowena Orr wants to know why.
Shipton: We refrained from speaking about individual cases in relation to that report because we were – this is a thematic industry-wide report. That was the intent and purpose.
And I believe that the intent and purpose of that report was duly served.
Orr: You said to me a short time ago, Mr Shipton, that you agreed that an entity that’s publicly identified in a particular way, such as being the worst performer, is likely to have a strong incentive to improve their practices?
Shipton: Yes.
Orr: So why not identify the entities, the two entities who you called out in this report as having referred to customer remediation as a distraction?
Shipton: Because, as I said before, the main purpose was to talk about systems and processes in financial institutions on a relative basis. That was the main purpose.
Orr: You don’t think that purpose would have been well served by naming names throughout the report?
Shipton: I – I don’t – I don’t – I don’t think that it would have necessarily added to the broader impact and purpose of that particular, of that important report. Again, the purpose was not to speak about case-by-case basis.
The purpose and intent of that report was to talk about themes and processes as opposed to case specific matters.
So there is a difference between the purpose. If it was a matter which was primarily aimed at case specific matters, then perhaps that would be a more appropriate forum, but this was a report about processes, procedures, systems and decision-making inside financial institutions that were found wanting.
But I am disturbed by that response. I agree with you. And I know that the team followed up directly with the institution on that.
Orr: What’s the point of having case studies then in a report of this nature?
Shipton: Case studies show – are examples of that – as I said, the purpose of this particular report was to identify systems failures, cultural failures, decision-making failures. That was the point. So having individual case studies in relation to that were examples of those failures.
I think what we’re – what we’re speaking about here is, you know, an exercise of judgment as to whether we make mention or name names of that particular incident is one that we, we exercise.
For what it’s worth, there are a number of examples also mentioned there that would trigger the same line of questioning that you mentioned, and if we were to name names on each of those individual – let’s call them triggers or catalysts – the report would probably just be far too long.
Orr: Well, it wouldn’t increase the length of the report at all to use the name of the entity in each of the case studies, would it?
Shipton: I think what we did – in fact, what I know we did was exercise judgment as to what we thought was meaningful disclosure. You are making a case, which I can certainly understand, that we should be disclosing each and every reference to incidents and observations.
That is a degree of professional judgment. I believe that the report was incredibly impactful and effective.
And, you know, usage of examples and case studies are important. You make a good point. I – I see the point that you’re trying to make.
But what I’m trying to also say is that we’re trying to exercise – let’s call it editorial judgment as to these types of reports moving forward.
So far, the line of questioning has been centred on whether or not Asic, as the regulator, risks being too buddy buddy with the groups and people it is meant to be regulating.So far, the line of questioning has been centred on whether or not Asic, as the regulator, risks being too buddy buddy with the groups and people it is meant to be regulating.
Now, Rowena Orr moves on to transparency.Now, Rowena Orr moves on to transparency.
Commissioner head Kenneth Hayne pops up during this line of questioning.Commissioner head Kenneth Hayne pops up during this line of questioning.
He also wants to know why there isn’t records of these meetings.He also wants to know why there isn’t records of these meetings.
Hayne: Would not having a note-taker at these meetings ensure that there was a method of preserving the corporate memory within the organisation of what has been said, when it has been said, and what was said?Hayne: Would not having a note-taker at these meetings ensure that there was a method of preserving the corporate memory within the organisation of what has been said, when it has been said, and what was said?
Shipton: Yes. I agree with that, Commissioner, and I think, in part, that was the intent behind having one of our senior executives for the first time attend these meetings in recent times. Shipton: Yes. I agree with that, commissioner, and I think, in part, that was the intent behind having one of our senior executives for the first time attend these meetings in recent times.
Hayne: But the preservation of corporate memory of contacts of this kind is itself, surely, a matter of very considerable importance to the proper governance of ASIC? Hayne: But the preservation of corporate memory of contacts of this kind is itself, surely, a matter of very considerable importance to the proper governance of Asic?
Shipton: I certainly agree with that. I most certainly agree with that. And that is - that is, in part, why I initiated having a senior executive leader accompany us on these types of engagements. Shipton: I certainly agree with that. I most certainly agree with that. And that is – that is, in part, why I initiated having a senior executive leader accompany us on these types of engagements.
Hayne: Yes. As I recall your answer to one of the questions, it was that he or she would take a note of matters of significance. What I’m talking about is a note-taker as more generally understood, a note-taker who took a note of all that was said at the meeting?Hayne: Yes. As I recall your answer to one of the questions, it was that he or she would take a note of matters of significance. What I’m talking about is a note-taker as more generally understood, a note-taker who took a note of all that was said at the meeting?
Shipton: Yes, it’s a suggestion that I think is very worthy and I am minded now to ensure that this happens from here on.Shipton: Yes, it’s a suggestion that I think is very worthy and I am minded now to ensure that this happens from here on.
Shipton says he does most of the talking during these meetings:Shipton says he does most of the talking during these meetings:
These board meetings - these liaisons with the board, to be frank, the ones that I’ve attended to, I’ve done most of the talking, to be frank. These board meetings – these liaisons with the board, to be frank, the ones that I’ve attended to, I’ve done most of the talking, to be frank.
To be frank, I’ve been passing on the messages, my expectations, and it has been a bit of a one-way dialogue. So no matters of significance, at least coming from a financial institution has been raised because I have been very forthright in using these platforms and forums to tell these people what I think. “ To be frank, I’ve been passing on the messages, my expectations, and it has been a bit of a one-way dialogue. So no matters of significance, at least coming from a financial institution, have been raised because I have been very forthright in using these platforms and forums to tell these people what I think.
James Shipton admits that he does not take formal minutes or record of these meetings with the banks – because the conversation should be “free flowing”.James Shipton admits that he does not take formal minutes or record of these meetings with the banks – because the conversation should be “free flowing”.
“Formal minutes are not taken but my practice in relation to meetings, whether they be a board – meeting with a board or meeting with another senior leader, if there is a matter of significance, particularly a matter relating to an enforcement matter, for me to take a note and to brief my colleagues involved directly on that as soon as possible.”“Formal minutes are not taken but my practice in relation to meetings, whether they be a board – meeting with a board or meeting with another senior leader, if there is a matter of significance, particularly a matter relating to an enforcement matter, for me to take a note and to brief my colleagues involved directly on that as soon as possible.”
Orr: “Wouldn’t it be better, Mr Shipton, for the sake of transparency, for there to be a formal record of the meetings that you and the commissioners have with the leaders of these organisations?”Orr: “Wouldn’t it be better, Mr Shipton, for the sake of transparency, for there to be a formal record of the meetings that you and the commissioners have with the leaders of these organisations?”
Shipton:Shipton:
It may very well be. These meetings were designed originally and have been – have been pursuing along these lines where they are meant to be a free-flowing dialogue between the board members and the commissioners of Asic. I believe that the reason why there is no formal minutes, at least from our side, is to enable that dialogue to be free-flowing.It may very well be. These meetings were designed originally and have been – have been pursuing along these lines where they are meant to be a free-flowing dialogue between the board members and the commissioners of Asic. I believe that the reason why there is no formal minutes, at least from our side, is to enable that dialogue to be free-flowing.
But I will make one amendment to that, because I, after attending one or two of these board meetings, I thought it entirely appropriate to have somebody there who was not a commissioner, who is in – in the cases that we’ve had in recent times – a senior executive leader, who observes the meeting and is not a commissioner but observes the meeting, in many respects to ensure that we have a record and a witness to those discussions.But I will make one amendment to that, because I, after attending one or two of these board meetings, I thought it entirely appropriate to have somebody there who was not a commissioner, who is in – in the cases that we’ve had in recent times – a senior executive leader, who observes the meeting and is not a commissioner but observes the meeting, in many respects to ensure that we have a record and a witness to those discussions.
And this is something that I’ve instituted in recent times.And this is something that I’ve instituted in recent times.
And it is also now correlated to the senior executive leaders who are involved in our close and continuous monitoring program.And it is also now correlated to the senior executive leaders who are involved in our close and continuous monitoring program.
Back to Rowena Orr’s questioning – we are getting to the nub of the issue – is James Shipton, and therefore Asic and the other commissioners, too close to the banking heads because of these meetings?Back to Rowena Orr’s questioning – we are getting to the nub of the issue – is James Shipton, and therefore Asic and the other commissioners, too close to the banking heads because of these meetings?
Orr: “Do you think, Mr Shipton, that there are any risks associated with frequent personal contact between regulators and the leaders of the entities that they regulate?”Orr: “Do you think, Mr Shipton, that there are any risks associated with frequent personal contact between regulators and the leaders of the entities that they regulate?”
Shipton: “I do, and that is why I personally exercise the highest degree I can possibly apply of professional judgment when I have these interactions, when I have these meetings.”Shipton: “I do, and that is why I personally exercise the highest degree I can possibly apply of professional judgment when I have these interactions, when I have these meetings.”
Orr: “What are the risks that you’re aware of, Mr Shipton?”Orr: “What are the risks that you’re aware of, Mr Shipton?”
Shipton: “For – I think I’ve alluded to it with my clarifications earlier, that somehow this would be seen by the other side as too familial, too friendly, too social, and ensuring that these remain, as they are in my mind, professional and very much anchored in the purpose in which I do them, which is, as I said, information – information accumulation, regulatory messaging, and baseline assessment as to the – to be brutally honest and blunt, their performance as regards compliance with our laws and regulations.”Shipton: “For – I think I’ve alluded to it with my clarifications earlier, that somehow this would be seen by the other side as too familial, too friendly, too social, and ensuring that these remain, as they are in my mind, professional and very much anchored in the purpose in which I do them, which is, as I said, information – information accumulation, regulatory messaging, and baseline assessment as to the – to be brutally honest and blunt, their performance as regards compliance with our laws and regulations.”
Orr: “It’s the commissioners who have the ultimate responsibility for making decisions about whether to take enforcement action against these entities, isn’t it?”Orr: “It’s the commissioners who have the ultimate responsibility for making decisions about whether to take enforcement action against these entities, isn’t it?”
Shipton: “Ultimately that – the commission is the – the ultimate decision-making body in matters like that, yes.”Shipton: “Ultimately that – the commission is the – the ultimate decision-making body in matters like that, yes.”
Orr: “But through these frequent meetings with the leaders of these entities, you and the other commissioners necessarily develop a relationship with the boards and the senior executives of the organisations?”Orr: “But through these frequent meetings with the leaders of these entities, you and the other commissioners necessarily develop a relationship with the boards and the senior executives of the organisations?”
Shipton: “A professional relationship and a professional engagement, yes.”Shipton: “A professional relationship and a professional engagement, yes.”
Orr: “Well, it’s part of human nature, isn’t it, Mr Shipton, that when we have a relationship with someone, it’s usually harder for us to do something that might harm that person’s interests?”Orr: “Well, it’s part of human nature, isn’t it, Mr Shipton, that when we have a relationship with someone, it’s usually harder for us to do something that might harm that person’s interests?”
Shipton: “That’s why I am emphasising the importance of having a professional relationship and, as I emphasised earlier, exercising the highest degree of professional judgment in relation to these interactions.”Shipton: “That’s why I am emphasising the importance of having a professional relationship and, as I emphasised earlier, exercising the highest degree of professional judgment in relation to these interactions.”
Orr: “And what about the professional judgment of your fellow commissioners; what do you do to oversee how they exercise their professional judgment?”Orr: “And what about the professional judgment of your fellow commissioners; what do you do to oversee how they exercise their professional judgment?”
Shipton: “I have mentioned to my colleagues the importance of treating carefully and with a healthy dose of scepticism some of our interactions with the regulated population. In my interactions and feedback from my colleagues, it’s very clear that they share that, that mindset, as well.”Shipton: “I have mentioned to my colleagues the importance of treating carefully and with a healthy dose of scepticism some of our interactions with the regulated population. In my interactions and feedback from my colleagues, it’s very clear that they share that, that mindset, as well.”
Just a reminder.Just a reminder.
In this year’s budget, the Turnbull government – with Scott Morrison as treasurer – decided to cut Asic’s permanent funding from $346m to $320m by 2020-21.In this year’s budget, the Turnbull government – with Scott Morrison as treasurer – decided to cut Asic’s permanent funding from $346m to $320m by 2020-21.
It also budgeted for Asic’s staff numbers to be slashed by 30 in 12 months, from 1,749 to 1,719.It also budgeted for Asic’s staff numbers to be slashed by 30 in 12 months, from 1,749 to 1,719.
That was in May, after the royal commission had already exposed some appalling behaviour by the banks.That was in May, after the royal commission had already exposed some appalling behaviour by the banks.
The Coalition and Labor argue constantly about job and funding cuts at Asic, with both parties trying to blame the other for the regulator’s failings.The Coalition and Labor argue constantly about job and funding cuts at Asic, with both parties trying to blame the other for the regulator’s failings.
One thing is for certain – Asic has had to deal with a very uncertain funding environment.One thing is for certain – Asic has had to deal with a very uncertain funding environment.
Just two years ago, Morrison gave Asic an extra $121 million to try to boost its resources and ward off the royal commission. But the royal commission happened anyway, so a few months later the government cut Asic’s long-term funding. But this month, the government announced it was boosting Asic’s funding again by $70m over two years to help it deal with the royal commission.Just two years ago, Morrison gave Asic an extra $121 million to try to boost its resources and ward off the royal commission. But the royal commission happened anyway, so a few months later the government cut Asic’s long-term funding. But this month, the government announced it was boosting Asic’s funding again by $70m over two years to help it deal with the royal commission.
Shipton argued in his submission to the royal commission how difficult it was dealing with such up-an-down funding.Shipton argued in his submission to the royal commission how difficult it was dealing with such up-an-down funding.
He said Asic was woefully underfunded compared with its international peers.He said Asic was woefully underfunded compared with its international peers.
In 2016–17, Asic’s actual total budgeted resources were $402.393 million.In 2016–17, Asic’s actual total budgeted resources were $402.393 million.
In 2017–18, its actual total budgeted resources were $431.969 million.In 2017–18, its actual total budgeted resources were $431.969 million.
In 2018–19, its total budgeted resources are $380.434 million.In 2018–19, its total budgeted resources are $380.434 million.
The 2020–21 forward estimate-based total budgeted resources figure is substantially lower at $349.509 million.The 2020–21 forward estimate-based total budgeted resources figure is substantially lower at $349.509 million.
Shipton said Asic’s staff numbers and budget have increased only modestly since 1991 (FTEs 1,492 then and 1,698 now) but there have been frequent increases in its mandate – that is, the government wants it to do more and more.Shipton said Asic’s staff numbers and budget have increased only modestly since 1991 (FTEs 1,492 then and 1,698 now) but there have been frequent increases in its mandate – that is, the government wants it to do more and more.
He asked: “A central question is: what level of funding and resources best enables a re-balancing of priorities, alteration of practices and implementation of decisions weighted more heavily towards litigation-based enforcement or a ‘deterrence strategy’, taking into account the real resource impacts and real resourcing risks of that those approaches?”He asked: “A central question is: what level of funding and resources best enables a re-balancing of priorities, alteration of practices and implementation of decisions weighted more heavily towards litigation-based enforcement or a ‘deterrence strategy’, taking into account the real resource impacts and real resourcing risks of that those approaches?”
Shipton doesn’t say he has a “good” relationship with the banking CEOs, instead describing it as:
I would say we have an open working relationship and a professional working relationship.
Orr is now trying to get to the bottom of why he is holding these meetings, given that the law states the banks are required to report breaches.
Because 912D imposes a legal obligation on these financial services entities to report information about significant breaches or potential significant breaches of their legal obligations to Asic in a timely way?
Which is the lead into Orr asking, given the banks are required by law to report misconduct, why are these meetings happening. Shipton replies:
Meetings are not held for that purpose. These meetings are not breach reporting meetings. They are not a substitute for breach reporting. I’m not aware that they ever have been, nor should they ever be so into the future.
Rowena Orr is asking James Shipton about some of Commonwealth CEO Matt Comyn’s testimony from earlier in the week, where he described his contact with Asic as getting together.
Shipton doesn’t like that descriptor.
“I would not clarify them as get-togethers,” he says.
Asked why, he replies: “Well, just in my own interpretation – and maybe I’m being pedantic, so apologies. I took get-together – I personally interpret it and maybe it’s my own interpretation – as a more familiar or more social gathering. And I just wanted to clarify, at least in my own mind, that I have very structured – I aim to have very structured – formal meetings with people like Mr Comyn.”
As for the “less structured way” Comyn described other chats as, Shipton says:
Well, less structured way – my take of the less structured communication with Mr Comyn is that we often speak by phone.
Often pre-market, as I said, because Mr Comyn is giving us, as a markets regulator, the heads-up of a – a market announcement which is coming the next day.
That’s important for us as a market regulator but it’s also very important for us to be aware of business developments inside a financial institution as important as the Commonwealth Bank.
Shipton says he has similar interactions with the other CEOs of the major banks.
Shipton says he also gets involved, by contacting leaders’ directly, if they are taking too long to respond to Asic over any concerns it may have. He says he doesn’t get involved with the matter itself, but strives to get them moving faster:
They have been receptive to my approach, and it has had a operational impact to speed up the response.
And it speaks to a broader point that I firmly believe that CEOs, chairs and other leaders of these financial institutions should be more engaged and more aware of some of these issues that are taking place between their organisations and our agency.
James Shipton says part of his job is to stay in touch with banking CEOs. Here is some of what he has said to them:
I’ve called CEOs to express dissatisfaction on a number of occasions as regards the handling of particular matters that are being handled by our – our enforcement teams.
I have called CEOs and spoken at meetings about my dissatisfaction about what I call legal trench warfare.
I have also expressed my dissatisfaction to these leaders about the lack of professionalism in the Australian financial sector, and I have also spoken to these leaders, to a man and a woman, about the fact that I believe that they have forgotten that they are dealing with other people’s money.
James Shipton is asked about Asic’s funding.
Orr: “How do you think that Asic’s resourcing compares with that of conduct regulators in other jurisdictions?”
Shipton: “In my own experience, I believe that Asic is under-resourced compared to some of our peers globally.”
Orr: “And how does the level of resourcing that you have affect the way that you perform your functions and exercise your powers?”
Shipton: “Well, it weighs very heavily on the regulatory choices that we have to make, because it means that we are restricted in our ability to take on matters or to pursue matters in a way that, perhaps, we would like to.”
Orr: “And could you explain further how that plays out, Mr Shipton? Does it mean that you are not able to investigate matters that you would like to investigate?”
Shipton: “It means – it would be across the – the full spectrum of our regulatory activity. We are constrained in probably every aspect of our regulatory work. It’s certainly in investigations, certainly in other matters relating to enforcement, but I would also make the case that we are constrained in our surveillance, our supervision, our important work on financial capability, and – and other work that we undertake.
Senior counsel assisting Rowena Orr QC has taken over questioning here.
She has begun by establishing what exactly Asic sees its role as, and what tools it believes it has at its disposal.
We’re back, with James Shipton, the chair of Asic, in the hot seat.
Towards the end of Nicholas Moore’s evidence, Hodge asked him what would happen to Macquarie’s profits if it was prohibited from paying commissions to mortgage brokers and brokers were only able to get paid by charging customers fees for service.
Moore said he’s wasn’t sure. But, speculating, “it doesn’t sound as attractive as the current structure.”
Hayne then interjected: “Attractive to whom?”
Moore said: “I think the expression used is the ‘stick of shock’ of actually seeing the upfront fee.
“One of the other issues discussed is whether the fee should be upfront or over the life. And our position is, we would like it … to reflect the value of [the service] being delivered, which is over the life of the loan.
“So there is an issue, obviously, for – if you have an offer without a broking fee versus with a broking fee – that makes a difference in the mind of the consumer.
“Economically, of course, the fee is being borne.”
So, the customer will bear the cost of the fee regardless, but Macquarie doesn’t particularly want the customer to see that fee written on a piece of paper at the point of sale, because they may lose business.
Unremarkable, I guess. That’s what all businesses do. But it’s nice to see the admission sometimes.
We are done with Nicholas Moore now. We’ll recap the last part of that for you in this next break (the commission is now adjourned until 2pm) but it was about mortgage brokers, the products they are incentivised to sell, and what would happen if they no longer received those incentives.
James Shipton from Asic is up next.
We will see you at 2pm.
It has to be said that out of all the executives I have seen sit in the grilling seat, Nicholas Moore looks the most relaxed. Some could even say well-rested.
But he did make more than $18m in the past financial year and he is finishing up next week, so I guess there is not a huge amount to lose sleep over.