Page 995 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 31 March 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
On the following Sunday there was a second meeting of the group, which was now calling itself the Victims of the State Bank of New South Wales, in Sydney. I believe that over 200 people attended that meeting. At that meeting senior officers gave an assurance that there would be a 30-day moratorium on any further legal action against victims of the State Bank of New South Wales. They did not call their clients that, but that indeed is what many of the clients of the State Bank of New South Wales are - victims. Obviously, after considerable thought, the bank gave a guarantee that there would be a 30-day moratorium. Despite that, I have evidence of their solicitor saying to another of their victims' solicitors that, in his case, they were going to proceed with legal action. In other words, the moratorium meant nothing. It is about time that we did something about these appalling, immoral and, in many cases, highly illegal acts. I commend the principle to members, and let us keep on in this particular vein.
MS FOLLETT (Chief Minister and Treasurer) (3.24): When I saw the title of Mr Stevenson's matter of public importance, I was not sure exactly what issues Mr Stevenson might be covering, so my comments on the MPI are necessarily fairly general, although I do agree with Mr Stevenson's general proposition that in many instances banks have not treated their customers, their clients, as we would wish to see them treated.
From what Mr Stevenson has had to say, I am not sure whether he expects the ACT Government to make any particular response to the issues that he has raised. That presents some difficulties because, as I am sure members know, the regulation of banks in Australia is the responsibility of the Reserve Bank of Australia under the Banking Act 1959, and the overall objective of that regulation is depositor protection. Given that the Reserve Bank does the regulation of banking, it seems to me that it is extremely difficult for the ACT to intervene; but, of course, we can always make our views known.
The Reserve Bank of Australia sets prudential standards - by that I mean the levels of capital and liquidity - and monitors compliance with those standards. They also set the official cash rate, and the interest rate for financing transactions between banks and the Reserve Bank. Although these rates affect the mortgage and business lending rates that are offered by banks, the RBA does not control the rates set by banks. They are in fact set by competitive pressure between the banks in the marketplace in accordance with the lending policy and business profile of each bank. Madam Speaker, State banks could remain outside the RBA's supervision; but in fact all States have elected to come under the RBA, even those for whom it is in fact voluntary to do so. Since its corporatisation, the State Bank of New South Wales has been directly under the Reserve Bank of Australia.
The credit provision by banks to consumers, especially disclosure and enforcement of loan conditions, is regulated under the credit Act of each State and Territory. It has long been the ambition of this Government, and it has given a great deal of work to my colleague Mr Connolly, to see uniform credit legislation throughout Australia. That has yet to be achieved, but when we achieve it we might get a better deal across Australia for the clients of banks. As things stand, Madam Speaker, consumer complaints can be lodged with the consumer affairs offices throughout the country, with the Banking Ombudsman or with the Reserve Bank itself. That is the situation with banking.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .