Showing posts with label banks and bankers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label banks and bankers. Show all posts

Monday 18 April 2016

Global corruption of democracy in the 21st Century


The Guardian UK, 11 April 2016:

Because at root, the Panama Papers are not about tax. They’re not even about money. What the Panama Papers really depict is the corruption of our democracy.

Following on from LuxLeaks, the Panama Papers confirm that the super-rich have effectively exited the economic system the rest of us have to live in. Thirty years of runaway incomes for those at the top, and the full armoury of expensive financial sophistication, mean they no longer play by the same rules the rest of us have to follow. Tax havens are simply one reflection of that reality. Discussion of offshore centres can get bogged down in technicalities, but the best definition I’ve found comes from expert Nicholas Shaxson who sums them up as: “You take your money elsewhere, to another country, in order to escape the rules and laws of the society in which you operate.” In so doing, you rob your own society of cash for hospitals, schools, roads…

“Those who exited our societies are now also exercising their voice to set the rules by which the rest of us live”

But those who exited our societies are now also exercising their voice to set the rules by which the rest of us live. The 1% are buying political influence as never before. Think of the billionaire Koch brothers, whose fortunes will shape this year’s US presidential elections. In Britain, remember the hedge fund and private equity barons, who in 2010 contributed half of all the Conservative party’s election funds – and so effectively bought the Tories their first taste of government in 18 years.

To flesh out the corrosion of democracy that is happening, you need to go to a Berlin-born economist called Albert Hirschman, a giant in modern economic thinking. Hirschman died in 2012 at the age of 97, but it’s his concepts that really set in context what’s so disturbing about the Panama Papers.

Hirschman argued that citizens could protest against a system in one of two ways: voice or exit. Fed up with your local school? Then you can exercise your voice and take it up with the headteacher. Alternatively, you can exit and take your child to a private school.

In Britain and in America, the super-rich have broken Hirschman’s law – they are at one and the same time exercising economic exit and political voice. They can have their tax-free cake and eat it……

Monday 11 April 2016

Dear Mr. Morrison........


North Coast Voices was sent a copy of the following letter sent to Australian Treasurer Scott Morrison, with permission to publish:

EMAIL TO TREASURER MORRISON SENT ON GOVERNMENT  EMAIL FORM 8th April 2016

Dear Mr Morrison

I was interested to hear your interview on Radio National "Breakfast" this morning. 

It was quite astonishing that you rejected the notion of a Royal Commission into the banks given all the shonky behaviour we have seen from all of the "Big 4" in recent years. It's quite obvious that these all-powerful institutions have no respect for the regulators (your cop on the block or whatever you called it) or for the Australian community.  Whenever a new outrage is revealed, we hear sounds of contrition from the offending bank and then some time later there's another outrage revealed.

In your comments criticising the Leader of the Opposition for his suggestion that a Royal Commission be considered, you ignored the fact that there are backbenchers in your Government calling quite strongly for a Royal Commission.  Don't you hear your backbenchers, Mr Morrison?

Don't you understand that there is considerable community concern about the continuing outrageous behaviour of the major banks?

We need a royal commission into the big 4 banks.  Maybe that will result in some improvement in their behaviour.

Yours sincerely

Leonie Blain

8th April 2016

Thursday 4 February 2016

FILE UNDER NOTHING CHANGES: Liberal & Nationals MPs poised to help out their banker mates once more


Assistant Treasurer and Liberal MP for Higgins Kelly O'Dwyer was quick to deny the content of the media release (below) concerning the Superannuation Legislation Amendment (Transparency Measures) Bill 2015: Product dashboards.

However Allens Linklater appears to support Industry Super Australia’s take on the new rules:

The Bill sets up (and proposes changes to) the application of the product dashboard rules as follows:

* Choice product dashboards now only need to be provided for a fund's 10 largest choice investment options by funds under management (with some exclusions) rather than all choice products. For the purposes of working out a fund's largest choice investment options, a lifecycle option should be treated as one option.

* Although a choice lifecycle option should be treated as one option for the purposes of identifying its size, a separate product dashboard is required for each lifecycle stage in the option (and this applies to both MySuper and choice lifecycle options).

* Eligible rollover funds and pooled superannuation funds are specifically excluded from the product dashboard rules.

Industry Super Australia, media release, 28 January 2016:

GOVERNMENT PROPOSALS WILL PREVENT CONSUMER “COMPARE THE PAIR”

A carve out of an estimated 72% of the bank-owned and retail super sector from requirements to disclose their investment returns, fees and costs on proposed “product dashboards” for super funds could make it nearly impossible for Australians to readily make informed choices about their superannuation, industry super funds have warned.

The new federal Government proposals carve out bank-owned super funds held through platforms and some legacy products from having to disclose details on ‘dashboards’.

Product “dashboards” are designed to provide consumers with a standardised and simple presentation of fees, all underlying costs, risk and net returns.

The proposed changes mean many bank-owned super products will not have to disclose many of their underlying investment costs.

According to independent analysis by Rainmaker, as at December 2014, 72 per cent of the $572 billion of retail superannuation assets were held via platforms.

“Australians need to be able to compare the net performance of super funds to be able to make informed choices”, said David Whiteley, Chief Executive of Industry Super Australia.

“It is unsurprising that the banks oppose having to disclose the performance of their super funds in an easily comparable and transparent manner. According to SuperRatings, industry super funds have outperformed bank owned super funds over the short, medium and long term to 31 December 2015.

The Government is also seeking to remove existing limited exemptions to choice of fund legislation introduced by the Howard government at the request of employers. It is estimated the exemptions currently cover less than seven out of a hundred Australian employees.

In submissions to Treasury, ISA has recommended that the Government not proceed with the changes until:

* The product dashboard regime includes all superannuation products and investment options with no carve outs for banks and retail funds; and

* A cost benefit analysis is undertaken of the plan to remove Howard Government choice of fund rules.

“Industry super funds support a strong default fund safety net, the ability of members to choose their own fund, and access to information to make informed decisions.

“We are concerned that these proposals have not been through a rigorous evaluation. In their current form the proposals are internally inconsistent, seeking to extend choice of fund without providing consumers with the necessary information to make informed decisions.”

“Despite very few Australians actively choosing a fund other than the default one their employer has in place, everyone needs to be able to compare the performance of funds to be able to make an informed decision. It is not good enough that the banks want to hide their chronic under-performance from consumers”, said David Whiteley.

Background

Brisbane Times, 28 January 2016:

ISA and the Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees, the lobby group for all non-profit funds including public sector and corporate funds as well as industry funds, argued that requiring funds to produce dashboards only for their 10 largest investment options meant too many retail products would be exempt. 
In their submission to Treasury, AIST pointed to the findings of a soon-to-be-released report it commissioned by SuperRatings that showed retail MySuper fees and costs were on average 28 per cent higher than those passed on to the public by non-profit providers. 
The upcoming report will also show that in the choice market, the like-for-like fees and costs charged by retail funds were 85 per cent to 300 per cent higher than the comparable investment options from non-profit funds. 
"Members of many bank-owned super funds are being kept in the dark about high fees that will materially affect their retirement," AIST chief executive Tom Garcia said. 
All MySuper products, the no-frills funds that employers can nominate for default flows, are already required to produce a product dashboard. The new rules will extend this requirement to choice products. 
Non-profit super providers dominate the $547 billion MySuper sector with a market share of 83 per cent, while retail providers dominate the $681 billion choice sector with a market share of 64 per cent, according to the regulator's latest statistics. 

Friday 6 March 2015

Time to keep track of what the boss and the banks want to do with your super



Medianet Release 2 March 2015:

BANKS OFFER INCENTIVES TO EMPLOYERS TO GAIN ACCESS TO EMPLOYEE SUPER

New research indicates that banks appear to be offering business bundling deals to employers, which could result in employees being switched into superannuation funds irrespective of the impact on their net returns and long term retirement savings.

A survey of 550 small and medium businesses conducted by UMR has produced some deeply concerning findings:

* 26% of employers surveyed said that a major bank had approached them about transferring their employees’ default superannuation to the bank’s own retail super fund in the last year.

* Just under half those approached say their bank offered them benefits to change funds.

* The most common offers made by the banks involved a direct benefit to the business rather than employees, such as discounts on business banking and insurance products. Some employers report being offered tickets to sporting events.

* 33% of employers offered benefits say they were persuaded to switch to a super fund promoted by their bank, and many more (57%) report that they are still considering switching.

* Two banks in particular appear to be the most active in approaching employers about switching default super fund arrangements and recommending their own fund.

“UMR’s employer survey gives rise to serious questions about the banks’ behaviour. It appears they are approaching employers and offering deals to bundle business banking services with employee default superannuation,” said David Whiteley, Chief Executive of Industry Super Australia.

"This could result in employees’ super contributions being paid into bank-owned super funds, which have on average historically produced lower net returns to their members.”

Were this the case, employees could retire with lower savings or feel compelled to commit more of their wages to super, or work longer, perhaps past 70, before they achieve a sufficient level of retirement income.

“In the best interests’ of employees, the law should be changed to prohibit a bank-owned super fund from providing default super services where it is also the provider of business banking services to the employer,“ said Mr. Whiteley.

“The research also reinforces the need for Australia’s super system to provide employers with a strong safety net of high performing funds to choose from, which have been assessed for quality by the Fair Work Commission. For the vast majority of Australians who leave it to their employer choose a fund for them, this process promotes consumer confidence in the system which safeguards Australia's retirement savings.

“However, the banks are lobbying the government to scrap the safety net. This would suit their vertically integrated business model and reduce competition by creating barriers to entry for super funds not owned by the banks,” he said. 

“It would also remove consumer protection for around eight million Australians who don’t choose their own super fund. Last year the banks unsuccessfully tried to remove consumer protections for Australians needing financial advice, now they are attempting to do the same with superannuation.

“Encouragingly, the research also found that most employers want to do the right thing by their employees,” said Mr. Whiteley.

“Fees and returns rank first and second as their most important considerations when selecting a default superannuation fund for their workers.”

Get the full report here.

Friday 19 December 2014

An Open Letter To The Australian People: "banks and foreign mining companies are deliberately and cruelly forcing our own Australian farmers off the land"


Charlie Phillott (The Australian) December 2014 
and
 Florence Owens Thompson (Dorthea Lange) March 1936 
(originally photographed in b&w; and retouched)


Dear Men and Women of Australia,

There are two photographs on this page, and while they might look like father and daughter, they are separated by two nations, one ocean and some seventy years.

Yet incredibly, they are both part of the same tragedy, the kind that leaves deep and irreparable scars on a nation and its people for a lifetime.

The young woman who was born in 1907. The elderly man who was born twenty seven years later in 1934.

The photograph of the woman was taken in the Great Depression of 1936 when the man was a two year old boy.

Her name was Florence Owens Thompson and she was a 32 year old mother of seven who was photographed sitting homeless in a tent. The image was published across the newspapers of America and it managed to enrage the nation, because people could not believe that Americans could be treated in such a way.

It forced President Roosevelt to act, to step up and become a leader for his times: he launched soup kitchens, work gangs, programs for the homeless, dams and roads and railways were built - and he gave his people hope.

John Steinbeck later wrote a book called The Grapes of Wrath which became an American literary Icon. It was about a drought that made the farmers penniless - and how the banks had forced them off their land so they could sell it on to the big powerful corporations. What happened to the farmers of Oklahoma ultimately carved a deep and shameful scar across the American identity that was felt throughout the Twentieth Century.

The second photograph on this page is of Charlie Phillott, now 80, an elderly farmer from the ruggedly beautiful Carisbrooke Station at Winton. He has owned his station since 1960, nurtured it and loved it like a part of his own flesh. He is a grand old gentleman, one of the much loved and honoured fathers of his community.

Not so long ago, the ANZ bank came and drove him off his beloved station because the drought had devalued his land and they told him he was considered an unviable risk. Yet Charlie Phillott has never once missed a single mortgage payment.

Today this dignified Grand Old Man of the West is living like some hunted down refugee in Winton, shocked and humiliated and penniless. And most of all, Charlie Phillott is ashamed, because as a member of the Great Generation - those fine and decent and ethical men and women who built this country - he believes that what happened to him was somehow his own fault. And the ANZ Bank certainly wanted to make sure they made him feel like that.

Last Friday my wife Heather and I flew up with Alan Jones to attend the Farmers Last Stand drought and debt meeting in Winton. And after what I saw being done to our own people, I have never been more ashamed to be Australian in my life.

What is happening out there is little more than corporate terrorism: our own Australian people are being bullied, threatened and abused by both banks and mining companies until they are forced off their own land.

So we must ask: is this simply to move the people off their land and free up it up for mining by foreign mining companies or make suddenly newly empty farms available for purchase by Chinese buyers? As outrageous as it might seem, all the evidence flooding in seems to suggest that this is exactly what is going on.

What is the role of Government in all of this? Why have both the State and Federal Government stood back and allowed such a dreadful travesty to happen to our own people? Where was Campbell Newman on this issue? Where was Prime Minister Abbott? The answer is nowhere to be seen.

For the last few months, the Prime Minister has warned us against the threats of terrorism to our nation. We have been alerted to ISIS and its clear and present danger to the Australian people.

Abbott has despatched Australian military forces into the Middle East in an effort to destroy this threat to our own safety and security. This mobilization of our military forces has come at a massive and unbudgeted expense to the average Australian taxpayer which the Prime Minister estimates to be around half a billion dollars each year.

We are told that terrorism is dangerous not only because of the threat to human life but also because it displaces populations and creates the massive human cost of refugees.

Yet not one single newspaper or politician in this land has exposed the fact that the worst form of terrorism that is happening right now is going on inside the very heartland of our own nation as banks and foreign mining companies are deliberately and cruelly forcing our own Australian farmers off the land.

What we saw in the main hall of the Winton Shire Council on Friday simply defied all description: a room filled with hundreds of broken and battered refuges from our own country. It was a scene more tragic and traumatic than a dozen desperate funerals all laced onto the one stage.

Right now, all over the inland of both Queensland and NSW, there is nothing but social and financial carnage on a scale that has never before been witnessed in this nation.

It was 41 degrees when we touched down at the Winton airport, and when you fly in low over this landscape it is simply Apocalyptic: there has not been a drop of rain in Winton for two years and there is not a sheep, a cow, a kangaroo, an emu or a bird in sight. Even the trees in the very belly of the creeks are dying.

There is little doubt that this is a natural disaster of incredible magnitude - and yet nobody - neither state nor the federal government - is willing to declare it as such.

The suicide rate has now reached such epic proportions right across the inland: not just the farmer who takes the walk "up the paddock" and does away with himself but also their children and their wives. Once again, it has barely been covered by the media, a dreadful masquerade that has assisted by the reticence and shame of honourable farming families caught in these tragic situations.

My wife is one of the toughest women I know. Her family went into North West of Queensland as pioneers one hundred years ago: this is her blood country and these are her people . Yet when she stood up to speak to this crowd on Friday she suddenly broke down: she told me later that when she looked into the eyes of her own people, what she saw was enough to break her heart.

And yet not one of us knew it was this bad, this much of a national tragedy. The truth is that these days, the Australian media basically doesn't give a damn. They have been muzzled and shut down by governments and foreign mining companies to the extent that they are no longer willing to write the real story. So the responsibility is now left to people like us, to social media - and you, the Australian people.

And so the banks have been free to play their games and completely terrorise these people at their leisure. The drought has devalued the land and the banks have seen their opportunity to strike. It was exactly the excuse that they needed to clean up and make a fortune, because once the rains come - as they always do - this land will be worth four to ten times the price.
In fact, when farmers have asked for the payout figures, the banks have been either deeply reluctant or not capable of providing the mortgage trail because they have on-sold the mortgage - just like sub-prime agriculture.

This problem isn't simply happening in Winton, but rather right across the entire inland across Queensland and NSW. The banks have been bringing in the police to evict Australian famers and their families from their farms, many of them multigenerational. One farmer matter of factly told us it took "oh, about 7 police" to evict him from his first farm and "maybe about twelve" to evict him from his second farm which had been in his family for many generations. You think they are kidding you. Then you see the expression in their eyes.

And there was something far worse in the room on Friday: the fear of speaking out against the banks: when we asked people to tell us who had done this to them, they would immediately start to shake and cry and look away: They have been silenced to protect the good corporate image of their tormentors called the banks. What in God's name have the bastard banks been allowed to do to our people?

This is a travesty against the rights and the human dignity of every Australian.

So it's only fair that we start to name a few of major banks involved: The ANZ is a major culprit (they made $7 billion profit last year). Then there is Rabo - which is an international agricultural bank - the NAB, Bank West and Westpac (who paid CEO Gail Kelly a yearly salary of some $12 million). They are all equally guilty. For any that we have missed, rest assured they will be publicly exposed as well.

But here's the thing: when these people are forced off their farms, they have nowhere to go. There are no refugee services waiting, such is the case for those who attempt to enter the sovereign borders of this nation. The farmers simply drive to the nearest town - that's if the banks haven't stripped their cars off them as well - and they try and find somewhere to sleep. Some are sleeping on the backs of trucks in swags. There is basically no home or accommodation made available to take them. They camp out, shocked and broken and penniless - and they are living on weet bix and noodles. If there is someone that can lend a family enough money to buy food, they will: otherwise they are left completely alone.

And consider this: not one of them has asked for help. Not one. They just do the best they can, ashamed and broken and brainwashed by the banks to believe that everything that has happened is completely their own fault.

There is not one single word of this from a politicians lips, with the exception of the incredibly courageous father and son team of Bob and Robbie Katter, who organised the Farmers Last Stand meeting. The Katter family have been in the North since the 1890's, and nobody who sat in that hall last Friday could question their love and commitment to their own people.
There is barely a mention of any of this as well in the newspapers, with the exception of as brief splash of publicity that followed our visit.

The Minister for Agriculture Barnaby Joyce attended the meeting in a bitter blue-funk kind of mood that saw him mostly hunched over and staring at the floor. He had given $100 million of financial assistance in a lousy deal where the Government will borrow at 2.75% and loan it back at 3.21%.

The last thing these people need is another loan: they need a Redevelopment Bank to refinance their own loans: issuing a loan to pay off a loan is nothing more than financial suicide.

The reality is that Joyce cannot get support from what he calls "the shits in Cabinet" to create a desperately needed Redevelopment Bank so that these farmers can get cheap loans to tide them through to the end of the drought.

Our sources suggest that those "shits in Cabinet" include Malcolm Turnbull - Minister for Communications and the uber-cool trendy city-centric Liberal in the black leather jacket:, Andrew Robb - Minster for Trade and Investment and the man behind the free trade deal, the man who suddenly acquired three trendy Sydney restaurants almost overnight, the man who seems to suddenly desperate to sell off our farms to China - and one Greg Hunt, Environment Minister and the man who is instantly approving almost every single mining project that is put in front of him.

At the conclusion of the meeting, we stood and met some of the people in the crowd. My wife talked to women who would hug her for dear life, and when they walked away people would suddenly murmur "oh, she was forced off last week" or "they are being forced off tomorrow" . Not one of them mentioned it to us. They had too much pride.

The Australian people need to be both informed and desperately outraged about what is being done to our own people. This is about every right that was once held dear to us: human rights, property rights, civil rights. And most all, our right to freedom of speech. All of that has been taken away from these people - and the rest of us need to understand that we are probably next.

In the last four weeks the Newman Government has removed all farmers rights to protest to a mine and given mining companies the rights to take all the water they want from the Great Artesian Basin - and at no cost to them at all.

And all of this has happened under the watch of both Premier Newman and Prime Minister Abbott.

Until Friday, we used to think of Winton as the home of Waltzing Matilda: it was written at a local station and first performed in the North Gregory Hotel. I think it was Don McLean who wrote, "something touched me deep inside…the day the music died"… in his song American Pie, and for us, last Friday was the day music died.

We will never be able to sing Waltzing Matilda again until we see some justice for these people, and all the farmers of the inland.

This is no longer the Australia we once knew: no longer our country, no longer our people, no longer the decent caring leaders we once remembered.

Right now, the banks, the mining mates, the corrupt politicians and all the 'mongrels in suits' have won - and the Australian people don't have a clue what has been done to them.
Like the American Depression and the iconic photograph of Florence Owens Thompson, there is a terrible, gaping wound that has been carved across the heartland of this nation.

We need to fully grasp that, and to understand that our people - dignified, decent and honourable old men like Charlie Phillott - have been deliberately terrorized, brutalised - and sold out.

In one sense, Charlie Phillott has become the symbol overnight of every decent Australian: the simple right to live out our lives on the land we love - and the land we are still free to call our own. At least until some dangerously persuaded corrupted trendy liberal theorist decided to strip all that away.

The truth is, no Australian was ever consulted about whether or not they wanted to see their land mined into oblivion or see our precious water poisoned and given away for free, whether they wanted to be driven off their land by the greed of banking executives who saw the chance to make a profit by wiping out the weakest and most vulnerable amongst us.

No Australian was ever consulted about whether or not we wanted to see our beloved homeland sold on the cheap to greedy faceless foreigners just because some slimy two-faced minister managed to convince a weakened prime minster to meekly carry out his bidding.

Nobody has asked us. We the People. Not once.

So if we are ever going to do something, then we'd better realise that it’s now only two minutes to midnight - so we'd better move fast.

Regards
David

* NOTE: Dr. David Pascoe BVSc PhD is a veterinarian practicing in Queensland, Australia

Tuesday 20 May 2014

The banking and finance sector is still cleaning up after the last mess yet Abbott & Co want to let financial planners off the leash again


The Abbott Government introduced the Corporations Amendment (Streamlining of Future of Financial Advice) Bill 2014 into the Australian Parliament on 19 March 2014 to implement changes to Future of Financial Advice (FOFA) legislation.

This bill winds back consumer protections put in place in 2012 after the 2009 Storm Financial-Commonwealth Bank debacle and resulting court cases revealed significant problems in the finance and banking sector and, winds them back in the face of evidence (such as the media report below) that the sector still hasn’t finished clearing up the mess left by avaricious financial planners.

ABC News 16 May 2014:

The Commonwealth Bank will reopen compensation offers to thousands of its clients affected by its financial planning scandal, after the corporate regulator said it was "extremely disappointed" in the bank's compensation process.
The move follows a joint investigation by Four Corners and Fairfax which exposed how poor financial planning advice at the bank had left some clients almost penniless.
The program revealed that commissions and bonuses helped create a sales-driven culture inside the bank which led to some planners losing millions of their customers funds.
The Commonwealth Bank will now have to dramatically expand its compensation scheme, with 4,000 clients now potentially having their case for compensation reopened. Originally, only 1,100 were offered compensation.
Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) chairman Greg Medcraft said the problem was not with the original compensation arrangements, but with the implementation.
"The compensation process originally developed was carefully designed to include a range of measures to protect the interests of customers involved. ASIC is extremely disappointed that not all of those measures were applied to all customers," he said.
"We are now taking immediate action to remedy the inconsistent treatment."…..

On 20 March 2014, the Senate referred the Corporations Amendment (Streamlining of Future of Financial Advice) Bill 2014 to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee for inquiry and report due on 16 June 2014.

The Senate changes composition on 1 July 2014 and the Abbott Government is likely to vigorously woo those new senators from minor parties in order to get its own way.

Thursday 15 August 2013

Politifact nails Federal Nationals MP for Cowper for being loose with the truth

Snapshot from The Sydney Morning Herald 12 August 2013

According to economic journalist Peter Martin writing in The Sydney Morning Herald on 12 August 2013:

He [Hartsuyker] is talking about the levy on bank deposits, which incidentally the Coalition hasn't yet said it will oppose.
It's due to start in 2016 and it won't be anything like as big as income tax, as Hartsuyker implies when he says savers will be taxed twice.
It'll amount to just $5 per year on a bank account of $10,000, just 50 cents a year on an account of $1000.
Other bank fees dwarf the levy. The cost of withdrawing from another bank's ATM is typically $2 a throw.
But is it a tax at all? More particularly, is it a tax on savers?

Read the rest of the article here.

Friday 8 February 2013

Ethical investors need to be aware of what JPMorgan Chase is supporting in Australia

 
JPMorgan Chase & Co claims to be one of the oldest financial institutions in the United States. With a history dating back over 200 years. It is certainly one of the largest.
 
This wealthy multinational corporation with global assets worth $2.3 trillion asserts; Our integrity and reputation depend on our ability to do the right thing, even when it's not the easy thing.  
 
Further it states that it; believes that responsible corporate citizenship demands a strong commitment to a healthy and informed democracy through civic and community involvement.
 
JP Morgan Chase also has a 100% owned subsidiary, JPMorgan Nominees Australia Ltd which just happens to be the eighth largest shareholder in Metgasco Limited with a 5.4 million share parcel as at 21 September 2012.
 
Metagasco is a coal seam gas and exploration company currently operating on the NSW North Coast in the face of sustained opposition by local communities, such as Glenugie in the Clarence Valley and Casino in the Richmond Valley.
 
In the Lismore local government area alone the September 2012 plebiscite resulted in 86.26 per cent of the 25,595 electors who voted saying “No” to coal seam gas exploration and production in their districts.
 
If JPMorgan Chase genuinely believes in democratic processes and doing the right thing, one wonders why it is financially supporting a coal seam gas mining company with a spotty regulatory compliance history and no social license.
 
If you are an investor trying to act in an ethical manner, then perhaps you need to reassess any financial interaction you might have with JPMorgan Chase.

Wednesday 12 December 2012

International Monetary Fund 2012: "Australian banks are currently among the most profitable in the world"

 
Media release 16 November 2012
 
IMF study confirms super profits of Australia’s banks
 
A new study by the International Monetary Fund shows that Australia’s ‘big four’ banks are the most concentrated in the world and are among the most profitable in the world.
 
The IMF today released its Financial System Stability Assessment for Australia. The following graph shows where Australia’s big four rank in terms of share of total industry compared to other countries.
 
 
“The IMF publication shows the absurdity of claims by the Australian Bankers’ Association’s Steven Munchenberg that Australia’s big banks are ‘fiercely competitive’,” said The Australia Institute’s Senior Research Fellow David Richardson.
 
In fact the IMF said Australian banks enjoy “pricing power” and are “highly profitable”. The IMF’s assessment also said “in fact, Australian banks are currently among the most profitable in the world”. That is clear in the following graph (overleaf) which shows Australia’s big four banks make up half of the eight most profitable banks in the world.
 
“The IMF study confirms the view that high concentration allows banks to extract very high profits from the Australian community. Super profits represent a major challenge for Australian policy makers,” said Mr Richardson.
 
 
An Australia Institute analysis recently showed that people taking out an average mortgage could potentially save $1,200 per annum by choosing a mutually-owned bank, credit union or building society, instead of one of the big four banks.
 
* International Monetary Fund report: Australia: Financial System Stability Assessment

Monday 3 September 2012

And banks wonder why their reputations are in the basement of world opinion


The Independent 1st September 2012:
“Barclays has made as much as half a billion pounds in two years from speculating on food staples such as wheat and soya, prompting allegations that banks are profiting handsomely from the global food crisis.
Barclays is the UK bank with the greatest involvement in food commodity trading and is one of the three biggest global players, along with the US banking giants Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, research from the World Development Movement points out.
Last week the trading giant Glencore was attacked for describing the global food crisis and price rises as a "good" business opportunity.
The extent of Barclays' involvement in food speculation comes to light as new figures from the World Bank show that global food prices hit an all-time high in July, with poor harvests in the US and Russia pushing up the average worldwide cost of staples by an unprecedented 10 per cent in a month.
The extent of just one bank's involvement in agricultural markets will add to concerns that food speculation could help push basic prices so high that they trigger a wave of riots in the world's poorest countries, as staples drift out of their populations' reach……”

Friday 16 March 2012

It's only taken the Australian Securities and Investment Commission three years to dig a hole big enough to bury its head in


It’s only taken the Australian Securities and Investment Commission three years to dig a hole deep enough to bury its head in. The Age must be wondering why it bothered outlaying time and resources on investigative journalism.


BIPARTISANSHIP is rare in Canberra these days, but the Government and Opposition are as one on the scandal-racked Reserve Bank subsidiary Securency: they don't want to know about it. Since May, The Age has exposed a string of allegations about the way the company goes about the business of selling its banknote polymer to other nations, some of which are notoriously corrupt.


FEDERAL police have referred to the corporate watchdog evidence of possible illegality by senior Reserve Bank officials and business figures in connection with the nation's worst bribery scandal.
The referral to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission marks a significant shift in the investigation of the Reserve firms Securency and Note Printing Australia, which allegedly paid millions of dollars in kickbacks to win foreign banknote contracts.
For the first time in three years - and after last year charging 10 former senior banknote executives with paying bribes - authorities are examining the conduct of several Reserve-appointed directors of NPA and Securency between 1998 and 2009.
It is understood federal police have gathered significant documentary evidence and witness statements that point to improper corporate behaviour and have sought legal advice about the material before referring it to ASIC. Those whose conduct is under scrutiny over possible illegality include:
A former deputy governor of the Reserve and former chairman of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority, Graeme Thompson, who chaired NPA and Securency and who allegedly approved highly irregular company behaviour that fuelled bribery.
An assistant governor at the Reserve, Frank Campbell, who as NPA director was privy to information about company corruption and bribery in 2007 which he and his board did not refer to the police.
The managing director of NPA, Chris Ogilvy, who also sat on Securency's board and who was party to highly irregular corporate behaviour, including the payment of secret commissions via inflated contracts.
A former Reserve assistant governor, Les Austin, who was a director of Securency and NPA.
If ASIC pursues civil or criminal charges against any of the directors, they could face jail sentences or heavy fines.
Company directors have a legal obligation to act honestly and diligently, and if their recklessness is found to have contributed to bribery or other improper conduct, they can be charged.


The Australian Securities and Investments Commission says it will not launch an investigation into bribery allegations against two companies linked to the Reserve Bank.
Seven former employees of polymer banknote companies Securency International and Note Printing Australia (NPA), and the companies themselves, have been charged in relation to bribes allegedly paid to foreign officials to win note-printing contracts overseas.
Securency is 50 per cent owned by the RBA, while NPA is wholly owned by the RBA.
ASIC says it looked for evidence of possible breaches of the Corporations Act in material supplied by the Australian Federal Police.
"In line with its normal practice, ASIC has reviewed this material from the AFP for possible directors’ duty breaches of the Corporations Act and has decided not to proceed to a formal investigation," the regulator said in a statement.
Millions of dollars were alleged to have been paid in bribes to officials in Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam between 1999 and 2005 to secure contracts to produce bank notes for those nations.

Wednesday 4 January 2012

Uncle Joe puckers up and blows the first dog whistle of the season


On the 3rd January 2012 @JoeHockey tweeted that I warned of this a year ago!!!”
I clicked on the link wondering what financial horror the federal shadow treasurer had uncovered.
The article merely confirmed the bleeding obvious; “Among banks trading in Australia, the major lenders account for 86.7 per cent of the home loan market.
Well, knock me down with a roo’s tail feather!
Now mortgage holders can switch between banks with no financial penalty for doing so, they are still sticking with the big banks.
I wonder why?
Could it possibly be that these aspirational borrowers believe that solid reputations built up over decades or centuries by the banks really matter in periods of global financial uncertainty?
Or did many of them approve of the big banks following the November 2011 example of the Reserve Bank rate cut? After all there was a surge in mortgage lending to first home buyers and investors right after that – mostly within the banking sector.
Were they cheered by the fact that in December all four of the big banks had passed on another rate cut to their borrowers?
Now Uncle Joe likes to blow his dog whistle loudly over Twitter, this time crying out that Teh Big Four are still big!
A few street mutts might even scamper his way. This old mongrel won't be one of them.
I may hail from a long gone time where you actually knew your bank manager and it was the price of our schooners which concerned us all, but for the life of me I can’t see that consumers exercising choice is a problem for the country. Specially those consumers taking out a new mortgage.
Why should they go and pay higher borrowing rates in the non-banking sector just to please Hockey’s notion of how the world should turn?


Running dogs from http://www.halhigdon.com/
Dog cartoon from http://www.webweaver.nu/