Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Last night when asked, if the Treasurer had spoken to the banks about holding an ASIC inquiry into banks, the Prime Minister said, 'You'd have to ask him.' So can the Treasurer advise the House whether he or his office have spoken with any banks since Labor announced its support for a royal commission into the banking and financial services industry; and, if so, what was discussed?

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for his question. As he would know, as a former Treasurer, you are in constant engagement with members of the financial and banking industry. It is our job. In fact the Prime Minister spoke to a gathering for Westpac and, in response to that, we have the unadulterated populism of the Leader of the Opposition.

The Prime Minister—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Gorton, that is your final warning.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

raised the important issue of banking culture directly with the banks as those on this side of the Leader of the House do regularly. But what we see from those opposite is rank populism, and I will tell you why—and they may want to take a bit of advice from the member for Lilley, the member for Rankin's old boss. When he was presented by Laurie Oakes some years ago with a terms of reference that I previously tabled—a terms of reference for a financial systems inquiry, which they opposed—Laurie Oakes said:

Now, Joe Hockey, tomorrow will take to Shadow Cabinet his terms of reference for his proposed Son of Wallis Inquiry into the finance industry. Why are you against such an inquiry?

He said:

… I think the last thing the system needs is another inquiry.

That is what Wayne Swan said, the member for Lilley. He said:

Crass populism doesn't not work…

That is what the member for Lilley said. He said:

What works here is methodical application, the detail, getting it right, then getting it in place so the reform is enduring for the long term.

So why is it that, instead of taking the wise advice of the member for Lilley, the Leader of the Opposition is proposing a royal commission whose terms of reference is a blank sheet of paper. There are no terms of reference. There is nothing more than crass populism seeking to undermine confidence in the banking and financial system, which is key to jobs and growth in this country.

If he actually had a proposal, as the former shadow Treasurer, who became Treasurer—he was prepared to put forward a terms of reference in opposition and make the case for a financial systems inquiry which we implemented in government. If he was prepared to do that, then fair enough, but what he has is complete hot air, appealing to crass populism. He should take the advice of the member for Lilley, which was:

Crass populism doesn't work…