Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) | Hansard source

Yes; as Senator Scarr says, they denied they had an agreement. But I've been in politics for a long time, and I know what a handshake is. And I know exactly the agreement that former minister Jones and I made. Again, it's Labor in cahoots with the big banks to protect the profits of giant banking corporations, who also happen to significantly donate to Labor Party election coffers, I might add, through the institutionalised bribery of political donations. Once again, it is the consumers, the people who have to have accounts with the big banks, who are exposed to harms because Labor will not side with everyday Australians—because Labor is siding with the big banking corporations, who are also significant political donors to the Labor Party.

People should not be able to be ripped off by financial services sector organisations, including the big banking corporations. So it's fine and it's good that Labor is putting in place protections in the consumer law, but it is completely unacceptable that Labor is leaving a gaping hole in these regulations that the big banks are going to be able to drive a truck through. That is why the Greens are seeking to amend this bill to apply these provisions to the financial services sector. We're also moving an amendment to include lead generation as an example of behaviour that would constitute an unfair trading practice, to ensure that predatory behaviour—lead generation—is captured.

That amendment, and in fact our other amendment as well, is particularly important in the context of the collapse of managed investment schemes First Guardian and Shield, which has cost around 12,000 Australians over $1 billion in lost retirement savings. At Senate estimates in October last year, the Chair of ASIC, Ms Court, indicated that a ban on unfair trading practices in the financial services sector may have assisted ASIC in its investigation and prosecution of the complex web of actors involved in the collapse of First Guardian and Shield. Wouldn't you think the government would want to be doing everything it could to give our regulators the tools they need to either prevent things like First Guardian and Shield happening again or to properly be able to investigate them if, heaven forbid, they do happen again? But no. Labor again has left a gaping hole, because Labor is here for big corporations and not for ordinary Australians.

Well, that's not the way the Greens roll. We don't take donations from big banking corporations or, for that matter, from big corporations at all, so they have no influence over our policies. That is why we're coming in here today demanding that Labor act to apply these provisions—which we welcome being applied across much of the economy—to the financial services sector. When our amendments are moved in the committee stages, this will be Labor's test. If they support the Greens amendments, they'll be able to look the Australian people in the eye and say, 'We are backing everyday Australians in, over the profits of the big banking corporations and the other financial services sector behemoths that exist in this country.' But if Labor fail—and I predict they will not support the Greens amendments—that will be living, breathing proof that the Labor Party have been captured by corporate Australia, that the Labor Party are in thrall to the big banking corporations and that the Labor Party are puppets to the Commonwealth Bank, NAB, Westpac, ANZ and the other massive corporate giants that operate in the financial services sector in Australia. We will also, I indicate, be moving amendments on behalf of Senator Payman which also favour consumers.