Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Thursday, 7 December 2017
Page: 10113


Senator ANNING ( Queensland ) ( 16:2 4 ): I seek leave to amend general business notice of motion No. 659 standing in my name for today relating to the Commonwealth Bank of Australia.

Leave granted.

Senator ANNING: I move the motion as amended:

That the Senate—

(a) acknowledges that the Commonwealth Bank of Australia's alleged53,700 breaches of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (Cth), significantly contributed to the Government's decision to launch a Royal Commission into the banking industry;

(b) calls on the Commonwealth Bank of Australia:

(i) to act as a model litigant in its defence of the civil proceeding brought by AUSTRAC in the Federal Court of Australia, and

(ii) if ordered by the Federal Court of Australia to pay a civil penalty, not to pass on, directly or indirectly, the costs of paying the penalty to its customers;

(c) calls on the Government to closely monitor the Commonwealth Bank of Australia to ensure that if the Commonwealth Bank of Australia is ordered to pay a civil penalty, that the costs associated in doing so are not passed onto its consumers, directly or indirectly; and

(d) calls on the Minister representing the Treasurerto table a report to the Senate within 12 months of the decision by the Federal Court of Australia, detailing whether or not the Commonwealth Bank of Australia has passed on the costs of any civil penalty the Commonwealth Bank of Australia is ordered to pay, to its customers, directly or indirectly.

I seek leave to make a short statement.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Leave is granted for one minute.

Senator ANNING: Senators may be aware that proceedings have been brought by AUSTRAC in the Federal Court against the Commonwealth Bank regarding an alleged 53,700 breaches of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006, which no doubt contributed to the government's decision to launch a royal commission into the banking industry—the quasi-monopoly enjoyed by the four major banks. Statements have already been made that any cost imposed upon them by the intended royal commission will be passed onto consumers. In these circumstances, I seek the Senate's concurrence to monitor whether the costs associated with any civil penalties or orders that may be subsequently made against the Commonwealth Bank for its illegal actions are not simply passed onto consumers.