That's not the constitution.
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
True it's not in the constitution, but that's not what you said... Aside from our national affiliation with international convention there are a number of acts of parliament that provide for it, such as the fair work and anti discrimination jobs.
BCF are still going strong up here, part of the Supacheap group.
Who'd have thought I was more into fishing than building? I'm going to sit here for an hour type BLF in until my phone knows me better...
You must have a one-eyed view of such inquiries.
Lets list a few Financial Services Inquiries from recent times:
- Campbell Inquiry 1981
- Wallis Report 1997
- David Murray Inquiry 2014
- Productivity Commission Inquiry 2017
- Royal Commission 2018.
That list is far from comprehensive.
Yeh, you'd think people might learn huh? Do you have an issue with the ongoing nature of these ones?
Given that I'm not old enough to have lived through the horror of these early not royal commission inquiry and report I have had to resort to google...now I know the internet doesn't hold all of the knowledge that has ever existed, but the Campbell Report barely rates a mention. When the most trivial of historical events is deemed worthy of a Wikipedia page it makes one wonder. Of course I can request a copy to read at my library...short of waiting for that I could only find vague information regarding it. This seems to have been the trigger for deregulation of the banking industry and floating of the Australian dollar, hardly bad things. Wallis is reported to have lead to the creation of a regulator separate to the Reserve Bank, seems a bit circular but that is how we roll. More recently Murray (interesting choice there given he was a long time industry power player...could you imagine if a union official had been in charge of one of the royal commissions? also found a smh article where hockey accused him of bullying the NSW minister in the 80s) seems to have been about modernising our financial system to catch up. The producvity commission is a constant...these things, while probably inconvenient, don't seem to have been about breaking up any bank and take away their ability to exist. Was the existence of any bank under threat during these reviews? Were the executives under threat of imprisonment or punitive fines? I can't find any information about that. Were these individual reviews or were they one continuous event? These are genuine questions, I can't find any meat.
It is difficult to separate the Howard royal commission and resultant special commission, it was about 10 years of continuous investigation. Bringing this to an end was a significant component of the (you'll love this...) kevin07 campaign. There was specific focus on the commissioner's power to force people to give evidence (compulsory examination power).