ABC’s The Business interviewed the Australian Bankers Association’s Anna Blith. The interview covered banking culture, remuneration, bankers and ASIC and housing. See also the ABC News segment.
Tag: ABA
ABA Releases Final Sedgewick Report
Public Service Commissioner Stephen Sedgwick AO was appointed by the ABA to review how bank tellers and other customer-facing bank employees, their managers, and third parties are paid by banks. The final report was released today. He concludes:
It remains my view that there is not sufficient evidence of significant systemic risks of poor outcomes for customers to support an outright ban on all product based payments in retail banking.
Nonetheless, as foreshadowed in the Issues Paper, some current practices carry an unacceptable risk of promoting behaviour that is inconsistent with the interests of customers and should be changed.
Some of these relate to management practices that may reduce the effectiveness of the bank’s risk mitigation strategies. Other practices relate to the way incentives and remuneration are structured. The need for change is true of both direct (i.e. staff) and some third party channels – a view reinforced by myreading of the Australian Securities & Investments Commission’s (ASIC) recent report into the mortgage broking sector.
The ABA says: Mr Sedgwick has concluded that while there are not systemic issues warranting the outright banning of product based payments, some practices need to be changed because they could promote behaviour inconsistent with customer interests.
“Mr Sedgwick has not only identified that remuneration arrangements need to improve, but also that it needs to happen alongside a change in culture and approach from management,” Ms Bligh said.
“Banks don’t underestimate the changes recommended by Mr Sedgwick. This will not be easy for banks and there will be challenges. Changes will need to be made to bank policies, workplace agreements, contracts, staff training programs, internal controls, and performance management systems.
“This is not just about payments; it’s about governance and leadership. It’s not just about bank tellers and their managers; it goes up the line.
“Banks have heard the criticism about the sales culture. The industry needs to embed a customer-focused culture so customers have confidence banks are doing the right thing by them,” she said.
Ms Bligh said individual banks would take action to make changes to their businesses, while any industry-wide response would need to consider competition and other legal obligations.
“Banks will focus on the best way to change payments for their employees,” she said.
“Mortgage brokers play an important role in supporting competition in the home loan lending market, and the industry wants to ensure competition is preserved and customer choice is maintained.
“The ABA will seek guidance from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission and liaise with the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission as appropriate, in particular around changing payments to third parties like mortgage brokers,” Ms Bligh said.
Mr Sedgwick’s final report contained 21 recommendations about what banks should do to ensure payments achieve better customer outcomes, including:
- No longer paying retail bank employees incentives based directly or solely on sales.
- Where incentives are paid, they should be based on a range of measures of which financial measures is not the dominant component.
- Incentives paid should be product neutral and no longer include payments related to additional products or cross-selling products.
- Examining workplace culture and leadership frameworks to ensure they are aligned with good customer outcomes.
- Increasing transparency of remuneration arrangements with third parties, such as mortgage brokers, including stopping payments directly linked to loan size and introducing more robust performance management like that used with employees.
“The ABA would like to thank Mr Sedgwick and his team for conducting a rigorous and thoughtful independent review,” Ms Bligh said.
More information on the Sedgwick Review, and a copy of his final report, is available at retailbankingremreview.com.au.
Background
On 16 March 2017, ASIC published its report into the review of mortgage broker remuneration.
Mr Sedgwick’s recommendations are consistent with ASIC’s findings and proposals to improve consumer outcomes and competition in the home loan market. Mr Sedgwick’s final report identifies how the ASIC proposals could be implemented by banks and the mortgage broking industry working together to protect consumer interests, increase transparency and promote competition.
Bligh’s banking appointment is a masterstroke
The Australian Banking Association (ABA), backed by the banks’ financial and political clout, has not yet made its mark in the way the mining or gaming industries have. But this is threatening to change. The appointment of Anna Bligh to head up the ABA may represent an important turning point for the organisation.
That she is the first woman to head the ABA connotes some positive PR. But her party-political background is the true advantage. Bligh, a former Queensland Labor premier, is now the chief spokesperson for an industry that fares poorly in the public eye and is persistently at the centre of political firestorms.
The strategic advantage of Bligh’s appointment comes in two key areas of lobbying strategy. For one, she will meaningfully augment the ABA’s power behind the scenes, where lobbying is done directly between businesses and government.
But her primary role will be in the harsh glare of the public. Banking bosses are often disliked, and PR – in this case a form of “public lobbying” – is essential to win over voters on critical policy issues.
Influence in the halls of power
It is important for industry groups like the ABA to keep governments onside. This becomes difficult when, in (effectively) two-party systems like Australia, power shifts between Labor and the Coalition.
Typically, executive boards are stacked with those from a business and PR background, such as the ABA’s outgoing CEO, Steven Münchenberg (a former PR executive with NAB). Otherwise, there will typically be at least one other executive with a background in politics – usually from the Liberal Party – but ideally both parties are represented.
Along with Tony Pearson, formerly Joe Hockey’s senior economic adviser and now an ABA executive, Bligh’s appointment means the organisation has direct lines to decision-makers regardless of which party is voted in.
However, having a Labor Party elder as your CEO brings added advantages. Like other major industry groups, such as the gambling, alcohol, tobacco and mining industries, the banking industry is highly susceptible to public policy changes.
Also like the aforementioned groups, banks seem to have a better relationship with the Liberal Party (as reflected by policy outcomes) than with Labor. It was Labor that introduced the Future of Financial Advice (FoFA) legislation, which placed a fiduciary onus on banks (and others) to put the interests of clients ahead of their own.
Then came the proposed royal commission into banking in the lead-up to the 2016 election. Labor remains committed to this.
The banks’ strategy is clear: beyond her political savvy, Bligh’s appointment brings greater access than a Liberal appointee would. And she will be expected to use it. As the ABA’s head, Bligh will need to meet with her former colleagues to shape policy.
If Labor wins the next federal election, her status as a prominent and well-connected party figure will become exponentially more useful.
But if the Coalition remains in power, then the ABA takes a back seat. Treasurer Scott Morrison has made it clear that he deals directly with the banks, not through “intermediaries” such as the ABA.
The strategy of the banks is strong in that sense. Whether they lobby individually or use the Bligh-led ABA, they will be well represented.
Influence in the living rooms of power
Beyond the advantages of face-to-face lobbying and the ever-more-rapidly spinning “revolving door” between lobbying and politics, the ABA’s principal focus will be to shape public opinion.
These PR efforts acknowledge the power of representative democracy: work on the representatives first, but keep the “demos” – the people – onside, just in case.
As such, the ABA, like all industry groups with a public face, exists to try to convince the voting public that their own best interests are inextricably aligned with the best interests of businesses, whether true or not.
This PR strategy often relies on press releases and media engagement. But when a significant policy threat emerges – like a banking royal commission – the ABA may well rely on the use of “advocacy advertising”. This is where organisations use ads to try to win over public opinion, in turn pressuring the government.
This technique is used excessively in the US. It has a strong track record in Australia too, most notably during the mining tax and pokies reform debates.
To work, advocacy ads wouldn’t even need to make the public like the banks. In the case of unpopular industries, building goodwill is useful but problematic, so scaring the public can be just as effective.
To return to FoFA’s “best interests” example, convincing the public that banks should be able to put their own interests first is difficult. But if banks can suggest that the economy will suffer, and the public might lose monetarily, the strategy can work.
Currently fighting a similar “best interest” clause in the US, its financial services industry made such a case – and appears to be getting its way. The “Secure Family” financial services lobby group has run TV ads such as this:
For an industry as powerful (and rich) as banks, advocacy ads are usually worth a shot. There’s relatively little to lose but a lot to gain.
For policy battles fought in the domain of TV advertisements, it can be tremendously lopsided: those with money (like banks) can pay-to-play. But, problematically, in a system where a plurality or “marketplace” of ideas is critical to democratic ideals, similarly well-funded and advertised counter-argument is often conspicuously absent. By acting and speaking with a unified voice, banks have a significant advantage.
Commercial interests have long recognised the power of lobbying, but more are now realising the importance of harnessing public sentiment too.
Anna Bligh to lead the ABA
The Chairman of the Australian Bankers’ Association, Andrew Thorburn, today announced the appointment of Anna Bligh to lead the ABA as it continues its work to strengthen trust and confidence in banking and deliver better outcomes for customers.
“We are excited to appoint Anna as Chief Executive Officer at such a pivotal time for our industry,” Mr Thorburn said.
“Anna’s focus will firmly be on the culture within banking and lifting respect for our profession; creating a strong vision for customers and on how our industry responds and leads on regulatory reform.
“As I’ve met with Anna I’ve seen the leadership, values and accountability she will bring to the role – and a willingness to confront and challenge the industry to continually improve.
“Anna has a track record of community service and a strong ability to connect with people. She is highly regarded and respected by community, political and business leaders and understands the need for all stakeholders to work together to deliver the best outcome for customers.”
Mr Thorburn added: “Australia has a world-class banking system and there is more we can do to be better for customers and demonstrate the role banks play for them, the broader community and the Australian economy.
“We have also heard the message from customers and from the public, and the industry is serious about change. The appointment of Anna demonstrates our commitment to this.”
Ms Bligh has more than 30 years’ experience in public service, initially with community organisations, before entering the Queensland Parliament in 1995. She held ministerial responsibilities for a number of portfolios including Education and Finance, and served as Treasurer and Deputy Premier before becoming Premier from 2007-2012.
She holds Honorary Doctorates from the University of Queensland and Griffith University and the National Emergency Services Medal for her service during the Queensland floods in 2011. Ms Bligh was awarded a Companion of the Order of Australia (AC) in the Australia Day honours in 2017.
Ms Bligh is currently the Chief Executive Officer at YWCA New South Wales, a role she has held for the past three years. During that time she has worked with vulnerable and financially disadvantaged Australians.
Ms Bligh said: “Our banks are critical to the strength and stability of our national economy and the prosperity and well-being of every Australian. We all rely on our bank for the most important financial decisions of our lives, so we want a system that is open, fair and trustworthy.
“I am excited by this opportunity to lead and shape the reforms needed to strengthen public trust and confidence in our banking system.”
Ms Bligh, who becomes the ABA’s first female CEO, will commence in the role on 3 April. She replaces Steven Münchenberg, who announced in October last year that he was stepping down after almost seven years as CEO.
Mr Münchenberg will finish with the ABA on 14 April, to enable a transition to Ms Bligh.
“On behalf of the membership and Council of the ABA, I want to thank Steven for his commitment and strong leadership as the industry navigated through a rapidly changing political, regulatory and economic environment following the global financial crisis,” Mr Thorburn said.
“Steven is a total professional who has worked tirelessly during what have been challenging times for our industry. We have a stronger foundation to build on thanks to Steven and his team.”
ABA Responds To Independent Retail Banking Commission Review
The ABA, in a media release has responded to the paper which has been released, and which questioned whether good customer outcomes and product commission payments were possible. It warned that the use of upfront and trailing commissions and their effect on incentivising sales may potentially lead to poor customer outcomes.
The Australian Bankers’ Association has today welcomed the release of Mr Stephen Sedgwick’s issues paper from his independent review into commissions and payments made to bank staff and third parties.
“Banks want to ensure that they pay their staff to do the right thing by customers, and we will work on any areas that need improving,” ABA Executive Director – Retail Policy Diane Tate said.
“This review is part of an industry-wide look at some of the influences on culture in banks, such as leadership and people and performance management.
“In recent years banks have made changes to remuneration practices to place more of an emphasis on good behaviour rather than sales targets, in light of changing community expectations and regulatory requirements; however there is more to do.
“It is important that banks get the balance right between rewarding employees and getting the best results for customers.
“Banks have committed to changing or removing payments that could lead to poor customer outcomes,” she said.
“Importantly, the issues paper has not identified systemic issues warranting the outright banning of product based payments. However, the paper does highlight the importance of culture, good governance, performance management systems, compliance checking, and communications across the organisation and by management, as all related to remuneration.
“The ABA looks forward to providing another submission to Mr Sedgwick to help complete his review. This is a complex area with mixed views so we encourage interested parties to have their say,” Ms Tate said.
In addition to reviewing payments for the selling of retail banking products like deposit accounts and mortgages, the Sedgwick Review will also comment on overarching principles on how banks pay and incentivise all executives and employees.
More information on the Sedgwick Review is available at retailbankingremreview.com.au.
As I recall the ABA were central to the establishment of the review in the first place, (mitigating the pressure for an independent financial services review) and perhaps they are surprised that the independent review is questioning commissions! We shall see.
Report on the Code of Banking Practice Delayed
The Australian Bankers’ Association has today acknowledged the one month delay of the report of the Code of Banking Practice review.
ABA Executive Director – Retail Policy Diane Tate said the independent reviewer, Mr Phil Khoury, had requested more time to adequately deal with the breadth and complexity of issues.
The ABA recognises that the process to review the Code is extensive and requires thorough consultation and engagement,” she said.
We acknowledge that Mr Khoury needs more time to be able to produce the best outcome – a report which clearly identifies the pathway to improve the Code.
“We look forward to receiving the report by the end of January next year with recommendations on how banks can strengthen their commitments to customers and improve standards of behaviour,” Ms Tate said.
80% Of Main Retail Banks’ Profits – $25.6 billion – Returned to the Community – ABA
According to a release from the Australian Bankers Association, eighty per cent of the main retail banks’ profits – $25.6 billion – were returned to the community, primarily through dividend payments to everyday Australians who own bank shares directly and indirectly through their superannuation savings.
Banks again paid more tax than any other industry – $12.8 billion in 2016 – providing a valuable revenue stream to help fund the Federal Government’s provision of essential infrastructure such as schools and hospitals.
Banks continued to invest in initiatives to improve customer service, including a $6.9 billion spend on technology. This included a $1 billion investment in a new payments platform launching in 2017 that will allow customers to transfer money online between accounts in real time.
Australian Bankers’ Association Chief Executive Steven Münchenberg said banks needed to continue to perform well for Australia to have a strong and well-functioning economy.
“Given ongoing economic uncertainty here in Australia and overseas, it is as important as ever that our banks remain strong, stable and profitable,” Mr Münchenberg said.
“Bank profits provide an income stream for Australians through dividends, superannuation payments and interest on bank deposits and bonds; as well as to the Federal Government. Profitable banks also help fund economic growth through lending to business customers and homeowners, and in their role as significant employers.”
In 2016, $25 billion in wages was paid to the 140,000 people employed by the main retail banks. Households earned $66 billion in interest on bank deposits and bonds.
$600 million was provided in donations and ‘in-kind’ support to the not-for-profit sector and other community initiatives.
Mr Münchenberg said, like most industries, banks were facing tougher operating conditions in a low interest rate, low growth environment.
“In addition to finding growth in a challenging market, banks are also responding to increasing regulation and the challenges associated with rapid advances in technology and new market entrants,” he said.
“In this environment, it will be more important than ever that banks work hard to get the balance right between looking after their customers, shareholders, employees and the community.”
The profitability of the main retail banks declined in the 2016 reporting year.
Return on equity for the major banks dropped from 15.6 per cent in 2015 to 13.6 per cent, while net interest margins for the major banks fell to a record low of 202 basis points
APRA On Risk Culture, and ABA’s Response
APRA has released a series of documents on the risk culture within financial services organisations. They will be looking at the risk culture of entities, as well as remuneration and its linkage to risky behaviour.
They are also seeking to harmonise prudential standards across APRA-regulated industries where appropriate and practical. This ensures that like risks are treated in a like manner so that no significant differences arise in the regulatory treatment of entities with similar risks operating in different industries.
The 2008 financial crisis revealed major shortcomings in the way the global financial sector managed risk. This was not solely an issue of poor risk measurement, or weaknesses in internal control structures. It also reflected deficiencies in institutions’ attitudes towards risk. In combination, a poor risk culture and weak risk management (the former often being the root cause of the latter) led to unbalanced and ill-considered risk-taking, to significant losses and, in some cases, to institutional failures. The impact on the financial stability of affected countries was significant.
Although APRA-regulated institutions avoided the worst of the financial crisis, Australia has not been without its own examples of poor risk culture. The failure of HIH Insurance in 2001, for example, highlighted the central role that a weak organisational culture, and a dismissive attitude to risk management, had in the demise of the insurer. Similarly, foreign currency trading losses at a major bank in 2004 identified the link between the risk culture of its trading area and the scant regard given by the business to the underlying risk and management risk limits.
More recently, APRA highlighted the emergence of increased risk-taking within the life insurance industry with respect to the underwriting and pricing of, in particular, group insurance business. At its heart, this stemmed from a focus on growth without, in a number of institutions, adequate regard to the risks that came with it. Similarly, in the past few years, APRA observed that sound market practices for the origination of residential mortgage loans had, in some instances, been sacrificed to considerations of preserving market share and growth.
Unlike the earlier episodes highlighted above, which affected individual institutions, the more recent issues in group risk insurance and mortgage lending have manifested in a deterioration in general industry practices. There is nothing wrong with an institution or an industry pursuing a higher risk strategy, provided it does so consciously, and with appropriate risk management capabilities and financial capacity. In some of these cases, though, hindsight and supervisory scrutiny would suggest that the decision was not a conscious one: considerations of risk were not always front of mind in a highly competitive environment.
It is also interesting to juxtapose these recent experiences with the assertion made by most institutions that they believe they have a good, if not strong, risk culture; to the extent there are deficiencies in the industry, most institutions consider they exist within their peers. And where there have been specific problems identified within their own businesses, ‘bad apples’ are typically seen as the cause. Yet in the case of mortgage lending standards, for example, there were few lenders who could claim their risk culture was sufficient to prevent them succumbing to the weak practices that eroded industry standards.
Unfortunately, a poor risk culture can persist for some time without detection, or immediate damage. Typically, it will be when a poor risk culture is combined with adverse market conditions and/or other stresses that there is greater potential for a build-up of unbalanced and ill-considered decisions to result in significantly adverse, and potentially crippling, financial outcomes. Good times will often mask poor practices. In an Australian context, where the domestic economy has enjoyed 25 years without a serious recession, this should sound a clear note of caution against complacency.
As well as setting out global developments in risk culture, APRA highlighted the following key areas of focus.
Continue to encourage APRA-regulated institutions to focus on risk culture
APRA’s initiatives that will help maintain the prominence of risk culture within regulated institutions include:
- engaging with the broader APRA-regulated financial sector – through, for example, speeches and publications such as this one – to reinforce the need for continued focus on risk culture and, where needed, highlighting any areas of concern;
- providing information and guidance to industry, where appropriate, on approaches that can be used to assess and strengthen risk cultures;
- bilateral discussions with institutions’ senior executives and directors to highlight and seek remediation for any specific concerns that are identified through routine supervision activities; and
- conducting pilot on-site reviews at individual institutions focussing specifically on risk culture.
A more anticipatory supervisory approach to risk culture
Although APRA already considers risk culture as part of its ongoing supervisory activities, APRA intends to refine and sharpen its approach to assessing risk culture. Conducting pilot risk culture reviews will form a key component of this work.
APRA expects that this more intensive review will enable it to better anticipate potential risk issues, and strengthen its forward-looking supervisory approach. For example, where a regulated institution is found to have indicators of a poor risk culture, supervisory attention will correspondingly increase. As with APRA’s more general approach to supervision, which focusses on the prevention of problems before they materialise, the goal of these risk culture reviews will be to promote prompt corrective action to any shortcomings identified, or establish mitigating actions. In doing so, the potential for loss from unbalanced and ill-considered risk decisions is reduced, potentially adverse outcomes for depositors, policyholders and superannuation fund members can be avoided, and (in the extreme case) threats to financial stability are eliminated.
Reviewing industry remuneration practices
The remuneration requirements contained in CPS 510 were introduced in 2010 for ADIs and insurers. Requirements for superannuation were introduced in Prudential Standard SPS 510 Governance22 in 2012. The fundamental principle underlying these requirements is that performance-based components of remuneration must be designed to encourage behaviour that supports:
- the regulated institution’s long-term financial soundness; and
- the risk management framework of the institution.
Remuneration frameworks, and the outcomes they produce, are therefore important barometers and influencers of risk culture.
APRA intends to conduct a stocktake of current industry remuneration practices to gauge how well existing requirements are being implemented, and how they are interacting with the risk cultures of regulated institutions. This will include reviewing the remuneration arrangements and outcomes for some senior executives, risk and control staff, and material risk-takers at a sample of institutions.
APRA will also use this opportunity to compare its remuneration requirements with more recent international regulatory developments and supervisory practices.
This work will commence in 2016 and will continue into 2017. APRA will engage with industry participants, as well as relevant industry experts, throughout this period as it formulates its views.
The Australian Bankers Association welcomed APRA’s announcement.
The Australian Bankers’ Association has welcomed today’s release of an information paper by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority on the risk culture of financial institutions.
“A lender’s risk culture impacts every decision it makes and is the cornerstone of a stable financial system,” ABA Chief Executive Steven Münchenberg said.
“We welcome initiatives that help banks understand and manage their own risk culture, and we are pleased that APRA has noted an improvement in how directors focus on the risk culture in their organisation,” he said.
“It is important that the tone is set from the top and employees have a clear framework to make decisions that appropriately balance the potential gain with any potential loss.”
APRA’s paper looks at how different organisations approach risk culture and how this relates to company values. It also outlines APRA’s future plans to encourage institutions to focus on risk culture.
Mr Münchenberg said the ABA agreed on the need to build on the work that had already been done.
“There are many elements to a strong risk culture, including having clear business objectives, values and understanding of risk appetite.
“Banks recognise that demonstrating a strong risk culture will increase the public’s trust in the financial sector. We look forward to working with APRA on how risk culture can be strengthened to ensure banks have the right practices and behaviours,” he said.
ABA Consults On Whistle blower Protection
The Australian Bankers’ Association has today opened public consultation on how banks can better support and protect staff who call out poor behaviour that harms customers.
“Customers expect banks to have a strong culture – having a robust and trusted framework for staff to raise concerns is an essential part of this,” ABA Chief Executive Steven Münchenberg said.
“As part of the industry’s six point reform plan, banks are implementing the highest standards of whistleblower protections,” he said.
“The ABA has developed draft principles on how banks can strengthen their existing whistleblower programs, based on an analysis of international best practice standards done by Promontory Australasia.
“In the interests of transparency, we are inviting interested parties to provide their feedback on these principles,” Mr Münchenberg said.
The principles outline the importance of the ‘tone from the top’, with the board and executive management championing whistleblower policies, and how protections can be extended to third parties, such as consultants and suppliers.
They also aim to ensure whistleblower programs have clearly defined ways for people to report misconduct, knowing they can remain anonymous and won’t be financially disadvantaged.
To make a submission on the draft principles, email submissions@bankers.asn.au by close of business Wednesday, 2 November 2016.
The draft principles are expected to be finalised by the end of 2016, with banks required to ensure their whistleblower policies and programs meet the highest standards by July 2017.
“If staff are confident to speak up about misconduct and unlawful activity, they can save customers and the bank a lot of pain later. It can take courage to stand up and call out poor behaviour, so we should support people who do that,” Mr Münchenberg said.
“We need to break the ‘us versus them’ mentality; whistleblowers make an important contribution to our businesses.”
The ABA conducted some preliminary consultations with regulators and other stakeholders in developing the principles.
The principles and the Promontory Australasia report on best practice whistleblower standards are available at betterbanking.net.au.
ABA On The Inquiry This Week
The Australian Bankers’ Association today acknowledged the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics’ Inquiry this week had provided a valuable forum for major banks to respond to issues of interest to the Committee and outline the progress already being made to address them.
Steven Münchenberg, Chief Executive of the ABA, said the banks involved had welcomed the opportunity to provide their perspectives on various industry issues, challenges and opportunities.
“As an industry, we know we haven’t always lived up to the expectations of all of our customers and the wider community. The banks are acknowledging those issues and more importantly they are addressing them,” he said.
“The Inquiry this week raised a wide range of important issues, many of which are already being addressed by the Federal Government or industry initiatives.
“There were also a number of ideas and proposals raised that merit further substantive consideration and the banks will be evaluating these at the next meeting of the ABA Council.
“That said, the banking industry is committed to taking action right now to deal with major issues and deliver better outcomes for customers,” he said.
Mr Münchenberg said the banking industry’s six point reform package launched in April 2016 included independent reviews into:
- Pay structures that put incentives for bank staff ahead of customer needs. The review is being conducted by former Australian Public Service Commissioner Stephen Sedgwick AO with a final report expected in March 2017.
- The Code of Banking Practice to lift standards of conduct and culture. The review is being conducted by former ASIC executive Phil Khoury who is due to report by December 2016.
The next progress report on the delivery of the industry’s reform package will be made by an independent expert, former Auditor-General Ian McPhee AO PSM, by 21 October 2016.
The banking industry’s six point reform package is running in parallel with separate Government reviews into:
- Finding faster and better ways for customers to get justice if they feel they are treated unfairly (the Ramsay Review, which reports in March 2017).
- The treatment of small business customers (the Carnell Review, which is due to report by the end of 2016).
Mr Münchenberg said the ABA and the banks intend to set out detailed responses to the matters raised by the Committee in the coming weeks, including responses to various questions on notice that were taken over the past three days, so that the Committee would be in a position to finalise its recommendations.
“We believe there is an opportunity to accelerate the timetable on a range of initiatives and we will be exploring this with our members and with the Committee, particularly on matters where there is general agreement on the need for action sooner rather than later.”