At the May/June Senate Estimates, I asked the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) about their accountability and responsibilities for financial services and then probed further into depositor guarantees. I wanted to try and establish whether Australians’ savings are secure in the event of a financial crash. Have a listen.
APRA made the point that Financial Claims Scheme (FCS) is really a last resort. Australian banks and financial institutions are required to have practical plans in place to ensure they can get up and running again in the event of a financial crisis. If that were to fail, however, account holders would be covered for the first $250,000 of their deposited funds per institution.
What this answer failed to mention is that the Financial Guarantee Scheme (FGS) only kicks in once the bank fails. At this point, the bank would have been able to use bail-in provisions to use depositor’s funds to save themselves.
The FCS is also unfunded. The government has not put any money aside to fund the scheme — there is a limit of $20 billion per bank, which is only 10% of what would be needed for just one of the Big-4 banks alone. The Treasurer is not required to trigger the FCS if they don’t want to spend the money.
The Federal Government does not care about Australians, let alone their finances. Indeed, they would be salivating at the advent of a financial crash, so that they could implement a digital currency.
The govt does’nt seem to o be interested in BRICS given the RBA failure to consider the possibility of a failing US dollar ; I think you should pursue the matter further
Jim and Stephen haven’t got a clue !
Do we believe the government’s bank guarantee scheme? NO! how can we when we hear/see/ watch all the lies that are used to manipulate Australians. What to do? Take our savings and put it under the mattress?
What then if they abolish cash? Who can tell us what to do and where to turn?
It makes me feel safe to know that you, Senator Roberts, and other great Senators are there actually working for the people
Disturbing.
Duty of Care seems to be a thing of the past.
Who owns the funds?
Everyday people have, a maybe false belief, that the banking institutions are custodians.
Is that how it is, in reality?
Their actions make it appear as if they own them.
Maybe I’m confused
Banks being owned by Superannuation Funds says it all. They own most shopping centres too that’s why most shops can’t make it today. Too many greedy funds wanting bigger & bigger returns. We have to find some way to stop them. They take rent & they have their cash register taking online so they get both. It should be one or the other not both. Stocks & Shares are the reason we are in the trouble we are today I believe. Greed is one of the 7 deadly sins!