Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Register

21 May 2025

Home / 170

Bank royal commission survey initial results

Last week’s article, ‘10 reasons not to hold a bank royal commission’, drew many heated comments for both sides of the debate, in the comments section and in the results of the survey.

The original article showed the strong public support for a bank royal commission, with 64% in the support camp and only 13% opposing.

The Cuffelinks survey generally produced the opposite results, as shown in the table below:

The support camp was 25.6% while the oppose side was a healthy 73.2%. Even more impressive was the strong oppose score of 47.6%, nearly half of all respondents (although it is acknowledged that response numbers were down on our usual survey participation levels).

We will leave the survey open for a few more days to encourage more responses, and then open up the full survey results and comments before next week’s edition.

Please take our survey on whether a royal commission into banking and financial services is required [now closed].

 

3 Comments
SMSF Trustee
August 26, 2016

Keith, I expect that many of the Cuffelinks readers may well be connected to banks, if they are financial planners who work for bank-aligned agencies. But how does that necessarily skew the results? I am assuming that your belief is that these folk will oppose a RC.

However, there are plenty of planners who would much rather not be aligned with banks and thus who might see a RC as a way of getting the banks to sell off their advisory businesses.

There are also plenty who aren't bank-aligned, but use bank fund manager products who are very happy with their service and the results delivered to their clients, who thus might not favour an inquiry into the banks.

You just can't presume how people think about this and I believe we should just take the survey results as they come.

Graham Hand
August 26, 2016

Hi Keith, every poll has its sampling shortcomings, especially where respondents are 'opt in' and not selected at random. We have a wide range of readers but with a bias to professionals. So the poll is offered for what it is - a survey of our readers, who are obviously far more engaged with markets and investing than the general public. Some argue polls in the SMH have a left wing bias and polls in The Australian have a right wing bias. Yes, the response is probably skewed. Cheers

Keith Hart
August 26, 2016

How many readers of this post are connected in some way to the banks? Wouldn't that potentially skew your data?

 

Leave a Comment:
Firstlinks is sponsored by:
banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Pros and cons of Labor's home batteries scheme

Labor has announced a $2.3 billion Cheaper Home Batteries Program, aimed at slashing the cost of home batteries. The goal is to turbocharge battery uptake, though practical difficulties may prevent that happening.

Howard Marks: the investing game has changed

The famed investor says the rapid switch from globalisation to trade wars is the biggest upheaval in the investing environment since World War Two. And a new world requires a different investment approach.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 606 with weekend update

The boss of Australia’s fourth largest super fund by assets, UniSuper’s John Pearce, says Trump has declared an economic war and he’ll be reducing his US stock exposure over time. Should you follow suit?

  • 10 April 2025

4 ways to take advantage of the market turmoil

Every crisis throws up opportunities. Here are ideas to capitalise on this one, including ‘overbalancing’ your portfolio in stocks, buying heavily discounted LICs, and cherry picking bombed out sectors like oil and gas.

An enlightened dividend path

While many chase high yields, true investment power lies in companies that steadily grow dividends. This strategy, rooted in patience and discipline, quietly compounds wealth and anchors investors through market turbulence.

Tariffs are a smokescreen to Trump's real endgame

Behind market volatility and tariff threats lies a deeper strategy. Trump’s real goal isn’t trade reform but managing America's massive debts, preserving bond market confidence, and preparing for potential QE.

Latest Updates

Investment strategies

Getting rich vs staying rich

Strategies to get rich versus stay rich are markedly different. Here is a look at the five main ways to get rich, including through work, business, investing and luck, as well as those that preserve wealth.

Investment strategies

Does dividend investing make sense?

Dividend investing offers steady income and behavioral benefits, but its effectiveness depends on goals, market conditions, and fundamentals - especially in retirement, where it may limit full use of savings.

Economics

Tariffs are a smokescreen to Trump's real endgame

Behind market volatility and tariff threats lies a deeper strategy. Trump’s real goal isn’t trade reform but managing America's massive debts, preserving bond market confidence, and preparing for potential QE.

Strategy

Ageing in spurts

Fascinating initial studies suggest that while we age continuously in years, our bodies age, not at a uniform rate, but in spurts at around ages 44 and 60.

Interviews

Platinum's new international funds boss shifts gears

Portfolio Manager Ted Alexander outlines the changes that he's made to Platinum's International Fund portfolio since taking charge in March, while staying true to its contrarian, value-focused roots.

Investment strategies

Four ways to capitalise on a forgotten investing megatrend

The Trump administration has not killed the multi-decade investment opportunity in decarbonisation. These four industries in particular face a step-change in demand and could reward long-term investors.

Strategy

How the election polls got it so wrong

The recent federal election outcome has puzzled many, with Labor's significant win despite a modest primary vote share. Preference flows played a crucial role, highlighting the complexity of forecasting electoral results.

Sponsors

Alliances

Site Map

About Firstlinks

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.