Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

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].

 

  •   25 August 2016
  • 3
  •      
  •   
3 Comments
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?

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

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.

 

Leave a Comment:

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

It’s time for LICs to die

A high-profile dividend cut and a prominent fund manager’s apology have reignited a long-running debate. If investors can access similar exposures more cheaply and efficiently elsewhere, what exactly is keeping LICs alive?

The retirement scorecard: how many of these questions can you answer?

From the maths of retirement, estimating spending and picking the right asset allocation to survive a poor decade, here are the questions every retiree – current or future – should be able to answer for themselves.

Testamentary trusts: Treasury has picked the wrong reading

A decades-old estate planning tool has survived one tax crackdown only to be caught by another. The surprise isn't who the reform is targeting, but who could end up paying the price for drafting choices made years ago.

How the typical Australian Family could save $844,350 in taxes

The value of a testamentary trust is not determined by wealth alone. Depending on circumstances, it can reduce the tax burden on inherited income, create efficiencies and help build intergenerational wealth.

The housing slide could become a crash

House prices are sliding across Australia, yet the most dangerous ingredient for a housing crash is still missing. If job losses surge amid growing economic risks, today's correction could become a historic property downturn.

Will investors be better or worse off under new housing tax changes?

Housing tax reforms have sparked warnings of market turmoil and promises of greater fairness. But after modelling nearly two decades of property data, the results suggest winners and losers may not be who many investors expect.

Latest Updates

SMSF strategies

Division 296: the initial moves to make before the windows close

What if the best superannuation strategy isn't about earning more, but acting before your options disappear? Several overlooked planning windows are narrowing, with consequences that can last for decades.

Planning

Avoid unnecessary CGT with this estate planning clause

A simple estate plan can create a ticking time bomb. One overlooked clause can pit spouses against children, delay inheritances, and potentially leave a family facing an unexpected tax bill worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Exchange traded products

The hidden trade-off in fixed income ETFs

Some investment trade-offs are immediately visible. Others are embedded in the way a portfolio is constructed. Understanding the difference may explain why similar-looking investments can produce surprisingly different results.

Retirement

The mortgage free retirement is fading

What happens when a generation reaches retirement carrying obligations previous generations largely avoided? New research suggests we may need to rethink both how much we need in retirement and what life could look like.

Retirement

The key question to inspire a confident and purposeful retirement

Most people spend decades planning for retirement. Far fewer plan for what happens when they get there. The difference may explain why so many find the transition harder and less fulfilling than expected, despite careful preparation.

Latest from Morningstar

Making the case for a 'good enough' portfolio

Some investors spend years chasing the perfect strategy. Others choose a path that’s simply good enough and move on. Which approach is more likely to deliver both better outcomes and a happier financial life over the long run?

Investment strategies

Is the US market as expensive as CAPE says?

Many investing ideas survive for decades. But that does not make them right. A famous valuation measure implies that US shares are dangerously expensive, but the evidence may point to a very different conclusion.

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 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.