Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Register

9 October 2026

Home / 171

What readers think about a bank royal commission

In the Cuffelinks’ reader survey regarding the pros and cons of a bank royal commission (RC), the majority (70%) said they opposed a RC, although there was less agreement on the reasons for the opposition among a diverse range of strong opinions.

Common among supporters were issues surrounding executive salaries and bonuses, the failings of regulators, and fraud and unconscionable conduct.

Those who opposed tended to agree with the arguments put forward in the related article, 10 reasons not to hold bank royal commission, especially time and cost, doubts about what it would achieve, lack of firm terms of reference and a view that banking regulators should be allowed to do their job.

Results summary

Question 1: Do you support or oppose holding a royal commission into the banking and financial services industry?

Among the more than 250 responses, the percentage split was around 70/30 against. This would indicate that while the wider public shows strong support for a RC, people that are more engaged with their investments and perhaps even linked to the industry in some way, cannot see a RC making the difference everyone wants it to.

Can our politicians put politics aside and act on the industry’s shortcomings without the hoo-ha of a RC? It’s a challenging question. Comments for Question 1 can be found here.

Question 2: Do you agree with the points made in Graham Hand's article?

Most of those who took the survey agreed with or were convinced by Graham’s arguments, although four of the points were supported by only a little over half the respondents: issues of customer satisfaction, bank profit levels, benefits of RC recommendations, and alternatives to a RC. Clearly the most agreed upon point was that, for our economy to be strong, we need a strong banking system.

Comments for Question 2 can be found here.

Question 3: Please add any other comments.

Summarising all of the comments is difficult given the wide variety of opinion and many people draw on their personal experiences. Even so, some of the recurring phrases (from each camp) went a little something like:

Comments for Question 3 can be found here. Thank you to all our respondents, including the many who disagreed with Graham's original article. We await future developments with interest.

 

Leisa Bell is Assistant Editor at Cuffelinks. No responsibility is accepted for the comments by any of our readers and they are presented in the spirit of an open conversation.

 

  •   31 August 2016
  • 3
  •      
  •   
Firstlinks is sponsored by:
banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Why spending more in early retirement can improve lifetime income

Conventional wisdom encourages retirees to preserve superannuation. But if those likely to qualify for the Age Pension later in life spend a little more today, it may deliver higher lifetime income and a more stable retirement.

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?

Testamentary trusts survived the trust tax. The drafting battle has just begun.

The fight over testamentary trusts looked settled. Then the draft legislation arrived. Hidden in a technical detail is a question that could force many families to rethink wills they thought were already future-proof.

Is it time to bail on Australian stocks?

For generations, Australian investors have backed banks, miners and dividends. But has that loyalty come at a cost? A look at the numbers raises an uncomfortable question about where future returns will come from.

The new capital gains tax trap for your portfolio

Investors have long accepted one portfolio rule without much question. A major tax shift could change that calculation entirely, forcing difficult trade-offs between risk, discipline and an overlooked cost lurking beneath.

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.

Latest Updates

Fixed interest

Higher yields are creating opportunities in global bonds

Bond markets are adjusting to a new reality, but not in the ways investors expect. With markets repricing and capital competing for attention, investors may need to rethink where resilience and opportunity lie. 

Economy

Are we in a recession?

What if the warning signs are already everywhere? From supermarket aisles to company failures, investors are being bombarded with recession signals. But most face a different risk that can be just as dangerous for portfolios. 

SMSF strategies

Meg on SMSFs - Division 296 actuarial certificates

The tax bill might be yours, but the event that caused it may not be. A key Division 296 calculation can sometimes attribute earnings in ways that many SMSF trustees won't instinctively expect or fully appreciate.

Property

The first impact of negative gearing reform is not the tax bill

Negative gearing changes formally begin in 2027, but the first consequences may already be here. A subtle shift is quietly influencing who can borrow, how much they can access and which property strategies still stack up.

Economy

The oil market is running out of easy answers

The biggest threat to markets may not be what investors are watching. The numbers have stopped adding up and supply is harder to measure, with forecasts becoming simple guesses. A more fragile reality is being masked.

Investment strategies

The state of investor knowledge in Australia

Australians are investing more than ever, yet a surprising divide is emerging between those building wealth effectively and those making costly mistakes. Surprisingly, the gap has little to do with income, age or starting capital.

Taxation

Complexity and capital gains

A case study shows that the ‘30% minimum CGT’ is a poorly conceived tax that adds significant complexity to an already over-complex system. A less complicated model would create a much fairer progressive tax scale.

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

Site Map

About Firstlinks

© 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.