Hi PHB, Geoff again. At least this time you may not to ask regarding my standing comment.
Before you criticize and abuse, walk a mile in my shoes. As a former Federal Compliance Manager, the real issue with ineffective regulators is the legislation they are burdened by. Legislation at the Federal level is usually (on average) about 50+ years old. Amendments to Regulations are frequent. Review the scrutiny of X days in Parliament for review any new Reg amendment on the floor of The House? Look to the abilities, and skin-in-the-game interest, of Pollies. Yes, give them a cracker - so what are reasonable expectations. ASIC has been criticized for inaction or too few prosecutions. Fact check - look to the success in the Courts to all Federal Regulatory activity. ASIC failed in the Courts wrt a big 4 Bank. What was the ‘penalty’ for Storm Financial indiscretion. The financial institutions can afford more and better lawyers than the underfunded Regulators. Any good or better employees can be headhunted by any and all Corpses. Legal folk are soooo flexible and useful. They must know the strengths of both sides of the argument. Their enthusiasm in Court is matched by their reasonable expectation of success, and equally by the support offered by their enabling legislation.
It is an unemotional financial cost/benefit criteria for Corpses (multi national and local) to challenge Regulators as the enabling legislation is so weak and outdated to a constantly moving world. IMHO any Local, State and Federal Legislation and Regulations should have a sunset clause (say 10 to 20 years). Parliamentary committee(s), or a new all encompassing Integrity Agency, should review enabling legislation for “fit for the purpose” review.
What can be said of our legal system? IMHO it is more antiquainted than the Regulatory framework. The adversarial common law system clearly favours the elites (however quantified). Precedent can be drawn from centuries earlier, and frequently is, by Judges that are nearly that old. The total knowledge of the world doubles in decades, while our three pillars in The Constitution are past their use by date.
The Drum panel discussed the background to the recent formulation of The Aged Care Act. The Howard G required say $30B of funds to meet the demand. Clearly a Conservative crew looked to the private sector, as the matra often repeated is that this is more cost efficient. So do an evaluation, or back end propagation, of the achievements in Health, Aged Care, Education, or utilities such as electricity, gas, and water? The profit motive does what it always does. Power, self interest and narcissism corrupts. Greater power merely potentiates this predictable human behaviour trait. I was in the Federal PS over the four term of JH’s G. IMHO, the first two were ‘normal’, while the last two demonstrated increasing malfeasance, ‘mates rates’ and possible corruption. The issue is that no Regulatory agency is, or was, able to discern this matter!!! Cheers Geoff
…
