Webdiary - Independent, Ethical, Accountable and Transparent
header_02 home about login header_06
header_07
search_bar_left
date_box_left
date_box_right.jpg
search_bar_right
sidebar-top content-top

Australia’s banks take a risky path, holding back on rate cuts

From Webdiarist Alan Thornhill’s Private Briefing website with many thanks.

 

Australia’s banks take a risky path, holding back on rate cuts
by Alan Thornhill

Australia’s big four banks are taking a serious risk by holding out on the latest interest rate cut.

Their argument, that this is necessary, because they now face higher costs raising the money they lend, is not convincing.

Even the usually mild-mannered Treasurer, Wayne Swan, says he has seen little evidence of that.

And an independent expert supports him.

Sean Cornelius, of Infochoice, told the ABC radio program PM last night, that in Novenber 2007, the average variable home loan interest rate charged by Australia’s banks, was 1.82 percentage points above the Reserve Bank’s target rate.

Now, though average margin that banks charge has blown out by amost 1 percentage point, Mr Cornelius said.

The big four banks, effectively, operate as a government protected banking cartel.

That has its advantages.

Australia’s banks, after all, have remained strong and solvent, when many in the United States, England and several other countries have not.

Mr Swan has clearly lost patience with Australia’s big banks.

So severely, in fact, that he told Fairfax radio, late yesterday, that they deserve “a good kick up the bum, occasionally.”

That’s not parliamentary language.

But it will resonate with the public.

“They (the banks) have to justify their position in the court of public opinion,” Mr Swan added.

There has been little sign, so far, though that the banks will step forward, either singly or together, to explain themselves clearly to the public.

In present circumstances, keeping quiet, as the banks have been doing, is not necessarily a good idea.

The government is arguing, very strongly, that it is doing all it can, to help Australians cope, as the global economic crisis hits the nationnal economy.

It is saying, too, that the banks should be playing their part, in that national effort.

This is powerful talk.

So if the banks do, in fact, have a good case for holding back, on the benefits of the latest rate cut, they would be wise to state it, very clearly.

So far, they are not doing so.

And no business, no matter how big or how dominant, can afford to ignore public opinion.

left
right
spacer

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The way to really kick the banks up the bum would be to ...

  1. Set up a Peoples' Bank owned by the Australian public
  2. Have the government resume the right from private banks the right to create money.

With regard to the second point, that's what Abraham Lincoln did successfully during the Civil War and that's what US author Ellen Brown says Barack Obama should do today. See Revive Lincoln's Monetary Policy - An Open Letter to President Obama published on Global Research, which is republished here.

Which bank?

Now, James Sinnamon, what might one call that new People's Bank?

Ah, erm, whaddabout something like the Commonwealth Bank? (Provided, of course, that they were at least as smart as the others at arranging settlements of purchased and sold properties. I still wake up with nightmares from the 1980's.....)

Banks and low interest rates

To obtain deposits, banks must attract funds through deposit rates, which normally means lower than the RBA rate. The public may not find these deposit rate attractive. So the banks, if they are lending, and that is no longer a given, must source funds from somewhere. Foreign capital, which still exists at the moment, may be unwary and may also find the rate unattractive, so what the banks say may have some truth. But they are supposed to be able to borrow some funds from the RBA. Clearly, the RBA can no longer supply these funds as they are meant to be short term. If the RBA could, then there would be no need to pay high rates to suppliers of capital.

What am I missing? 

Are the banks lying, looking for a fine or legislative action, or are the RBA lower rates already ineffective? Keeping the rates higher than the present will ensure enough funds to lend, but will also solve the malinvestments quicker. Do not count on further RBA cuts!

The banks are too profitable, but that increases their credit worthiness and in a few months we may be needful as the depression is only just gathering momentum. There is going to be a worse crash soon in global credit as the last international bubbles are popped. 

Free movement

About a year ago, the government was going to make the movement of home loans between banks easier and cheaper. What happened to that? It's the economists answer to the problem.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
© 2005-2011, Webdiary Pty Ltd
Disclaimer: This site is home to many debates, and the views expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the site editors.
Contributors submit comments on their own responsibility: if you believe that a comment is incorrect or offensive in any way,
please submit a comment to that effect and we will make corrections or deletions as necessary.
Margo Kingston Photo © Elaine Campaner

Recent Comments

David Roffey: {whimper} in Not with a bang ... 12 weeks 6 days ago
Jenny Hume: So long mate in Not with a bang ... 12 weeks 6 days ago
Fiona Reynolds: Reds (under beds?) in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 1 day ago
Justin Obodie: Why not, with a bang? in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 1 day ago
Fiona Reynolds: Dear Albatross in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 1 day ago
Michael Talbot-Wilson: Good luck in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 1 day ago
Fiona Reynolds: Goodnight and good luck in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 3 days ago
Margo Kingston: bye, babe in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 6 days ago