Former APRA chairman John Laker has rejected the suggestion that regulators have a bias against the smaller end of town when it comes to enforcement.
John Laker, former chair of APRA and member of the Commonwealth Bank review panel, was questioned at the 18th annual Wraps, Platforms and Masterfunds conference about perceived differences in regulator responses to non-compliance.
Shartru chief executive Robert Coyte asked Mr Laker why businesses like the Commonwealth Bank appear to receive less severe punishments than their smaller counterparts.
“At an adviser level, at that smaller level, to have your career taken away by a banning order, it’s a substantial impact and I do think that there’s a common view out there that the big end of town get treated considerably differently in that they just get a slap on the wrist,” he said.
Dr Laker rejected the idea that two sets of rules existed.
“I know from my experience at APRA that we didn’t differentiate between the big end and small end of town,” Mr Laker said.
“There was no criteria by size, but you’re right in that if you’re the only one with capital in the business you’re most affected. You’re the shareholder bearing the brunt.
“I’ve never been myself conscious that there’s been a different set of rules. I don’t think it’s set up that way, but I can understand why you might perceive it differently.”
APRA will soon be handing down new prudential standards around remuneration following the damning results of an inquiry into 36 of Australia...
EXCLUSIVE Now that he’s secured his leadership, Prime Minister Scott Morrison has a major opportunity to secure the future viability of t...
A report from prudential regulator has found that CBA is not the only institution that suffers from an ill-defined culture and hazy account...