Watch the PM's spin on Royal Commission backflip

Does anyone else think this sounds awkward? Only a few days ago, it was 'no banking royal commission ever' and today it's 'we need a banking royal commission to restore stability'. 

Does the PM thinks we have short memories? One does wonder ...

What's your take on this announcement? Did you find it awkward?



for more than two years the government has been resisting the mounting claims for a royal commission into the 'big four' banks.  now turnbull has been forced to agree but, according to whistle blower denise brailey, it will be a whitewash with the banks themselves writing the terms of reference.

what are the banks hiding?


you saying you can’t trust the independent panel on the commission ?

you lefties and the dirty corrupt Shorten demanded an RC

now that you got one , you’re trying to hedge your bets by discrediting it before it’s even begun.

you lefties are a sorry lot 

The banks are crooked -- they are deeming at 3.5% --  and you can not get that at all -- among other things they have and are doing --- Scott Mo,  is as crooked as -- and has a real bad attitude -- he ducks and weaves questions and  is a real smart a*&^^   AND also another religious NUT, Turnbull seems to flip and flop -- time to get rid of the LOT -- Lab & Lib!


Actually the deeming rate is set by the goverment of the day or public service maybe but not the Banks. They set the rate they will pay on money deposited only AFAIK.


Maybe wrong but...........

Yep BigVal, you're correct.

"Deeming rules are used to work out income from your financial assets. We add this to your other income and apply the income test to work out your payment rate."

How we work out your deemed income … Australian Government Department of Human Services.

I do apologise for that I meant to add that the deeming rate was set by the Government and it has not changed in many years -- they have it set at 3.5%  --

I have written to the Minister for Social service -- Christian Porter. -- and never even got a reply -- we had a meeting here in November 2016 and there were many people that were having their pensions cut because they were deemed to be getting a hell of a lot more than they were.


The rest of what I said in that former post -- I meant


Be careful what you wish for. The Royal Commission will not only cost a hefty package, there will also be winners and losers. The people who have been the most vocal could find themselves the losers including farmers, small businesses and people who utilize financial services. The winners could very well be the big four banks since the cost and limited time will see only a small number of cases reviewed.


I saw Rudd on the TV on a morning show yesterday -- I still say he was the smartest and most honest politician we have had in many years --I still like him and he sure got us out of the S*&^ and had a better NBN than this lot.

If you believe that Rudd was an effective PM then perhaps that's what his party meant by him not having Labor values. He certainly had a more open door type method. I've never seen a government apologise as much as they did.

Well I am sure he cared more than any others I have witnessed -- and he never ducked and weaved questions either -- I think he may have been a bit OCD BUT that cant be bad in SOME situations -- and I think that is what drove the others crazy as he got off his bum and they didn't like that


To make a comment, please register or login

Preview your comment