TO : Senator Sherry,
CC : Mr. Tony D'Aloisio, ASIC Chairman
CC : All parliamentarians
CC : The Australian Media
FROM : Graham MacAulay, President Westpoint Investors Group
Box 661 Miranda 1490
gmac@ihug.com.au 02 9525 2396 0411 141 888
DATE : June 25, 2008
Dear Senator Sherry,
I have received many calls from WIG members asking me why you are praising ASIC in the light of their disastrous performance, and why the Labor Party, as per your promise of 30-07-2007, has not carried out the promised investigation into past ASIC performance. They all express disappointment. I can only agree. Below are two excerpts from that document you sent me on 30-07-2007, whuch contained the promises.
It is obvious to Labor that a "perfect storm" of failure has occurred across the financial services sector and that this requires a substantial upgrade of regulation. It is time for the Howard Government to stop sticking its head in the sand and begin to help those investors who have fallen victim to their inaction and to protect future investors.
If successful at the next election a Rudd Labor government would hold an enquiry into the financial services industry, with particular focus on collapses such as Westpoint, Fincorp, ACR and Bridgecorp to determine what mistakes were made and effect change to legislation to minimise them happening again.
To date, the promises in that letter have not been met.
The collapse of Westpoint placed me in the position of conversing with people who were contemplating suicide, a situation for which I am still badly equipped. Fortunately, none of those people took their own life, but I am aware a few others did. You, of all people, should understand the state of mind of people who contemplate suicide. All Westpoint investors suffered, and continue to suffer, some form of depression. Very few have recovered fully from the tragedy.
Despite world problems in financial markets initiated by the prime mortgage scandal, your approval of ASIC performance in recent months puzzles and appalls me. Almost from its inception in 1999, ASIC has displayed a continuous ongoing pattern of regulatory failure, and an almost total absence of consumer protection as demanded in its charter. The following demonstrates the clear need for an open inquiry into the financial marketplace, including the financial regulators.
a). My letter of 12-02-2008 to Tony D'Aloisio remains unanswered, except for Jan Redfern's reply to a section concerning the "prosecution" of Karen Carey. I found her explanation outrageous.
b). ASIC received warnings on Opes in February 2008 but did not bother to investigate [AFR 15-04-2008].
c). The present ASIC Chairman knew of major problems involving insider-trading as far back as 2005. As yet no attempt has been made to address them.
d). The long list of criticisms and failures of our regulators as indicated in the Appendix.
Note. This list, mainly drawn from the press is restricted to events in 2008, is an indictment of ASIC performance. A much longer list can be found on website, www.wig.org.au, in the section Timeline/Need for a Royal Commission.
e). The recent "resignations" of four very senior ASIC personnel are a clear indication of problems in ASIC upper echelons [AFR 12-06-2008 and AFR 13-06-2008]. The AFR of 19-06-2008 describes the operation as ASIC's "NIGHT OF THE LONG KNIVES". Had ASIC been performing to a satisfactory standards, such "resignations" would not have been necessary.
f). Matters arising out of the Burnard trial attest to regulatory failure on both the part of ASIC and APRA. The jury had found Burnard guilty, and the Judge, Defence, and Prosecution had finalised, after declaring it was only a matter of curiosity asked the following question. 'After hearing the evidence in the trial, I presume this is the first in a series of prosecutions involving senior Kebbel'. He could not hide facial surprise when the prosecution told him ASIC did not contemplate senior Kebbel personnel along similar lines.
g). On more than one occasions ASIC has failed to obey the law. It began with ASIC not honouring the undertaking it gave Westpoint in the "Freehills letter of 2000". How could ASIC suddenly change its mind? Did it not have an obligation to those who had previously purchased Westpoint products? Why did ASIC, when directed by the Court to write to the investors, not advise ALL investors that would be affected by the outcome of the case? Although I do not have a legal background, Mark Steward’s description of the method involved in mounting a case against Westpoint borders on the bizarre.
h). ASIC's non-acknowledgement of its misleading both investors and planners when it failed from the outset to recognise the Westpoint Mezzanine Model as a MIS. This is not the desired behaviour one expects of a regulator, which should set the example in integrity to the financial marketplace. The only conclusion one can draw is ASIC, in not publicly acknowledging its own incompetence at law, tried to avoid its responsibility for the losses incurred by investors and planners. Further Mr. Tony D'Aloisio refused to answer the question of ASIC responsibility at a meeting ASIC held with the WIG executive on 09-03-2007, and he has not answered my questions on this matter in my communication of 12-02-2008. Does this continual refusal constitute a breach of the law?
The Business Spectator 13-06-2006 reports, On ASIC's involvement, Minister for Superannuation and Corporate Law Nick Sherry said in a statement: 'the Rudd Government expects the corporate regulator to vigorously enforce the law, Money Management reported'. If ASIC is to apply the law vigorously, then why is it exempt from obeying the law itself?
In your letter of 30-07-2007 you mention FICS. As my planner did not hold an AFS licence, I could not claim compensation via FICS. In written communications with FICS, I brought up the matter of the planners who sold Westpoint Mezzanine products were automatically responsible for investor losses. It is true that the planners relied on ASIC in this matter, but that does not mean that reliance absolved them from responsibility. FICS clearly stated they worked under a different set of rules. I brought this matter up with ASIC, but nothing came of it. As FICS is an ASIC approved scheme, I would have thought that both are responsible to the incumbent Government. Perhaps you might publicly remind ASIC and the now defunct FICS management of their responsibilities in the case where investors are misled.
The inescapable conclusion on reading of your document of 30-07-2008 was that you were going to do something for the then 20,000 affected investors in the "perfect storm" of failure across the financial sector (your words, not mine). In recent months that storm intensified to destroy the lives of a great many more Australian investors.
I appreciate the number, and complexity, of the many problems in the financial area demanding immediate attention. The regulators failing to take timely action is at the root of most of them. I also recognise the need for rebuilding ASIC into a credible organisation, and that it will take considerable time. However, falsely praising the financial regulators detracts from that aim.
Repairing the regulatory system is a laudable enterprise. It is neither an easy, nor a short period, venture. However, denying the truth of ASIC's past failure will not add confidence to the marketplace. The only purpose it serves is to hide the embarrassment, and deny many investors natural justice in the aim of saving the incumbent Government money. Neither of these practices is what one expects in a modern democracy. Westpoint investors, most in their senior years, have good cause to demand compensation from the Government.
EVERY WESTPOINT INVESTOR LOST MONEY BY INVESTING IN AN ILLEGAL MANAGED INVESTEMET SCHEME BECAUSE OF ASIC's FAILURE TO RECOGNISE THE WESTPOINT MODEL AS AN ILLEGAL MIS AT THE OUTSET.
I request the following.
1. The incumbent Government ensures the ASIC Chairman:
a). Immediately supplies appropriate answers to ALL questions raised in my document of 12-02-2008.
b). Discloses all actions taken to date in which planners selling Westpoint products did not supply clients with a written declaration of commissions.
c). In the Section 50's so far issued, why all planners were not added to the claim.
2. The incumbent Government recognises ASIC misled both planners and investors, and ensures ASIC takes immediate steps to recompense those it misled.
3. Given all of the available evidence in the marketplace of regulatory failure (it goes far beyond Westpoint), the Government has not begun the open inquiry as promised by Senator Sherry.
Graham MacAulay
_____________________________________________________________
APPENDIX
1. The accelerating rise of class actions is proof the current financial regulators and their administrations are an abject failure [The Australian 07-01-2008].
2. The story of Gabrial Pennicott [07-01-2008] is another case in which ASIC received warnings in 2002, but took no action until after Pennicott fled the country in 2005. It is very difficult to see how ASIC, which the Howard Government created with an aim of the protection of financial consumers, made any attempt to protect investors. By now, ASIC's failure to protect financial consumers is an expectation.
3. The Age of 08-01-2008 reports the banning of a Brighton Hall AFSL holder who put clients into Westpoint between 2001 and 2003. Even after the death of Westpoint, it took the regulator two years to get around to banning the Westpoint adviser. That was two years extra to fleece unsuspecting clients. The time lapse says much about ASIC's current knowledge of those to whom it issues AFSL'S. The above also illustrates ASIC's attitude of sitting on its backside waiting for something to happen.
4. ASIC TOO SLOW TO SALVE VICTIMS and WESTPOINT: 2 YEARS ON INVESTORS STILL WAITING is the story banner from the AFR of 22-01-2008.
5. ASIC Regulatory_Guide_156: DEBENTURE_ADVERTISING Why weren't things better before? Was it a lapse in consumer protection?
6. CAREY CLAIMS EVIDENCE WAS FALSE [AFR 24_01_2008]. I find it strange Norm Carey has consistently called for a Royal Commission involving ASIC behaviour.
7. An extract from SMH of 31_01_2008 reads: 'But Justice Robert French rejected ASIC's application to extend the April 2006 restrictions in the Perth court on Thursday, saying it was "characterised by generality and uncertainty" about the precise state of investigations into Westpoint. In my opinion ASIC has failed to make a case," Justice French said. Justice French is not the only one confused about where ASIC are up to in its investigation into Westpoint.
8. The Age of 01_02_2008 reports the decision to lift travel restrictions on the Carey's. Even the judge in the case has doubts about if ASIC has a case against Carey!
9. The AFR of 11_02_2008 says CAREY FIGHTS ASIC INTERVENTION. We now enter another phase in the continuing disaster.
10. 12-02-2008_MacAulay_Daloisio is a document that asks ASIC a number of awkward questions. At the time of writing, I have never received an answer to my questions. Is ASIC accountable for its actions?
11. The header in an article of the Investor Daily of 13-02-2008 reads INVESTORS DEMAND ANSWERS OVER WESTPOINT. There are so many unanswered questions. I doubt ASIC will ever admit the truth
12. The Investor Daily of 18-02-2008 says BONGIORNO BUSINESS DRAINED OF CASH This one of the companies ASIC is pursuing with a Section 50!
13. The Australian of 20-02-2008 says INSIDER TRADING RIFE IN AUSTRALIA. Didn't the current ASIC Chairman head up the ASX before coming to ASIC? What did he do in his time at the ASX to combat insider trading?
14. The AFR of 22-02-2008 reads ASIC PROBES FOR HEDGE FUND RORTS Why hasn't this shown up on ASIC's radar in the past? Does it monitor the market or just react to disasters?
15. The AFR of 22-02-2008 says LIQUIDATORS UNDER SCRUTINY. What mechanisms does ASIC have in place to ensure the liquidators are doing their job properly? Why hasn't this shown up on ASIC's radar in the past? Does it monitor the market or just react to disasters?
16. The article in the AFR of 23-02-2008, WHEN A BAD CALL IS MADE, concerns stockbroker and planners incentives in advising clients to buy products that result in the highest commissions for themselves rather than what is best for the clients. Wasn't one of the reasons for ASIC's creation investor protection?
17. INDUSTRY UNDER THE MICROSCOPE [The Australian 27-02-2008]. The open inquiry promised by Nick Sherry would be a good microscope. A Royal Commission with the widest possible powers into the financial industry would be a better one.
18. ASIC SILENT ON FINANCE LICENCE [Herald Sun 28-02-2008]. The Australian Securities and Investments Commission yesterday declined to comment on the circumstances surrounding a financial services licence issued last year to a subsidiary of a mortgage group that was balance-sheet insolvent on June 30. The sheer audacity of anyone to ask a question that would seriously embarrass it because of a shortcoming or failure. Whenever ASIC is faced with an awkward question, it refuses to answer questions. Where is its accountability?
19. The Mayne Report of 29-02-2008 gives the number of people jailed by ASIC action over the years. The low number gives an indication of ASIC's seriousness in bringing miscreants to account.
20. ASIC WARNED ABOUT DONOVAN.[The Australian 01_03_2008]. After Denise Brailey advised them about Westpoint and they ignored her, she should have recognised that ASIC's modus operandi is to sit and sleep until someone wakes it and informs it a disaster has occurred. ASIC will then shout to the heavens about stupid investors, greedy planners (which it controls), auditors, and anyone one else it can blame. It refuses to understand the true meaning of investor protection, and it is responsible for the losses of those the Liberal Government created it to protect.
21 The Australian of 03-03-2008 reports ASA SAYS WATCHDOG NEEDS TO BITE HARD. Has anyone told the ASA that ASIC has a sleeping disease that leaves it very weak for the few minutes a day it is awake?
22. The AFR OF 12-03-2008 says ASIC WANTS ANSWERS ON PLUNGING STOCKS. I know ASIC should be monitoring the market and preventing the majority of scams in this area, but would someone please explain the obvious to ASIC?
23. MARKET NEEDS A NEW RAE COMMITTEE AND A ROYAL COMMISSION! [AFR 12-03-2008]. That would be a step forward, but a Royal Commission into the Australian marketplace would be a better one.
24. ASX 'REJECTED SHORT SALE DATA OFFER' heads the article in the Australian of 22-03-2008. Short selling is not new. The ASX brought the matter to the attention of ASIC and the Government last year - with the usual do nothing result.
25. REGULATORS FAIL TO TACKLE PRICE RIGGING [AFR 13-03-2008]. Next these people will demand ASIC should be monitoring what is going on. Don't they realise that it is much easier to wait until something fails over dead, and then pick at the carcass?
26. The Investor Daily of 14-03-2008 reports ASIC TARGETS ACCOUNTANTS. By now ASIC must be running out of people to blame for their own incompetence.
27. BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE [Business Spectator 21-03-2008]. Surely a few prosecutions for illegal behaviour would have more effect than warnings.
28. ASX 'REJECTED SHORT SALE DATA OFFER' [News 22-03-2008]. Short selling is not new. The ASX brought the matter to the attention of ASIC and the Government last year - with the usual do nothing result.
29. CORPORATE LAW REVIEW AT STANDSTILL [AFR 25-03-2008]. And I thought it had fallen over dead through exhaustion!
30 INDUSTRY STILL WARY OF ASIC [Money Management 27-03-2008]. One is always wary of those who behave erratically.
31 ASIC REJECTS NOTIONS OF REGULARITY INACTION [AFR 27-03-2008 }. It's been ASIC's favourite song since 1999.
32. LACK OF ACTION ON STOCK LENDING BLASTED [The Australian 01-04-2008]. Anything I could say on this matter is superfluous.
33. FINANCIAL PLANNING RULES FARCICAL [The Australian 02-04-2008]. I can't argue with that statement.
34. DEMISE EXPOSES REGULATORS [AFR 03-04-2008]. Once again not monitoring the denizens of the marketplace has led to tragedy.
35. THE BLIND LEADING THE BLIND [AFR 03-04-2008]. How could I argue against the truth?
36. ASX ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL [The Australian 03-04-2008]. The Never Ending Story.
37. ASIC Media Release 08-67 refers to ASIC's discontinuation of legal action against Henry Kay. A search of the ASIC website using the key of Henry Kaye indicates just how much effort went into prosecuting Kaye. However, despite Jeff Lucy's proclamation they would keep at it until a court found him guilty, there has been no result for the spending of a vast sum of public money, and the wastage of valuable resource in the form of a great many hours of ASIC's time.
38. MONTY PYTHON GIVES OPES INVESTORS A LIFE LESSON [The Australian 06-04-2008] . Monty Python was humorous - not a tragedy involving appalling regulation.
39. CONCERN AT ASIC STAFFING LEVELS [2008_04_07_AFR]. If you don't do the work as it arrives, then it just piles up into an unscalable mountain.
40. ASIC INVITED TROUBLE [Australian 07-04-2008]. Oh! But they were mates of ours and could be trusted to do the right thing.
41. WESTPOINT REGULATOR TARGETS ADVISERS.[AFR 09-04-2008] ASIC stumbles into action long after the event.
42. REGULATION BY REACTION IS USUALLY WRONG. [AFR 12-04-2008] And even worse when it’s delayed reaction.
43. The 7.30 Report transcript of 14-04-2008 tells how ASIC was warned of the depth of insider trading as far back as 2005. Warnings to ASIC? Why did anyone bother?
44. [Crikey 14-04-2008] - TIME FOR THE ASX, ANZ AND FRIENDS TO START WRITING OPES PRIME CHECKS. An investigation by The AFR has uncovered internal Opes Prime documents in which staff recorded discussions with regulators. The documents reveal that the stockbroking firm felt encouraged" by senior ASX market supervision staff to exploit a loophole in the rules by hiving off its $1.3 billion worth of bank debts into a company that did not need an Australian Financial Services licence and was therefore out of the regulators sights.
45. ASIC SILENT ON 'MISSING OPES' WARNING. [Australian 14-04-2008]. Once again ASIC hides behind its standard technique of saying we don't discuss anything we are investigating.
46. WATCHDOGS ARE A JOKE [The Age 14-02-2008]. Why would anyone disagree?
47. The AFR of 15-04-2008 contained four articles involving ASIC, none of which was complimentary to the regulator. The articles need no comment from me.
ASIC REFORM A TOP PRIORITY.
REGULATORS MUST STAND FOR SOMETHING.
NO ONE WAS WATCHING OPES Despite the fact ASIC had discussions with them in February of this year!
GET REAL ABOUT SPRUIKERS, THE REIA WARNS CANBERRA
48. FAILURE ON ALL FRONTS [SMH 15-04-2008]. The SMH says it perfectly.
49. WHO DO YOU TRUST? MARKET SAGA RAISES QUESTIONS OVER SECURITY AND REGULATION. "A SLEEPING watchdog, a crook turned crusader, car chases and cash. Australia's business pages are spilling over with this theatre" [The Age 19-04-2008]. Yes, this is the Australian regulator, ASIC, the Age co-authors are describing.
50. EDITORIAL: ASIC LACKS SENSE, NOT MONEY [Money Management 17-04-2008].
51. Among other matters, Money Management of 19-04-2008 raises the long-standing problems of PII compliance for AFSL holders. As matters stand, no one knows whether insurance companies will offer products, what the cost will be, or what re the escape clauses in the policy. Just another example of the inability of ASIC to learn and plan. The problems arising out of Westpoint clearly indicate The Parliament must prescribe the main policy contents. There is no evidence ASIC has discussed, and solved, the problem of personal indemnity insurance. It isn't a major problem in other industries.
52. ASIC'S WESTPOINT ACTION NO USE [Investor Daily 21-04-2008]. It is my belief ASIC's claim of the use of Section 50 is a smokescreen. ASIC must have known IMF scrutinised the money pots carefully, and they are not suing people like Glenhurst, etc. The longer the truth can be put off, the less will come of it.
53. FINCORP FOUNDER ERIC KRECICHWOST WILL POCKET $6 MILLION FROM MANSION SALE [Daily Telegraph 21-04-2008].
54. CBA'S NORRIS SLAMS DUAL ASX ROLE [AFR 22-04-2008]. It's nice to know that someone of power agrees with me. That way it gets in the press.
55. Crikey 22-04-2008, asked its readers to give their scorecard on Tony 'Aloisio's performance to date. I don't think the editor was expecting an honours pass - or any other pass rate.
56. The Australian of 22-04-2008 reports ASIC changed its mind about intervening in a court case involving the ANZ. ASIC's refused to give any reason why it changed its mind. ASIC never gives a reason for changing its mind unless it can bask in the reflected glory.
57. RIVALS FACE OFF OVER $10 MILLION CAREY KITTY [WA_Business 25-04-2008]. More litigation over investor funds, but no prosecution of the Westpoint Directors.
58. PLANNERS HOSTAGE TO PI [Money Management 29-04-2008]. I still believe that any PI scheme should be run by ASIC. If it were, then we would see an interest in ensuring the regulator does it duties.
59. SHERRY BACKS ASIC, ASX ON 'SOLID JOB' [The Age 29-04-2008]. Sherry's statement would have been accurate if he had meant destroying investors.
.
60. TIME FOR MARKET OPERATORS TO WAKE UP TO MARKET MANIPULATION [SMH 03-05-2008]. But fewer transactions would hurt the bottom line of the ASX.
61. On 06-05-2008 a jury found Neil Burnard guilty on all charges [ASIC Media Release 08-91). I attended every day of the trial, which extended into 11 days including the jury verdict. I have included a set of short summary notes, and for those so inclined a more complete set, warts and all, that I took during the trial. There was been no attempt to turn the latter into an organised document. covering the trial.
The judge stated he never looks at any material to do with those involved in a case he will preside over. However, in this case, the evidence showed that senior people, including directors of Kebbel companies, seemed to have used Kebbel Investment Bank in the same manner as Burnard. He asked the Crown prosecutor if this was the first of a series of court cases, and the Crown prosecutor said no.
Note I sent a document to the press on this matter.
62. [Geelong Advertiser 08-05-2008] ASIC KNEW ABOUT CHARTWELL FOR TWO YEARS, INVESTORS TOLD. So? On past performance, why would anyone expect ASIC to take any action?
63. ASIC SAYS OPES COLLAPSE NOT ITS FAULT.[The Australian 08-05-2008] Of course it isn't. ASIC didn't do a thing. It's the greedy investors, and the incompetent auditors, and the crooked directors, and .., and, etc.
64. THE REGULATOR REMAINS A LAPDOG [SMH 08-05-2008]. First lapdog I've read about in a permanent catatonic state.
65. ASIC PLEDGES SHAKEUP [Herald Sun 09-05-2008]. We're gunna paint the deck chairs on the Titanic.
66. ISN'T OUR FAULT: REFORMED ASIC. [The Australian 09-05-2008] I don't know what's wrong. The needle is stuck in the same groove.
67. ASIC ASLEEP ON THE JOB [Crikey 09-05-2008] Asleep? No! ASIC's been on holidays since 1999]. .
68. FORMER WESTPOINT ADVISER CHARGED [WA Business News 13-05-2008]. It was Keith Rowntree of Solutions 1. Amazing how it takes so long after the event to prosecute the "button men" of the operation. Burnard was one of the bigger fish, but where are the other big fish?
69. OUTRAGED INVESTORS COUNT THE COST [The Australian 14-05-2008]. Same crew as Kebbel Investment Bank involved again. This would never have happened if ASIC acted when they first heard about Kebbel Bank.
60. OPES FALLOUT: ANZ SUED [AFR 15-05-2008]. More embarrassment for ASIC, the ASX, and ANZ. What a marvellous example of the investor protection system we have in Australia.
61. TICKED OFF IN OWN SURVEY [Herald Sun 17-05-2008]. What did they expect?
62. ASIC BUSINESS PESSIMISM [Courier Mail 17-05-2008]. ASIC should know. It has stood idly by and watched it all happen.
63. BUSINESSES THINK ASIC PROBING WRONG ISSUES: SURVEY [ABC Online 17-05-2008]. And the investors think both of them are concerned about the wrong issues.
64. The Herald Sun of 22-05-2008 article headline says ASIC FORCES GE MONEY TO CHANGE LENDING, INSURANCE PRACTICES. Once again ASIC has failed to take decisive heavy punitive action against a "big fish", after they warned GE back in 2006. The small criminals around town see that ASIC won't get its dentures out of the draw, and they run riot.
65. Many Westpoint investors gained information from the ASIC licenced Norton Capital and PIS research houses. Despite ASIC's constant prattling about consumer education , the consumers gained confidence from the reports put out by these research houses on Westpoint. It is now five year since they put out the research, and ASIC has now just completed an investigation the advice given by an ASIC licenced research house. It doesn't say why PIS got it wrong!
66. Alan Kohler's interview of Tony D'Aloisio on Inside Business of 11-05-2008 raises questions of not only ASIC's past performance, but its current state of readiness to perform its duty. The current ASIC situation didn't happen by accident, as Kohler's 2005 interview of Tony D'Aloisio shows. Where is the investigation Nick Sherry promised?
67. 2008_05_27_press is a copy of an email I sent to the media and members of the ASIC oversight committee. It refers to a document Ms. J. Redfern sent to me, and my reply to her. I am still waiting for a reply.
68. The SMH of 31_05_2008 reports ASX was told about the Opes fraud, but they did nothing. ASIC and the ASX were warned about Opes in February. True to its usual performance, ASIC stood and watched the disaster develop from afar. In terms of the ANZ's performance, Beltar of 01-06-2008 gets it right. What does it need for Labor to insitute Nick's Sherry's promise of an open inquiry into ASIC performance?
69. WORDS, NO ACTION, SPRUIKERS [AFR 04-06-2008]. The byline says it all.
70. OPES PRIME DEBACLE EXPOSED - A SYSTEM IN NEED OF A REVIEW [The Australian 07-06-2008] . That review should be a Royal Commission into the Australian Financial System and its regulators.
71. CHIEFS IN DEFENCE OF MONOPLY [The Australian 07-06-2008]. It's a monopoly that should never have arisen.
72. SHERRY PRAISES 'SOLID' MARKET REGULATORS.[AFR 11-06-2008]. Yes, it was a difficult year. But so were 1999, 2000, and every other year of the Australia's regulators existences. I guess one way to make me go away is to make me so sick I can't type.
73. CONDUCT UNBECOMING [SMH 11-06-2008] Agreed, but why didn't ASIC make an example of GE in 2005?
74. BANKS UNDER FIRE OVER FEES [The Australian 12-06-2008]. It will be interesting to see if the Government is willing to take the banks on.
75. ASIC DIRECTORS RESIGN [AFR 12-06-2008] Jan Redfen and Keith Inman resign. Were they pushed? Either way, it signals not all is sweetness and light in the upper ASIC levels.
76. ASIC SHAKEUP CLAIMS COMPLIANCE CHIEF [AFR 13-06-2008]. Two more gone, including Jennifer O'Donnell. How many more to go?
77. ASIC PUTS FOCUS ON PLANNERS [2008_06_23_AFR] These are the same planers that ASIC controlled when the disaters occurred. Once again, where was the monitoring process?
____________________________________________________________-
.