Bankers gonna bank

Written By: - Date published: 8:09 am, June 18th, 2019 - 117 comments
Categories: capitalism, john key, workers' rights - Tags:

So the former head of ANZ and the current owner of John Key’s Omaha property, David Hisco, has left the employment of the Bank in somewhat newsworthy circumstances.

From Radio New Zealand:

The head of ANZ bank’s local operation has left under a cloud after an investigation into his expenses.

Last month the bank said David Hisco was taking extended leave for health reasons, but has now revealed that the board was also concerned about certain transactions after reviewing Mr Hisco’s personal expenses.

In dispute were Mr Hisco’s charging for chauffeur driven cars, and wine storage without authorisation, which were worth tens-of-thousands of dollars.

ANZ New Zealand chairman Sir John Key would not say if the chief executive had been forced to go, but said Mr Hisco did not accept all of the bank’s concerns.

“I think the way to characterise it is that we parted company… and it was mutual,” he told a news conference

“From the moment we had this discussion with him, David was very firm of the view that we should probably part company and I think that was the view the board had over time.”

Mr Hisco claimed there was a handshake agreement concerning the payments.  You have to wonder why a banker did not document such an arrangement, especially as it could and did cause so much difficulty.  It should be noted that ANZ accepted Mr Hisco’s description of what happened but took the action because of accuracy problems with the way the expenses were recorded.

The poor mite obviously struggled to make ends meet on a salary of $3 million a year.

And there was a sting to his leaving.

“We have to apply the same standards to a freshly-minted teller to the CEO. David will say he failed those standards,” Sir John said.

[Key] said Mr Hisco would receive his contractual and statutory entitlements and untaken leave, but will forfeit unused options to buy shares in ANZ , worth about $6.4m.

Mr Hisco was paid about $3.8m a year.

ANZ staff are outraged.  From Michael Cropp at Radio New Zealand:

First Union general secretary Dennis Maga said Mr Hisco’s actions were especially galling when members worried about staffing levels and pay were told the bank was trying to cut costs.

“Some of our members were really outraged because of that lavish lifestyle that he had,” said Mr Maga. “I think that actually warrants his dismissal.”

He said tellers were paid $40,000-70,000 on average, compared with Mr Hisco who was being paid $3.8 million and would get a final payout of $2m.

“That is an unfair treatment… where a CEO is receiving a special treatment from the company compared to an employee of the bank who can be disciplined or can be dismissed if ever they committed the same mistake.”

Can you imagine if a beneficiary was in a comparable situation.  If they had provided incorrect information when filing in a WINZ form while at the same time receiving a benefit they were not entitled to?  I don’t think there would be a payout at the end of the process.

This is not the only problem that ANZ Bank has experienced this year.  From Liam Dann in the Herald:

Last month, the Reserve Bank of New Zealand revoked ANZ Bank New Zealand’s accreditation to model its own operational risk capital requirement due to a “persistent failure” to properly calculate risk.

It was ordered to increase the capital it holds as a safety net to absorb possible losses, by 60 per cent to $760 million.

That prompted former BNZ chairman Kerry McDonald to write to Reserve Bank governor Adrian Orr, saying he was “amazed” at the limited penalty imposed on the bank.

He called for ANZ chief executive David Hisco and Key to resign.

ANZ said it regretted the error, but also that the sum involved was a small portion of its total capital and that it had “no impact on customers or the operation of the bank”.

Soon after Hisco departed on sick leave. Key did not comment publicly about the breach.

Today he described them “as very separate issues”.

He also attributed blame for the breach to an error by a junior staffer.

Gee those junior staffers cause all sorts of problems.

And business analysts are questioning Key’s role.  Again from the Herald:

Key also sits on the board of the ANZ’s Australian parent company – something big bank critics like fund manager Sam Stubbs has described as a conflict of interest.

Stubbs, a former banker and chief executive of Tower Insurance, described the capital breach as “very concerning behaviour by our biggest and most profitable bank”.

“This is as strong a censure of a bank as I have ever seen in New Zealand.”

Hisco’s sacking has a machiavellian game of thrones feel to it.  And you have to wonder if the events are related.

117 comments on “Bankers gonna bank ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Pat 1
    18 June 2019 at 8:21 am

    Game of Thrones?…..more like house of cards

    • Robert Guyton 1.1
      18 June 2019 at 8:26 am

      Or from their point of view, something from the Marvel stable; Masters of the Universe etc.

    • I feel love 1.2
      18 June 2019 at 8:27 am

      Or a game of hot potato, last one holding it goes to prison (or full pay and pay off more likely, oh they must laugh at us suckers).

      • bwaghorn 1.2.1
        18 June 2019 at 11:18 am

        Fuck yes I wish I could get sacked for dishonesty and leave with a mill or two

  2. Ankerrawshark) 2
    18 June 2019 at 8:42 am

    I really feel for all the Anz staff turning up everyday keeping the bank going, on modest wages.

    I hope this this whole thing starts to unravel and key with it.

    the sense of entitlement from hisco is gob smacking. It’s also obviously dishonest rather than a “blind spot” because he coded the chauffeur driven cars in his personal life as business………that is lying. I run a business and it is very, very simple to distinguish between personal and business (I know I am stating the bleeding obvious)

    • Anne 2.1
      18 June 2019 at 9:37 am

      I know I

      • Anne 2.1.1
        18 June 2019 at 9:44 am

        Something a bit odd there… 😕 My name etc. has gone to.

        Edit: Hang on, they’re back again.

    • Anne 2.2
      18 June 2019 at 9:41 am

      Stating the obvious does no harm Ankerrawshark. It acts as a reminder to us all that what should be a foregone conclusion is not always the case any more. 🙂

    • mauī 2.3
      18 June 2019 at 2:58 pm

      I feel as much for the staff as say workers in a munitions factory. I'm sure they're nice enough people and all but they should know the business they're in isn't exactly ethical to start with.

  3. Sacha 3
    18 June 2019 at 8:44 am

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/392275/anz-boss-s-departure-raises-serious-doubts-over-nz-board-s-ability

    Mr Hisco believed he had authority for this under a verbal agreement, and Sir John said he took him at his word but the problem was that he didn't accurately record the expenses. "There was either no transparency, they were bulked up, or they were characterised as business when they were clearly of a private nature."

    What does 'bulked up' mean?

  4. Gosman 4
    18 June 2019 at 9:16 am

    Yet the PM thinks this is a matter for the Banking industry and is of no major interest to the Government…

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2018700083/jacinda-ardern-discusses-oranga-tamariki-anz-boss-departure

    • Sacha 4.1
      18 June 2019 at 10:11 am

      Given the way our corporate sector and financial regulatory systems are structured, she would currently be correct. Changing that would require changing the law.

      • greywarshark 4.1.1
        18 June 2019 at 11:26 am

        It could be that this is the appropriate time to raise the matter of the banks bullying farmers!

        https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/country/392242/farm-debt-mediation-scheme-gets-government-backing

        The government is proposing a new scheme to help farmers in financial distress deal with their lenders.

        Under a new bill, creditors – including banks – would be required to offer mediation before putting farms into receivership or liquidation.

        New Zealand First MP Mark Patterson pushed for the law change last year, and legislation setting up the scheme has now been proposed by the government.

        Agriculture Minister Damien O'Connor said that at nearly $63 billion, total farm debt was up by 270 percent compared to 20 years ago.

        • Cinny 4.1.1.1
          18 June 2019 at 1:18 pm

          Wow that's a massive amount of debt that farmers have.

          Wonder who they mainly bank with….

          • greywarshark 4.1.1.1.1
            18 June 2019 at 1:32 pm

            Right – l wondered too.

            https://www.rbnz.govt.nz/statistics/s31-banks-assets-loans-by-purpose

            At April 2019 – Agricultural loans ($m) $62,586
            (have risen steadily since April 2017)

            The dairy farming portion being – $41,234

            Then next biggest proportion:
            Sheep, B.Cattle & Grain farming – $14,407
            Horticulture – $4,675

            I would like to see those figures exchanged with dairy down to $14,407. Let’s have some balance in our agriculture as soon as possible. Dairy into grain on the Canterbury Plain like before. Highland cattle roaming round on the hills. They are even more photogenic than Jerseys.

          • Pat 4.1.1.1.2
            18 June 2019 at 1:32 pm

            the ratio is even worse for the dairy sector on its own…almost 3 times higher

            • In Vino 4.1.1.1.2.1
              18 June 2019 at 5:30 pm

              And who might be the greatest beneficiaries of this astonishing high level of debt?

              Well bless me if it doesn't turn out to be those bloody banks.

              It is a way of sorting the system.

          • mike 4.1.1.1.3
            18 June 2019 at 5:41 pm

            not farm debt is not as large as the houseing debt

            • Pat 4.1.1.1.3.1
              18 June 2019 at 5:44 pm

              true but much more widely spread…..approx 55,000 farming operations and around 12000 are dairy….approaching 2 million residences, and their source of servicing is diversified unlike dairy

  5. Peter 5
    18 June 2019 at 9:24 am

    'Characterised', 'bulked up'? It's just a situation that's happened and whatever has happened has had a high powered characterisation bulked up around it to give it as much of a 'nothing to see here' appearance as possible.

    Whether it involved shoddy practice, dishonesty, rampant greed or misunderstandings it's just a tiny moment to be forgotten.

    On newstalkZB just before 6.00 I heard their breakfast host in 'it's only a few dollars and in the overall picture it's nothing' mode. I didn't hear him later using to the full extent of his intellect justifying whatever happened and his total acceptance of the minimising line fed out by the bank yesterday.

    You know, the "Look, he's in a high-powered job, so high powered he's paid multi-millions a year and has chauffeur driven cars, and he was so busy he was a bit clumsy with some paperwork minutiae," sort of intellect. You know the intellect that has him in modes like, "She stole a loaf of bread to feed her family, let's have her hung drawn and quartered in Aotea Square. Let's make an example of her."

    Disclosure: I am an ANZ customer.

    • ianmac 5.1
      18 June 2019 at 9:35 am

      Which makes the actual figure very interesting. If it was just a few thousand dollars they could say so. $3,127.53 you say? (Hypothetical) Over 9 years? So what is the fuss?

      Unless tens of thousand means hundreds of thousand dollars. Recently a Beneficiary was in court for falsely claiming $100,000 and has to repay the sum.

      • greywarshark 5.1.1
        18 June 2019 at 11:32 am

        And that beneficiary may be a poor person who has been found to be in a relationship that conforms to marriage or whatever term is used. They could be propping up some person who needs assistance, and vice versa, neither of them able to manage on their own. Those near the ground will have any carpet they have managed to get pulled from under them; those further up have it automatically replaced with new and thicker every five years.

    • Anne 5.2
      18 June 2019 at 10:01 am

      On newstalkZB just before 6.00 I heard their breakfast host in 'it's only a few dollars and in the overall picture it's nothing' mode.

      According to a RNZ report it amounted to $25,000 over 9 years – something like that.

      OK, not a lot of money but lets remember :

      the people who are playing down the size of the amount, kicked up one hell of a stink over Metiria Turei’s few hundred dollars at a time in her life when she was a struggling solo mum with a new-born.

      • Peter 5.2.1
        18 June 2019 at 10:21 am

        Just written this and saw your comment:

        They’re putting the best possible spin on it. They’re trying to depict themselves as righteous and moral and strong.

        They won’t go into details of amounts involved. They won’t say how long or the number of occasions ‘untoward’ things happened. They’re all mere background details.

        Given the lengths they’ve gone to, the time he has been off work and the way they’ve made it public do you think it involves $17.50? Or something significant. I don’t mean significant in moral terms, or understanding employment conditions terms, but dollar terms.

        It’s a private business, it’s not publicly owned or anything to do with government. Stripping those away and leaving the morality and what is ‘right’ or ‘wrong,’ how do do you think Hisco will be judged compared to, say, Metiria Turei?

        • Blazer 5.2.1.1
          18 June 2019 at 10:38 am

          Funny how it was worthy of a press conference.

          The absolute scandal of the ANZ ignoring capital requirements was not deemed important enough for Key to front.

          Actually Nu Zilders should be concerned about the continuing arrogance and entitlement of these banking overlords.

          Their ongoing chicanery as revealed by the Australian inquiry,their veiled threats,their tacit reliance on Govt bailouts are proof that nothing was learned from the GFC.

          Kiwis should vote with their accounts and support local banks.

          • greywarshark 5.2.1.1.1
            18 June 2019 at 11:39 am

            Blazer

            +1000 (not allowing for inflation)

            'Kiwis should vote with their accounts and support local banks.'

          • Anne 5.2.1.1.2
            18 June 2019 at 4:20 pm

            I'm an ANZ customer but will have to think seriously about changing.

            As someone said to me today who is not political but she is nevertheless a very astute person… it's an overdose of entitlement and if anyone thinks it's just about a few thousand dollars then they are naive.

            or as Peter puts it:

            They’re putting the best possible spin on it. They’re trying to depict themselves as righteous and moral and strong.

      • Prickles 5.2.2
        18 June 2019 at 10:57 am

        I heard the person from ? The Financial Review on RNZ this morning say that it was around the $25,000 mark as well. Last night Lisa Owen got John Key to admit that it was in the "mid tens of thousands". Personally I would put mid as being in the 40-70 range rather than 25. Both can't be correct.

      • greywarshark 5.2.3
        18 June 2019 at 11:37 am

        And she had received that money for limiting her living area, not for swanning round in chauffeur driven cars on a salary of $3m? annually.

        https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11898293
        Revealed: What NZ's top executives are paid 12/8/2017

        ANZ New Zealand boss David Hisco was the fourth highest earner, on more than $4.3m, followed by Air New Zealand chief executive Christopher Luxon, getting just over $4m.

      • bewildered 5.2.4
        18 June 2019 at 12:29 pm

        FFS the anz is a private company, slightly different than Beni ripping ; off the tax payer Anz employee issues is no one business barring AnZ The capital ratio issue is a different story

        • Pat 5.2.4.1
          18 June 2019 at 12:37 pm

          wrong….they are vital infrastructure hence the need for a licence and RBNZ regulation (weak as it is)

        • Dukeofurl 5.2.4.2
          18 June 2019 at 12:55 pm

          ANZ is a PUBLIC company , not a private one owned by the manager.

          Putting private/personal expenses as business expenses is never on, but common in private companies.

          Banks are required to get Reserve Bank approval of for all their top executives. The highest standards of financial conduct are required, recently a new hire , woman who once worked for a international bank (where its Malaysian branch was used as conduit for transfers of money from a State owned asset fund to the then PMs family.) was declined, although they say it was withdrawn before final decision- yeah right

    • mickysavage 5.3
      18 June 2019 at 10:29 am

      Tiny moment? Some bad timekeeping cost him $6.4 million. Feels like a big helping of spin to me.

  6. Matiri 6
    18 June 2019 at 9:49 am

    Eerily similar to the Waikato DHB's chairmans supposed oversight of the CEO's expenses – Bob Simcock (ex National Party MP) and Nigel Murray (relocated Canadian ex pat). Case was referred to the Serious Fraud Office.

    • Muttonbird 6.1
      18 June 2019 at 10:44 am

      It reminds me of Martin Matthews case 'agreed to resign' at the eleventh hour before a report on him came out.

      Hey presto, report buried, no more questions asked…

    • tc 6.2
      18 June 2019 at 11:43 am

      Such a whiff about that whole saga which started even before appointments were made with Coleman being advised to not go there as the bloke had form.

      Waikato DHB have plummeted from one of the best (relative to other DHB’s) to a basket case under Ryall/Coleman. You get better care in akl’s oversubscribed DHB’s now for some areas it’s that bad folks.

  7. Hooch 7
    18 June 2019 at 9:50 am

    There’s gotta be way more to this than meets the eye. Put aside the fact he could afford the expenses and the moral outrage of it. He believed and ANZ accepted he could use it and if ANZ had a problem now he could easily pay them back and draw a line under it.

    Haven’t missed listening to Key’s BS either. You can tell he’s talking shit. Can’t believe people voted for him again and again.

    • greywarshark 7.1
      18 June 2019 at 10:51 am

      Agree. He was helping us to go into sleazy business through hedge funds tax haven stuff. Key learned his stuff well and that is why National wanted him here. Now this government is having to support farmers who got caught up in the financial thralls and have over-reached themselves. He and others were talking about us being the southern Swiss. And no doubt they have been involved with dodgy finance for years. They have had long practice, and have managed to keep a high standard of living as well.

      We are at base for our business, a lot of narrow-minded farmers with a few suppliers of basic goods such as hardware and building stuff (Fletchers – sold overseas) and others similar. We make a lot of our GDP from services. But if they are financial services these are vulnerable to collapse of financial entities, at base a pocketful of promises.

      A few good businesses have stayed in NZ hands like Tait, an early innovator, who decided to put his country into a Trust to preserve it as a NZ one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tait_Communications

      So Key is the face of NZ business as envisaged by National. Not one that inspires confidence in citizens wanting a smart, honest as well as wily, leaderhip to good conditions for all.

    • Naki man 7.2
      18 June 2019 at 11:56 am

      Apparently the problem was that his wife was using the car and it was getting charged back to ANZ.

      • Sacha 7.2.1
        18 June 2019 at 12:00 pm

        Still not a big enough offense.

        • Naki man 7.2.1.1
          18 June 2019 at 12:57 pm

          It's not about the dollar value it's about trust and transparency.

          • Muttonbird 7.2.1.1.1
            18 June 2019 at 1:14 pm

            Like trust and transparency have ever bothered Mr. Key before! 🤣

          • marty mars 7.2.1.1.2
            18 June 2019 at 1:32 pm

            lol mate at that level it is NOT about trust and transparency – that shit is for underlings ffs

            • Naki man 7.2.1.1.2.1
              18 June 2019 at 4:23 pm

              Well apparently things have changed. Honest John has raised the bar, that can't be a bad thing.

              • Stuart Munro. …
                18 June 2019 at 4:35 pm

                Raising the bar would have had the perpetrator reimbursing the company at least – minimum. What Key did is a let off so soft it reeks of corruption. Just forgiving the debt is a slap in the face to both lower paid employees and shareholders. It probably has tax implications also – someone has to cover the tax on the perk – Hisco if ANZ hasn't.

                • Naki man …
                  18 June 2019 at 5:13 pm

                  So they let him off a few grand and saved the company $6.4 million in shares that he was entitled to. That's your idea of Key letting him off soft.

                  • Stuart Munro. …
                    18 June 2019 at 5:23 pm

                    'A few grand' will get the typical employee sacked with a black mark that will follow them for the rest of their life. The share options don't cost the company at all – so there was no saving.

                    • Naki man …
                      18 June 2019 at 6:02 pm

                      "A few grand will get the typical employee sacked with a black mark that will follow them for the rest of their life"

                      Hisco has lost his job and the damage to his reputation isn't going away anytime soon.

                      In the past he would have got away with this no worries.

                  • Pat …
                    18 June 2019 at 6:12 pm

                    we dont know that he "got away" with anything….indeed we dont know why it was deemed beneficial to remove him, but we can be reasonably confident that the reasons given are either incomplete or erroneous.

        • Dukeofurl 7.2.1.2
          18 June 2019 at 12:58 pm

          When you use 'bulked up ' invoices to hide the fact private use was listed as business expense , it is.

    • mike 7.3
      18 June 2019 at 5:48 pm

      where has the anz parked all its risk off balance sheet i wonder if there

      over exposed

      • Blazer 7.3.1
        18 June 2019 at 7:56 pm

        almost a 'given'.

        Fraud,money laundering,creative accounting…'just go and make money,we will deal with any legalities'!

  8. Enough is Enough 8
    18 June 2019 at 9:50 am

    The serious fraud office needs to investigates Key's involvement in this.

    • Muttonbird 8.1
      18 June 2019 at 10:15 am

      That would be good.

      Someone brought this up yesterday. The 'crimes' stated for which Hisco has been ejected are small potatoes.

      This stuff goes on all the time at many high levels of business and it is merely dealt with quietly in house with a demotion, fine or boardroom censure.

      He charged for wine storage? Meh, hundreds of thousands of corporate relocation deals the world over have exactly this kind of thing in them.

      He used a few flash taxis going to the theatre? Meh, Simon Bridges blew $100K on limos for a personal promotion tour of the country. Did he get fired? Fined? No, he didn't.

      These ‘crimes’ and the sloppy expenses recording are not sackable offences in the corporate world no matter how much we here think they should be.

      No, as Mickey and others have alludes to, this is the cover up. Hisco is the fall guy for much more serious fraudulent activity by the top levels of ANZ and Key has gone into survival mode.

      If Key is damaged, National is damaged.

      Adrian Orr needs to get out the banking regulation manual and find a way into ANZ so the SFO can go and do its job.

      • greywarshark 8.1.1
        18 June 2019 at 11:04 am

        There was the mention that since 2014 the ANZ has not used the settings demanded by the Reserve Bank to work out what their reserves should be so this has persisted for 5 years and no doubt provides some advantage to ANZ that other banks meeting requirements have foregone.

        The fact that it was brought to light because of Australian demands, after they held a Royal Commission, and that unsatisfactory procedures there were similar to what has been revealed here, implies that without it matters would have rolled on unchecked.

        Since we dropped the idea of close regulation by government, things have gone downhill in NZ and now little oversight and standover tactics by government happen until there is a noticeable breach in the business wall of confidentiality which shows up the lack of probity there.

      • mike 8.1.2
        18 June 2019 at 5:52 pm

        i bet its to do with there risk models anz could really be a house of cards there alot loans out that should never have been approved

    • tc 8.2
      18 June 2019 at 11:50 am

      You'll find most forms of enforcement and adherence gutted by Shonky's crew years ago or stacked with 'friendly' folk mouthing slogans.

      Most people are clueless as to how effective their hollowing out job was and given they're experts at plausible deniability and not being in the room when it matters don't hold your breath.

    • Wayne 8.3
      19 June 2019 at 7:48 am

      In what way would the SFO be involved?

      Apart from your obvious dislike of Sir John Key, is there a single thing that you can point to that would indicate Key has done anything wrong.

      The problem seems to be all David Hisco's. The main action by Key seems to be holding Hisco to account. Which is the very thing the Chair of a Board is supposed to do in respect of the CEO.

  9. Sacha 9
    18 June 2019 at 10:15 am

    https://thespinoff.co.nz/business/18-06-2019/why-anz-chief-executive-david-hisco-has-left-under-a-cloud/

    Does today’s announcement answer all the questions?

    Hisco’s departure was apparently mutually agreed but you don’t relinquish a top role like that without good reason. He’s given up $6.4m worth of shares, after all.

    The bank’s explanations seem to raise many more questions.

    In the grand scheme of things, tens of thousands of dollars over nine years is not that much money and there appears to have been an element of misunderstanding – so why couldn’t ANZ have slapped Hisco over the hand and come to some agreement about repaying the money?

    Did he go on leave partly because of the expenses issue, or did it come to light when he went on leave? It would not be at all surprising if there were more revelations in the coming days.

    • Muttonbird 9.1
      18 June 2019 at 10:21 am

      This.

      Also, watch for Key himself to quietly step down sometime in the nearish future…

      …he’ll need to put some distance between himself and ANZ but can’t make it too obvious.

      • Naki man 9.1.1
        18 June 2019 at 12:16 pm

        "Also, watch for Key himself to quietly step down sometime in the nearish future…"

        Seriously Mutton, You really should keep your wet dreams to yourself.

    • Dukeofurl 9.2
      18 June 2019 at 1:01 pm

      The top CEO of ANZ in Melbourne instigated the detailed review of expenses of all his top executives. This was just one that came out. There may have been others that executives moved on.

  10. CHCoff 10
    18 June 2019 at 10:31 am

    A 'feel good' sideshow John Key story that doesn't really leave anyone feeling good…..tick

    It's probably murky……………..tick

    Probably even more boring the more you know…………..tick

    There are pros and cons to most things………………double tick

  11. marty mars 11
    18 June 2019 at 10:34 am

    the diversion from the deep story fronted by donKey will be the leadership change at the gnats…

    in a former life we had a futurologist give a talk at the conference – that is a good gig – no one is going to bother saying – hey you said that and it didn’t happen – perfect gig (for certain types), up there with guru imo and banker…

    • Blazer 11.1
      18 June 2019 at 10:40 am

      donKey,shonKey,kinKey,yanKee ….honest John…I mean Sir John..owhata…knight.

      • marty mars 11.1.1
        18 June 2019 at 10:43 am

        it was fun thinking up new ones for plonKey the wooden clown – ahhh those were the days – bloddy simon has stuffed that up too

  12. Kevin 12
    18 June 2019 at 10:42 am

    “We have to apply the same standards to a freshly-minted teller to the CEO. David will say he failed those standards,” Sir John said.

    Only a 'freshly-minted' teller would not receive a multi-million dollar golden handshake. More likely a court appearance.

    • marty mars 12.1
      18 June 2019 at 10:46 am

      yep old hoKey poKey wouldn't have stood beside them like he has this dude – unless they had a nice ponytail of course, then he'd need smelling salts just to stay focused

      • greywarshark 12.1.1
        18 June 2019 at 11:10 am

        Love the folksy jargon, meant to reach the ordinary folks, "freshly minted", probably the ones with a hole in the middle, not full of goodness through to the end.

  13. WeTheBleeple 13
    18 June 2019 at 11:02 am

    I had to sack a well known figure due to trying to use my company for fraudulent activity. It was much easier to just get rid of him than start a shit-fight. In retrospect I should have let the facts, police and media crucify the entitled prick.

    Done and dusted now. Sweeping stuff under carpets is not advised, you are always making excuses to cover what you covered. I hope the media pursue this doggedly, as the cover story is nonsensical and the banks are gouging the shit out of us.

    • Sacha 13.1
      18 June 2019 at 11:57 am

      The problem is that they then go on and repeat the behaviour at someone else's expense, especially if they have used the system well to protect their 'reputation'.

      Still, only have to see what Blomfield has gone through with Slater to understand why it's usually the smart choice to walk away. Frustrating.

      • WeTheBleeple 13.1.1
        18 June 2019 at 12:19 pm

        That's a great point. But when it's nobody vs well loved 'celeb'…

        I feel deeply for Blomfield. Faced with a glib shit licking motherfucker like that. I'd'a lost the plot and give him a beating. That's why I had to walk from the other prick.

        I had Slater in an audience once, he sucked the energy out of his and all surrounding tables. Utterly repulsive.

        • Sacha 13.1.1.1
          18 June 2019 at 12:38 pm

          The only time I've seen Slater in person he seemed like a pathetic lost boy. Timing perhaps? Farrar on the other hand was just oozing malevolence. Nasty shitheels, the pair.

  14. Dennis Frank 14
    18 June 2019 at 11:44 am

    Well, Michael Reddell has a poke at ANZ board relevance, reckons the news: "suggests the local board doesn’t amount to much, but why would that surprise anyone? Local incorporation is mostly about having (a) some assets that we can be reasonably sure will be available to meet local liabilities in the (very low probability) event of a major bank failure, and (b) having someone to prosecute if governance failures proved to have risen to a prosecutable standard (a reason for the otherwise questionable requirement for some of the directors to be locally resident)." https://croakingcassandra.com/

    Key seems to be doing a bit of house-cleaning to pre-empt escalating demands for the govt to send inspectors in. Fear of whistle-blowers, perhaps!

  15. Sacha 15
    18 June 2019 at 12:20 pm

    Finance Minister not accepting ex-PM's buck-passing antics either:

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/113568454/finance-minister-says-anz-has-questions-to-answer-about-ceo-departure

    Asked about Key's comment that the mistake was made by someone junior in the organisation, Robertson said: "That's simply not an acceptable response. It is the responsibility of the board and I'm sure Mr Key knows that."

    • Pat 15.1
      18 June 2019 at 12:28 pm

      "Mr Key" and not Sir John?

      What could that possibly mean?

      • Muttonbird 15.1.1
        18 June 2019 at 12:45 pm

        A removal of his knighthood would be sweet justice.

        • Pat 15.1.1.1
          18 June 2019 at 12:56 pm

          think a removal of an honour may require a little more evidence than currently available…..but it is informative the antipathy on display for the former administration

        • Blazer 15.1.1.2
          18 June 2019 at 7:48 pm

          I disagree knighthoods these days usually alert you to..'dodgy characters'

      • greywarshark 15.1.2
        18 June 2019 at 12:52 pm

        That he hasn't had a trans-gender operation – quite common these days.

  16. higherstandard 16
    18 June 2019 at 12:33 pm

    😆 Looks like JK got into the LWNJ headspace just as much as Helen got into those of the RWNJs

    • Sacha 16.1
      18 June 2019 at 12:35 pm

      Yes dear.

      • higherstandard 16.1.1
        18 June 2019 at 4:45 pm

        If I may borrow from Ms Clark and expand a wee bit ……there there didums

    • roblogic 16.2
      18 June 2019 at 9:45 pm

      Hisco’s error was not committing fraud, it was getting caught. And Key is up to his usual tricks, deflecting and making excuses.

      This may surprise you, but some people care about integrity more than point scoring.

  17. greywarshark 17
    18 June 2019 at 12:35 pm

    What is the banking situation in NZ? Do we know all we should?

    Edited:
    Brian Gaynor wrote in 2018 an extended information piece putting NZ situation in context with other countries' banks.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/personal-finance/news/article.cfm?c_id=12&objectid=12014245 Brian Gaynor: How safe is your money in the bank?
    17 March 2018

    …A 2014 Financial Markets Authority survey revealed that 75 per cent of respondents believed their NZ bank deposits were guaranteed.

    These respondents were essentially wrong. Thirty three of the 35 OECD countries have deposit insurance or government guarantees, but New Zealand and Israel are the two notable exceptions.

    In other words, all or part of bank deposits are insured or guaranteed in most countries but New Zealand bank depositors are not shielded from losses when a bank fails….

    New Zealand: A New Zealand Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme was introduced in October 2008, but terminated in December 2011. Unlike other countries, it was an open-ended scheme with investors in nine covered finance companies receiving their money back. The largest payout was in relation to South Canterbury Finance, where depositors received $1.6 billion from the Crown.

    It seems that the government between 2008-2011 introduced regulations to safeguard depositors' funds but these seem to have been based on expedience to cope with events at that time, then they resiled.

    He ends his article with comments on the results of a bank in trouble which would be likely to have funds frozen for a time, the NZ OBR, and the results for NZ depositors.

    …New Zealand doesn't have deposit insurance or bank guarantees but the Reserve Bank has introduced a system called Open Banking Resolution (OBR)….

    …If it was determined that 20 per cent of a bank's assets would have to be written off, then the impact on the liabilities side of the balance sheet would look something like this.

    All equity and subordinated creditors' funds, normally around 8 per cent and 2 per cent respectively, would be frozen.

    None of the amount owed to secured and preferred creditors, which might be around 10 per cent of total liabilities, would be frozen.

    The remaining amount required to be frozen would be divided equally among unsecured creditors, including domestic depositors.

    Thus, an Australian with A$25,000 deposited in an Australian bank would have it all guaranteed.

    By contrast, a New Zealander with $25,000 deposited in a fully owned subsidiary of an Australian bank could see $3000 or more of his or her $25,000 deposit frozen….

    But the main issue is the Reserve Bank's ability to carry out a proper process, to make quick and decisive decisions and to ensure that the investing public, both depositors and shareholders, are fully informed.

    The CBL Insurance debacle raises serious questions about the Reserve Bank's ability to effectively execute its regulatory obligations. A major bank failure, which is highly unlikely but does happen occasionally, would put the Reserve Bank under enormous pressure.

    Recent comments from a senior Reserve Bank employee indicate that the regulator doesn't believe that keeping sharemarket investors fully informed is one of its objectives. This attitude would be a disaster if one of the major Australian owned domestic banks had problems in New Zealand.

    • Blazer 17.1
      18 June 2019 at 1:41 pm

      'A major bank failure, which is highly unlikely but does happen occasionally, would put the Reserve Bank under enormous pressure.'

      I can hear it now/again…'no one saw it…coming'!

    • mike 17.2
      18 June 2019 at 6:13 pm

      I hate the way covered bond holders go to the top of the queue, and this happened at the expense of existing depositors, Its like a whole lot of rich people, just elbowed out a lot of hardworking Kiwis, !WTF.

      • greywarshark 17.2.1
        18 June 2019 at 6:34 pm

        It's the way the transactions are handled. We place our money with the banks at call, they pay a small amount of interest for that, and then charge us more for the access to the money.

        The bond holders have invested for set amounts of time on the promise that they will get a fixed amount of interest and are entitled to get their money out at the end of the period. Breaking that arrangement costs, the same with a mortgage.
        Edit:
        The idea is to keep the money system reasonably stable and seems logical. What bothers me is the way that our government has been tied up in such pseudo wisdom that warns that bank guarantees encourage recklessness, so therefore the finance leaders, Reserve Bank, have decided against a guarantee. There is plenty of recklessness about, not caused by ordinary depositors so why should we go without protection of our assets?

        (What I hate about ordinary people not being protected, is the situation where when a business goes down, workers wages don’t come out first. It is particularly bad if they are paid monthly and may be living on credit by the last week.)

        • Phil 17.2.1.1
          20 June 2019 at 10:55 am

          <i>The idea is to keep the money system reasonably stable and seems logical. </i>

          During the GFC, the only wholesale funding market that remained open, and continued to operate as normal, was the Covered Bond market.

          The basic thrust of why covered bonds are a good thing is that the 'societal cost' of reduced assets to cover unsecured depositors in the event of a bank failure, is more than offset by the 'societal gain' of banks continuing to have access to a funding market and therefore significantly reduces the probability of a liquidity-driven bank failure.

  18. Craig H 18
    18 June 2019 at 12:35 pm

    One of the best humorous collective nouns I have seen is a Wunch of Bankers…

  19. Rob 19
    18 June 2019 at 2:31 pm

    It seems hard to believe that such a punishment and reputation loss would be meted out for what seems in the scheme of things a small $2 to $3 K claim each year over the past decade

    They have such high standards at ANZ eh?

    • Ken 19.1
      18 June 2019 at 8:30 pm

      Why doesn't he just cut the crap and tell us he wants to spend more time with his family?

  20. Gabby 20
    18 June 2019 at 6:53 pm

    Wonder if he gets to keep his Caymans.

  21. SHG 21
    18 June 2019 at 7:37 pm

    All those bankers are vermin

  22. Ken 22
    18 June 2019 at 8:29 pm

    There's a culture of helping themselves to other people's stuff.

    I bet this is rife in all the Australian-owned banks.

    How many million a year? and he couldn't even pay for his own petrol and wine storage.

    I wonder if Key had a similar conversation when he "parted company" with the National Party.

  23. peterlepaysan 23
    18 June 2019 at 9:11 pm

    The Australian royal commission of enquiry revealed a lot of murky stuff.

    As those revelations came to the surface the lackey kiwi banks were loud in stating "not us, only them" Apparently it was the oz owners who blew the whistle on the nz bank.

    Whistle blown by your owner? Banks , like their cousins, insurance companies are "risk averse (who isn't?)

    I expect a lot of different behaviour from the nz vassal banks (until the next time).

    Greed has no limits.

    As I recall the during the so called GFC the chairman of the Bank of England saying " it will happen again, as long as banks are unregulated.

    A nz royal commission here is needed. Why should we trust australian banks. Australians do not.

  24. SHG 24
    18 June 2019 at 10:56 pm

    The bankers should be evacuated to the east

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.