Keynote address at ABA Banking Conference

Transcript

Check against delivery.

Introduction and acknowledgements

Good afternoon, all. I begin by acknowledging the Traditional Custodians of lands, waterways and skies across Australia. I pay my respects to the Gadigal people, on whose country we meet today, and honour their culture and Elders, past and present. I also extend my respect to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander colleagues who are here today.

Thank you to the ABA for the opportunity to join this conference. It is a privilege to be speaking with the people whose work is so critical to our financial system – and whose leadership in navigating disruption determines how resilient, productive and trustworthy that system is.

Navigating disruption and rebuilding trust

The transformations reshaping our economy – the transition to a low-emission future and the constant evolution of technology – are increasingly converging with complex global challenges including geopolitical uncertainty, volatile supply chains and persistent cost-of-living pressures.

The impacts of rapid innovation and change caused by these complex and interrelated forces have become near constant. Disruption is the norm, and it continues to test the resilience of our systems and the trust of the communities we serve.

The results of the 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer, a survey of more than 33,000 people across 28 countries, are a testament to the trend of declining trust in a time of change.[1]

The Barometer found an increased fear among Australian respondents that globalisation, economic pressures and technology threaten their job security.[2]

In addition, 62% of Australian respondents reported a moderate or high sense of grievance – defined by the belief that the system favours the privileged and that government, including regulators and business serve a select few and act in ways that hurt them.[3]

In these circumstances, trust collapses. Indeed, the research found a year-on-year increase among Australian respondents who worry that government leaders, business leaders, and the media purposely mislead people by saying things they know are false or gross exaggerations.[4]

When trust collapses, with it goes the confidence to engage and the capacity to believe that meaningful change is possible.

It’s no surprise then, that the survey found also that only 36% of respondents believed that the next generation will be better off compared to today.[5]

Trust underpins the social contract that ensures markets function and economies flourish.

It matters to all of us in this room, as regulators, business leaders, and stewards of the systems and institutions that influence people’s lives.

As we find ourselves in a time of persistent disruption and declining trust, we face challenges but also opportunity. Opportunity to innovate, to recalibrate, to engage with integrity and to consider the financial system of today and the future.

It is in this context that I have the privilege of speaking to you today. I would like to take this opportunity to discuss the ACCC’s role in promoting competition, protecting consumers, and supporting the future of the financial system.

And to share developments in areas of our work where we see system disruption and regulatory change including the Scam Prevention Framework, Digital ID and the Consumer Data Right, digital platforms, cash distribution and sustainability collaborations.

The new operating context and the evolving role of the ACCC

Today, developments with technology and innovation are manifesting at all levels of the financial system. We are now operating in an environment shaped by data, network effects, economics of scale and customer-centric business models. And we are seeing new intersections between competition, consumer protection, data collection and privacy issues.

In this environment, regulators are increasingly required to make decisions quickly, under conditions of uncertainty. To balance innovation with safeguards. And to do so in a way that is transparent, proportionate and anchored in the public interest.

Relevant to this, the ACCC’s traditional role has been expanding in recent years to include new regulatory and digital service delivery functions.

Protecting consumers from scams

One area in which our evolving role is evident is in the work to combat scams: a rising concern in our digital economy.

Two years ago, the government established the National Anti-Scam Centre, under the stewardship of the ACCC, to drive a coordinated response to scams.

Since then, we have seen some encouraging initial successes, and in 2024, reports of scams and scam losses declined by 18% and 26%, respectively compared to 2023.[6]

The banking industry has played an important part in achieving these outcomes; however, scams still affect far too many people and pose too great a risk to our communities.

They also continue to significantly undermine trust in our financial services, technology, and institutions.

That’s why the next phase of the work to combat scams through the new Scam Prevention Framework is so important.

As many of you are already aware, the Framework will set consistent and enforceable obligations for businesses in key sectors where scammers operate. And banks, telecommunications providers, and certain digital platforms, will likely be among the first sectors required to comply with the new obligations.

Another key feature of the Framework is the mandatory scam intelligence sharing for designated sectors.

This builds on the strong foundations of voluntary cross-sector collaboration we’ve seen through the NASC, and through initiatives like the industry-led Confirmation of Payee system – a powerful tool to reduce fraud in real-time.

As this Framework takes shape, the ACCC is keenly aware of the need for right-fit regulation that balances the outcomes it will deliver for consumers with the burden it poses for businesses.

To this end, we are working closely with government, industry and community and consumer representatives to ensure the Framework is practical, proportionate and effective.

Industry input to Treasury’s consultation process will also be vital to getting this right – and I encourage your continued engagement and collaboration.

Building trusted digital infrastructure: CDR and Digital Identity

The role of the ACCC has also evolved in recent years in Digital Identity and the Consumer Data Right (CDR) and our involvement in these programs reflects the broader transformational changes we are all dealing with.

Many of you will already be familiar with the development of Digital ID systems in Australia as a means of improving efficiency, underpinning online trust, reducing fraud and facilitating digital commerce.

The development and use of these systems is increasing. This can be seen in myGovID which now has more than 10 million Australian users accessing more than 230 government services.[7]

New legislation passed last year supports the phased expansion of the Australian Government Digital Identity System (AGDIS) to include state and territory government services and, in time, the private sector – noting that private sector solutions and ecosystems, such as ConnectID, are already in the mix.

The new legislation recognises the importance of privacy and security in digital ID solutions, and the role of interoperability in ensuring these solutions can be used across different platforms and services.

As these systems develop, it will be important that regulation continues to support both consumer trust and consumer choice in digital ID.

Users should be able to choose their digital identity provider, whether government or private, and be able to trust that they will receive consistent protection right across the system.

A related area that the ACCC has played a role in building the foundations for trusted digital infrastructure is the Consumer Data Right.

As many in this room know, the CDR gives consumers the right to safely access data about them, held by data holders, and direct this information to be transferred to an authorised third party.

While consumer uptake of CDR has been more gradual than expected, the foundations of the system are well established. The underlying digital infrastructure of the CDR is handling increasingly heavy API traffic while maintaining fast response times and some 530,000 consumers are now using the system.

The system is technically and operationally capable of delivering real benefits. However, we acknowledge that complexity and challenges have presented genuine obstacles to achieving these benefits.

Together with Treasury and other relevant agencies, we are focused on delivering new priorities for the CDR, including making compliance more proportionate and efficient, and supporting high-value use cases, including in consumer finance and lending.

Roll out of the CDR to the non-bank lending sector will promote competition and innovation. Beyond this, other changes will simplify compliance for data holders and reduce unnecessary costs.

This includes streamlining consent arrangements; removing data sharing requirements for certain niche products; reducing the period for which CDR data must be held and shared; and providing an exemption for data relating to trial products during a trial period.

The ACCC’s responsibilities across Digital ID and CDR include accreditation functions to ensure that participants meet high levels of privacy, security and authentication standards. As well as ensuring compliance with often complex and highly technical rules and data standards.

The particular features of these frameworks mean that a proportionality in regulatory responses is essential, especially as these programs evolve and mature. And we continue to take a risk-based approach to monitoring and assessing compliance and taking enforcement action.

Aspects of these digital initiatives have also meant that the ACCC has taken on direct responsibility for building technology solutions designed to engender consumer trust and facilitate secure participation in the digital economy.

Our work here has meant we have had to significantly boost our technological capabilities which are having timely flow on effects for how we go about our work across the agency more generally.

The future of the financial system: innovation, resilience and sustainability

As we navigate disruption in the financial services sector, our focus is on responding to emerging challenges and supporting competition and consumer welfare into the future.

The ACCC’s inquiries and investigations into digital platform services provide an example of this balance – and highlights some of the emerging and long-term disruptions of Australia’s financial system.

As financial services continue their digital transformation, firms’ ability to innovate and compete increasingly depends on access to key digital infrastructure including cloud platforms, mobile operating systems, app stores and AI tools.

The final and 10^th report of the ACCC’s five-year Digital Platform Services Inquiry found that Apple and Google have significant market power in mobile operating systems and app distribution. This creates risks of potentially anti-competitive tying of in-app payment systems and denying interoperability to key device hardware and software that payment providers need to innovate and effectively compete.[8]

Since 2017, the ACCC has deeply considered competition and consumer concerns posed by digital platforms. And in September 2022, informed by our inquiries, the ACCC made the case for additional regulatory scrutiny and measures focused on critical intermediary digital platforms to respond to these concerns.[9]

Since making our recommendations, we have worked closely with Treasury to explore a range of proportionate regulatory responses. This has included consultation on a proposed digital competition regime in Australia with targeted service-specific obligations that would apply to designated digital platforms.

This is not a uniquely Australian path.

Regulators worldwide are working to apply anti-trust enforcement and create adaptable frameworks that support both competitive digital markets and innovation.

This includes the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act in the UK and the Digital Markets Act (DMA) in the European Union in recent years.

It also includes the recent US federal court ruling in the Epic v Apple case which has enabled app developers to direct customers to alternative payment systems without incurring Apple’s commission fees.

Spotify, Patreon and other services providers now have the ability to offer lower prices and better customer experiences.

These are meaningful benefits from a payment services competition perspective: potentially lower fees, better incentives and capacity to innovate, and more choice. Greater competition in payment services can have flow on effects to the broader economy, including increasing productivity.

In addition to competition reform, we’ve also recommended changes to protect consumers from unfair digital practices – such as subscription traps or account lockouts – and to improve redress when things go wrong. These protections will matter more as financial services continue to move further into the app-based ecosystem.

In short: competition in financial services increasingly depends on competition in the digital infrastructure behind it. Our regulatory frameworks must evolve accordingly – to preserve diversify innovation, reduce systemic risks, and ensure a fair go for business customers and consumers.

The role of cash in a resilient payments system

While it is undeniable that digital payments are increasing, cash remains essential to Australia’s payment system.

Cash supports economic inclusion, and it enhances the resilience of the system, serving as a reliable fallback during power outages, natural disasters, or digital failures.

Recognising this, the Government has committed to maintaining access to cash and to mandating acceptance of cash for essential goods, with appropriate exemptions for small businesses.[10]

The cash-in-transit (CIT) sector underpins this access, but the sustainability of this sector has been impacted by a decline in cash use.

The ACCC has been mindful of these concerns in our recent authorisation for the ABA to coordinate CIT sustainability measures.[11]

Importantly, this authorisation includes reporting and consulting conditions to ensure these efforts are effective and transparent.

We have taken a similar approach to authorisations supporting the wind-down of Australia’s cheque system. Our recent authorisation for AusPayNet and its members to coordinate on the gradual phase-out of the system includes conditions to ensure the transition supports vulnerable consumers who continue to rely on this payment method.[12]

These are not small changes in the system, but they are examples of how regulation can support modernisation, enable resilience and ensure inclusion and public trust.

As a further example of this, the Council of Financial Regulators and the ACCC last week jointly released a consultation paper on the potential future regulatory framework for cash distribution. We look forward to seeing the response from the sector.[13]

Sustainability collaborations

While much of my focus today has been on the transition to a digital economy, and the associated challenges, I note that the transition to net zero is also reshaping the work of financial institutions and regulators.

In recent years, as action on environmental sustainability has become more urgent, the ACCC has received an increasing number of authorisation applications for collaborations that seek to bring about sustainability outcomes.

In 2023, one in four authorisation applications for collaborations between businesses considered environmental benefits. In 2024 that figure rose to one in three.

These applications have arisen from a range of sectors, including financial services.

For example, this month the ACCC issued a determination granting authorisation with conditions to allow the Australian Sustainable Finance Institute (ASFI) and industry participants to collaborate on sustainable finance initiatives for five years.[14]

The authorisation allows ASFI, ASFI members and other industry participants to exchange information to improve the integration of natural capital data into financial decision-making, co-design investment structures and give effect to limited agreements for co-designed financial products, and develop related regulatory reform proposals.

We specified conditions of authorisation to address potential public detriments, which included a requirement to adhere to a competition protocol tailored to the circumstances of the collaboration.

Competition law need not be a barrier for those considering sustainability collaborations that deliver a net public benefit. A wide range of sustainability collaborations are unlikely to breach competition laws. Where there is risk of a potential breach, the ACCC’s exemptions processes are flexible and can provide timely legal protection to businesses who wish to work together to achieve better environmental outcomes.

For businesses seeking these collaborations, we have released a detailed guide on navigating competition law.[15] We also have an open-door policy at the ACCC, and welcome contact to discuss the available competition law exemptions processes.

Conclusion

It is clear that we are operating in an environment of profound change. One in which regulators are increasingly called on to respond in novel ways to complex and interrelated challenges.

In this environment, the ACCC is deeply aware of the need to continue to be forward-looking, and evidence-based in our approach. To maintain high standards of performance and transparency. To be proportionate and risk-based in fulfilling our responsibilities. To collaborate with colleague regulators and stakeholders to deliver coherent solutions. And to ensure our decisions continue to be grounded in and understood to be in the public interest.

As I mentioned at the start, trust in institutions and government is not a given. But it can be earned through collaboration, transparency, and a shared commitment to outcomes that benefit all Australians.

Thank you.