Australian corporate governance and its financial regulation is becoming more interesting by the minute. In a political atmosphere that can only be described as toxic, dysfunctional and devoid of principle, one of its most important industries is on the brink of negotiating or walking away from a bargain of Faustian proportions. In Johanne Wolfgang von Goethe’s version of the fable, Faust (1832) is challenged by Mephistopheles. What could or should be traded to ascertain the true essence of life? What price can or should one place on one’s soul? In a treatment closer to our own age, Oscar Wilde’s depiction in The Picture of Dorian Gray (1890), the moral quandary extends to encompass those impacted by the choice. The vanity and the futility of the bargain play out in in both adaptations. The lack of remorse is reserved to Wilde’s amoral imagination. The duality between outward respectability and inner corruption rages throughout his novel, with ambiguity its closing unresolved thought. We now have a unique re-staging, with a banking and financial services backdrop, being played out in a Melbournian courtroom. None of the corporate, regulatory or political thespians appears willing, however, to contemplate the implications of the re-interpretation produced by the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry, and directed by Justice Kenneth Hayne, a former Chief Justice of the Federal Court. Notwithstanding the complexity of the task and the 10-month timeframe within which to rehearse a coherent and cohesive vision for the future provision of banking, superannuation and financial services, Hayne has produced a draft treatment with application beyond Australia’s shores. In what is the last major attempt to mine the rich seam of misconduct that spanned the globe since the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) of 2007–2008 onwards, Hayne is offering a six-act synthesis. Although the interim script is exclusively domestically focused, with no reference to wholesale markets, there can be little doubting its universal value. It combines explanation and exhortation: obey the law; do not mislead or deceive; be fair; provide services that are fit for purpose; and deliver services with reasonable care and skill. when acting for another, act in the interests of that other. There have been 128 royal commissions in Australia since Federation in 1901. These have been ordered into subjects as varied as taxation (1934), and impact of radio (1927), moving pictures (1928), and television (1954), electoral redistribution in Queensland (1977), and, more recently the collapse of HIH Insurance (2003), Australian companies involvement in corruption of the UN oil-for-food programme (2006) and institutional responses to child sex abuse (2013). Notwithstanding the country’s long history in using official discourse to kick the can further down the road, even in its interim form, the Hayne Commission has already emerged as one of Australia’s most consequential. Power rests not on considerable subpoena and other investigatory powers or willingness to use them. Traction derives from explicit (although not always used) authority to shift both normative narratives and practical outcomes (albeit within defined terms of reference and chaired by a candidate of the government’s own choosing). As such, they can recalibrate the country’s underlying political philosophy. They may facilitate a move beyond the form of the subject matter at hand to approach substantive matters. Even the most successful, however, require ongoing vigilance. Problems may be identified. Legislative change introduced. The HIH Royal Commission did this, for example, in relation to corporate governance, directors’ duties and the role of the audit profession. Unless, however, these reforms are subject to ongoing external monitoring and evaluation, there is a profound danger of institutional memory loss. Notwithstanding the soundness of the definition of corporate governance and responsibility put forward by Commissioner Owen, which had application across all listed corporations, for example, the misconduct continued. This failure lies at the core of the current investigation. It leaves open how and why the boards of Australia’s major financial institutions proved so inept and internal and external audit so defective? The conundrum is magnified because the misconduct complained of occurred in the aftermath of the GFC, which provoked such an existential crisis in Europe and the United States and caused such global ripples. Moreover, Australian regulators were aware of how perilous the situation could become domestically. The aggressive growth of BankWest, a subsidiary of HBOS in the period 2008–2010, before its forced sale of Commonwealth Bank of Australia in 2010 was, as a British Parliamentary Commission put it in relation to the parent, “an accident waiting to happen.” Can greed alone, or the pursuit of profit over how that profit was made, as posited by Hayne, be the only or primary reason? Can appeals to voluntarily assumed but non-binding promises to change offer sufficient succour to a deeply distrustful public? The results of a national survey showing that 80% distrusted banking as an institution and two thirds doubted regulatory capacity suggests not. There are signs of political awareness that the scale of the problems limits capacity to ignore or dilute any eventual recommendations, not least because of Commissioner Hayne’s open scepticism about whether codes of conduct can act as effective Law and Financial Markets Review, 2018 Vol. 12, No. 4, 167–174, https://doi.org/10.1080/17521440.2018.1548225

中文翻译：

---

来自悉尼的信

澳大利亚公司治理及其金融监管正变得越来越有趣。在只能用有毒、功能失调和缺乏原则来形容的政治氛围中，其最重要的行业之一正处于谈判或放弃浮士德式交易的边缘。在约翰娜·沃尔夫冈·冯·歌德的寓言版本中，浮士德（1832 年）受到梅菲斯托费勒斯的挑战。可以或应该交易什么来确定生命的真正本质？一个人的灵魂可以或应该付出什么代价？奥斯卡·王尔德在《多里安·格雷的画像》（1890 年）中的描述更接近我们自己的时代，道德困境扩展到包括那些受选择影响的人。交易的虚荣和徒劳在这两种改编中都有体现。王尔德的不道德想象力保留了缺乏悔意。外在受人尊敬和内在腐败之间的二元性在他的小说中肆虐，其结尾未解决的思想含糊不清。我们现在有一个独特的重新上演，以银行和金融服务为背景，在墨尔本法庭上进行。然而，似乎没有一家公司、监管机构或政治家愿意考虑皇家委员会对银行、养老金和金融服务行业的不当行为进行重新解释，并由前任首席法官肯尼思·海恩 (Kenneth Hayne) 指导。联邦法院法官。尽管这项任务很复杂，而且要在 10 个月的时间范围内为未来提供银行、退休金和金融服务制定一个连贯一致的愿景，海恩已经制定了一个适用于澳大利亚海岸以外的治疗草案。这是自 2007 年至 2008 年全球金融危机 (GFC) 以来挖掘遍布全球的大量不当行为的最后一次重大尝试，海恩提供了一个六幕综合。虽然临时剧本只针对国内，没有参考批发市场，但它的普遍价值是毋庸置疑的。它结合了解释和劝诫：遵守法律；不要误导或欺骗；平心而论; 提供适合目的的服务；并以合理的谨慎和技能提供服务。为他人行事时，为他人的利益行事。自 1901 年联邦成立以来，澳大利亚共有 128 个皇家委员会。 这些委员会被划分为不同的主题，如税收（1934 年）和无线电的影响（1927 年）、电影（1928 年）和电视（1954 年），昆士兰州的选举重新分配（1977 年），以及最近的 HIH 保险公司的倒闭（2003 年），澳大利亚公司参与了联合国石油换食品计划的腐败（2006 年）和机构对儿童性虐待的反应（2013 年）。尽管该国长期以来一直在使用官方话语来推动进一步发展，即使是临时形式，但海恩委员会已经成为澳大利亚最重要的委员会之一。权力不取决于可观的传票和其他调查权力或使用它们的意愿。牵引力源自明确的（虽然并不总是使用）权力来改变规范叙述和实际结果（尽管在规定的职权范围内并由政府自己选择的候选人担任主席）。因此，他们可以重新调整国家的基本政治哲学。它们可能有助于超越手头主题的形式来处理实质性问题。然而，即使是最成功的人也需要保持警惕。可能会发现问题。引入了立法变更。例如，HIH 皇家委员会在公司治理、董事职责和审计行业的作用方面就是这样做的。然而，除非这些改革受制于持续的外部监测和评估，否则存在机构记忆丧失的深刻危险。尽管欧文专员提出的公司治理和责任定义是合理的，例如适用于所有上市公司，但不当行为仍在继续。这一失败是当前调查的核心。澳大利亚主要金融机构的董事会如何以及为什么被证明如此无能，内部和外部审计如此有缺陷？这个难题被放大了，因为被投诉的不当行为发生在全球金融危机之后，在欧洲和美国引发了这样的生存危机，并在全球引起了如此大的涟漪。此外，澳大利亚监管机构意识到国内情况可能变得多么危险。BankWest 是 HBOS 的子公司，在 2008 年至 2010 年期间积极增长，在 2010 年被迫出售澳大利亚联邦银行之前，英国议会委员会将其与母公司联系起来，这是“一场等待发生的事故。 ” 可以单独贪婪，或者追求利润而不是利润是如何产生的，正如海恩所假设的那样，是唯一的还是主要原因？诉诸自愿做出但不具约束力的改变承诺能否为极度不信任的公众提供足够的帮助？一项全国性调查的结果表明，80% 的人不信任银行业作为一个机构，三分之二的人怀疑监管能力表明没有。有政治意识的迹象表明，问题的规模限制了忽视或淡化任何最终建议的能力，尤其是因为海恩专员公开怀疑行为准则是​​否可以作为有效的法律和金融市场评论，2018 年卷。12, No. 4, 167–174, https://doi.org/10.1080/17521440.2018.1548225 是唯一的还是首要的原因？诉诸自愿做出但不具约束力的改变承诺能否为极度不信任的公众提供足够的帮助？一项全国性调查的结果表明，80% 的人不信任银行业作为一个机构，三分之二的人怀疑监管能力表明没有。有政治意识的迹象表明，问题的规模限制了忽视或淡化任何最终建议的能力，尤其是因为海恩专员公开怀疑行为准则是​​否可以作为有效的法律和金融市场评论，2018 年卷。12, No. 4, 167–174, https://doi.org/10.1080/17521440.2018.1548225 是唯一的还是首要的原因？诉诸自愿做出但不具约束力的改变承诺能否为极度不信任的公众提供足够的帮助？一项全国性调查的结果表明，80% 的人不信任银行业作为一个机构，三分之二的人怀疑监管能力表明没有。有政治意识的迹象表明，问题的规模限制了忽视或淡化任何最终建议的能力，尤其是因为海恩专员公开怀疑行为准则是​​否可以作为有效的法律和金融市场评论，2018 年卷。12, No. 4, 167–174, https://doi.org/10.1080/17521440.2018.1548225 有政治意识的迹象表明，问题的规模限制了忽视或淡化任何最终建议的能力，尤其是因为海恩专员公开怀疑行为准则是​​否可以作为有效的法律和金融市场评论，2018 年卷。12, No. 4, 167–174, https://doi.org/10.1080/17521440.2018.1548225 有政治意识的迹象表明，问题的规模限制了忽视或淡化任何最终建议的能力，尤其是因为海恩专员公开怀疑行为准则是​​否可以作为有效的法律和金融市场评论，2018 年卷。12, No. 4, 167–174, https://doi.org/10.1080/17521440.2018.1548225