Australia is replete with commissions and inquiries into egregious behaviour in its financial sector. This author has quantified the effects of those behaviours on individuals and the wider economy. 1 These investigations include Heydon 2 (elimination of unhealthy culture), Hayne 3 (confluence of law and morality) and the Productivity Commission 4 (trust). The most important Hayne recommendations 5 – which would reduce Australia’s international reputation as a regulatory outlier and better reflect community expectations remain unresolved. Confused parliamentary leadership has facilitated corruption of the financial regulatory system which has for many people been an abject disaster. 6 The Australian government must act. It must do so strategically. It must establish the nexus between the intent of the law and its practical implementation for those it purports to serve. Parliament has yet to debate the underlying causes focussing instead on tactical and punitive responses. If it does, then it must confront the distinction between prescriptive statute and principles-based supervision, recognising the power of antecedent fiduciary law. These are philosophical as well as legal questions. Hayne pointed to the need for a framework for the re-integration of the intent and spirit of the law with its statutory manifestations, presently scattered and inconsistent. This paper is that framework. Without it, much of the financial services and products sectors may continue their descent into the Stygian gloom of costly and inconsistent multi-layered bespoke regulation. An unintended consequence of paternalist policy will be fewer market participants, less choice and fewer opportunities to develop financial literacy.

中文翻译：

---

在澳大利亚吗？国会会立法吗？

澳大利亚在其金融部门的恶劣行为中充满了佣金和调查。作者量化了这些行为对个人和更广泛经济的影响。1 这些调查包括 Heydon 2（消除不健康文化）、Hayne 3（法律与道德的融合）和生产力委员会 4（信任）。最重要的 Hayne 建议 5——这将降低澳大利亚作为监管局外人的国际声誉并更好地反映社区期望仍未得到解决。混乱的议会领导层助长了金融监管体系的腐败，这对许多人来说是一场灾难。6 澳大利亚政府必须采取行动。它必须战略性地这样做。它必须在法律的意图与其旨在服务的对象的实际实施之间建立联系。议会尚未就根本原因进行辩论，而是将重点放在战术和惩罚性反应上。如果是这样，那么它必须面对规定性法规和基于原则的监督之间的区别，承认先行信托法的力量。这些是哲学问题，也是法律问题。海恩指出需要一个框架来重新整合法律的意图和精神与其目前分散且不一致的法定表现形式。这篇论文就是那个框架。没有它，许多金融服务和产品部门可能会继续陷入成本高昂且不一致的多层次定制监管的冥河阴霾。