Former finance minister Simon Birmingham to lead Australian Banking Association
Former Coalition senator Simon Birmingham has been named as the new chief of the Australian Banking Association.
The ABA is the peak industry body representing the major four banks and a number of smaller lenders.
Mr Birmingham succeeds Anna Bligh, who announced her retirement in February after more than eight years in the top job.
Mr Birmingham, who was one of the Liberal's most senior moderates, announced his retirement from politics late last year after almost two decades in parliament.
He was finance minister for the second half of Scott Morrison's prime ministership as the pandemic wrecked global economies and inflation began its steady climb skywards. He has also held trade, finance and education portfolios under two prime ministers.
Mr Birmingham will leave his role at ANZ as head of Asia-Pacific engagement, which he assumed in February. He joins the ABA on August 18, with Ms Bligh finishing up four days later.
'He is a recognised leader who has had deep involvement in significant and long-lasting policy decisions and actions throughout his career that have helped to shape our country,' ABA chair and National Australia Bank chief Andrew Irvine said.
Mr Birmingham thanked the ABA board for their vote of confidence in his ability to lead the industry.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
6 hours ago
- The Age
The Libs have been handed a golden opportunity. Now, watch them stuff it up
One of the great entertainments of political commentary in Australia over the past decade-and-a-bit has been speculating on what new and inventive way the Liberal Party will find to comprehensively bugger itself up. I can't help thinking this must have crossed Treasurer Jim Chalmers' mind as he fronted the National Press Club this week to announce that he will undertake a process to develop a new productivity agenda. Chalmers' speech was solid, but then so it should be after so many have said the same things so often to so little avail. His words and aspirations have been written for him many times over, sometimes with hope, other times with emotions ranging from dull rage to despair. Sometimes even by the Coalition. We need productivity reform, politicians all know we need it, the media all know they know we need it, yet no-one ever does it. There's a simple reason for that: it's hard. The treasurer dwelt in his speech on why it's hard. Reforming an economic system requires trade-offs. Some choices will cost some people. They may or may not be recompensed in the rejig. Chalmers doesn't want the media to simplify economic reform by explaining it in terms of 'winners and losers', as they do after each budget, but there will be winners and losers in the short, medium, or long term as a result of any new tax system. And, naturally, the opposition will do what the name says on the tin. It will oppose. Given the last years of Liberal shenanigans, the real question is how it chooses to do that. In one scenario, Sussan Ley leads a team which analyses and criticises the government's productivity proposals to ensure the best outcome for Australia and Australians. Should they choose this version of their own adventure, there will be plenty of material to tackle. The prime minister has already shown that he has no instinct for making business more efficient or even any understanding that a healthy economy relies on the private sector, creating new wealth instead of just shifting existing money around. In the first term of the Albanese government, the size of the public sector grew relative to the size of the private sector, so now each private employee is supporting more public sector salaries. Loading Then-employment minister Tony Burke passed through an industrial relations bill which makes it harder for businesses to scale up without locking themselves into costly arrangements. Meanwhile, the 'Future Made in Australia' slush fund has been 'picking winners' (code for government making decisions on industries it poorly understands) by investing in bringing in an overseas quantum technology firm rather than backing existing quantum technology firms – ahem – made in Australia. Labor is even trashing its own legacy by changing the rules on the superannuation system it forced people to contribute to, undermining trust that the money you lock away for retirement is really yours for later. It's hard to see how a government which made policies of this sort a priority and prefers the public to the private sector will back a productivity agenda which turns Australia around. But one of the great paradoxes of politics is that sometimes you need the party which is seen to be the touchy-feely side to deliver hard-nosed decisions. Think Labour prime minister Tony Blair in the UK, Democrat president Bill Clinton in the USA, or chancellor Gerhard Schroeder in Germany, all of whom delivered welfare reform in the face of their countries' badly designed benefits systems, which were creating disincentives to work.
Sydney Morning Herald
6 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
The Libs have been handed a golden opportunity. Now, watch them stuff it up
One of the great entertainments of political commentary in Australia over the past decade-and-a-bit has been speculating on what new and inventive way the Liberal Party will find to comprehensively bugger itself up. I can't help thinking this must have crossed Treasurer Jim Chalmers' mind as he fronted the National Press Club this week to announce that he will undertake a process to develop a new productivity agenda. Chalmers' speech was solid, but then so it should be after so many have said the same things so often to so little avail. His words and aspirations have been written for him many times over, sometimes with hope, other times with emotions ranging from dull rage to despair. Sometimes even by the Coalition. We need productivity reform, politicians all know we need it, the media all know they know we need it, yet no-one ever does it. There's a simple reason for that: it's hard. The treasurer dwelt in his speech on why it's hard. Reforming an economic system requires trade-offs. Some choices will cost some people. They may or may not be recompensed in the rejig. Chalmers doesn't want the media to simplify economic reform by explaining it in terms of 'winners and losers', as they do after each budget, but there will be winners and losers in the short, medium, or long term as a result of any new tax system. And, naturally, the opposition will do what the name says on the tin. It will oppose. Given the last years of Liberal shenanigans, the real question is how it chooses to do that. In one scenario, Sussan Ley leads a team which analyses and criticises the government's productivity proposals to ensure the best outcome for Australia and Australians. Should they choose this version of their own adventure, there will be plenty of material to tackle. The prime minister has already shown that he has no instinct for making business more efficient or even any understanding that a healthy economy relies on the private sector, creating new wealth instead of just shifting existing money around. In the first term of the Albanese government, the size of the public sector grew relative to the size of the private sector, so now each private employee is supporting more public sector salaries. Loading Then-employment minister Tony Burke passed through an industrial relations bill which makes it harder for businesses to scale up without locking themselves into costly arrangements. Meanwhile, the 'Future Made in Australia' slush fund has been 'picking winners' (code for government making decisions on industries it poorly understands) by investing in bringing in an overseas quantum technology firm rather than backing existing quantum technology firms – ahem – made in Australia. Labor is even trashing its own legacy by changing the rules on the superannuation system it forced people to contribute to, undermining trust that the money you lock away for retirement is really yours for later. It's hard to see how a government which made policies of this sort a priority and prefers the public to the private sector will back a productivity agenda which turns Australia around. But one of the great paradoxes of politics is that sometimes you need the party which is seen to be the touchy-feely side to deliver hard-nosed decisions. Think Labour prime minister Tony Blair in the UK, Democrat president Bill Clinton in the USA, or chancellor Gerhard Schroeder in Germany, all of whom delivered welfare reform in the face of their countries' badly designed benefits systems, which were creating disincentives to work.
The Australian
21 hours ago
- The Australian
NRL's Pacific plan to pummel AFL in broadcast bonanza
ARL Commission boss Peter V'landys says rugby league's next TV rights deal could span up to 10 years, revealing a Pacific goldmine that will deliver broadcast billions to the NRL. V'landys plans to kick off broadcast negotiations in July after the State of Origin decider and the ARLC chairman says the inclusion of Papua New Guinea will help the code clinch the richest TV rights deal in rugby league history. V'landys will arrive in PNG this Tuesday to ramp-up the NRL's reconnaissance for the 19th team in 2028 and the next step is thrashing out a Pacific-infused broadcast deal that can blow their AFL rivals out of the water. A third network has contacted the ARL Commission to formally express interest. Up to five or six bidders are tipped to enter negotiations as current rights holders Fox and Channel 9 face billion-dollar competition for the most watched code in Australian sport. The NRL's last five-year TV rights deal was worth around $2 billion, including media rights in New Zealand, but V'landys has revealed the sport's next broadcast arrangement may be brokered for a longer term. The NRL's current TV rights deal ends in 2027. The next cycle was tipped to run from 2028-32, but V'landys says he wants to formalise rugby league's new broadcast deal by season's end in a package that could deliver a decade of certainty. That scenario would see the NRL smash their current broadcast haul with a potential fiscal TV rights bonanza of between $3 to $4 billion. 'It could be longer than five years, absolutely,' V'landys said. Asked if the next TV rights deal could be seven to 10 years in duration, he said: 'Yes, it could be. 'We're having some off-the-record talks at the moment, but we plan to start very soon and it will certainly heat up in the next couple of months. 'I definitely want it finalised this year. 'Hopefully that's the case and it's certainly our ambition to do it. 'We want certainty and we know our clubs want certainty. 'Players also want certainty, because if you do a three-or-four year deal or even longer, you know what your revenues are. 'We haven't got to that level of detail yet, but this will be a record deal. 'We have a much more valuable product now, much more valuable.' There are several variables that give V'landys confidence of broking the most lucrative broadcast deal in the code's 117-year history. One factor is the emergence of new media streaming giants, with global tentacles, such as Netflix, Amazon and Paramount. DAZN completed a $3.4 billion purchase of Foxtel in April and V'landys confirmed the world's leading sports entertainment platform will be a major player in upcoming TV rights negotiations. 'Of course they'll be keen,' he said. 'We're the number one sport in Australia. Why wouldn't they be keen? 'I can confirm we've had genuine interest. We are confident there are several parties in the marketplace and I'm confident there will be more to come when we begin talks. 'We will get a lot more dollars now than we have ever gotten because of the hard work done by the players, the clubs and the NRL.' Another significant factor is the expansion drive that will trigger the admission of the Perth Bears to the NRL in 2027 before Papua New Guinea's entry in 2028. V'landys says PNG will not only represent a fresh spectator market, but open a broadcasting gateway that could see the Pacific eventually usurp Australia as the NRL's most lucrative TV rights powerhouse. The NRL is exploring a cut-price Pacific subscription service to monetise the NRL's 19th team and the 10 million-plus Papua New Guinea fans who will back the franchise with unmatched tribalism. 'Papua New Guinea could end up, in 10 or 15 years, to be worth more in broadcast revenue than Australia,' he said. 'With PNG coming in, that is a massive arm that we have never tapped into, not to mention Perth. 'We're the most-watched sport in Australia, so we now should attract substantial offers. 'Our data shows 1.8 million people streamed the Papua New Guinea game against Australia's Prime Ministers XIII, which was an extraordinary number. 'By having a cheap subscription to watch (PNG and NRL games), we could attract millions of new subscribers in the Pacific. 'We're very mindful of pricepoint. We don't want to make it too expensive for rugby league fans to watch and support the game. 'We definitely want to get the most revenue, but at the same time, we don't want to make it unaffordable for our wonderful fans. 'The game has never been in a better place. 'This has been a planned strategy - and it will pay off big time.' Peter Badel Chief Rugby League Writer Peter Badel is a six-time award winning journalist who began as a sports reporter in 1998. A best-selling author, 'Bomber' has covered five Australian cricket tours and has specialised in rugby league for more than two decades. NRL Selwyn Cobbo flew to Sydney for preliminary talks earlier this month in the strongest sign yet that the powerhouse back is on the verge of quitting the Broncos. See which clubs are interested. NRL The might of New Zealand Rugby wants what the NRL has, with Warriors boss Cameron George approached to jump codes to become their next CEO, reveals David Riccio.
