#205 Westpac CEO Anthony Miller: My First Podcast with a Major Bank Leader

Anthony Miller is the CEO of Westpac Group, appointed in December 2024.

In this episode, we cover his story from family and siblings to his swimming career, personal growth, and early professional path before making the move into banking and leadership. Anthony talks about the challenges and opportunities in the industry, why stakeholder management and corporate responsibility matter, and how innovation is shaping the future of banking. He also shares his personal reflections, leadership philosophy, and what excites and scares him about the road ahead.

You can subscribe to the Mentored newsletter here: https://mentored.com.au/newsletter-sign-up

Join the Facebook Group.

Follow Mark Bouris on Instagram, LinkedIn & YouTube.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Him, I Boris and this is straight talk. I'm about
to do a podcast with Anthony Miller. He's the CEO
of the Westpac Group, which encompasses a lot of banks.
I should make an initial disclosure. The disclosure is that
my company Yellow Big Road Group, of which I'm the
chairman of Made Shoulder, has a relationship with Westpac. They

(00:23):
are a warehouse provided to us in relation to our
own product with our global partner, which is Magneta, through
a business called Resi Homelands or the Resi product.

Speaker 2 (00:32):
So that's a disclosure you need to make.

Speaker 1 (00:35):
And I also will happily disclose that I've been maybe
forty year customer of Saint George Bank, right back from
the days it was building society right through today. It's
now sitting under the Westpac Group as still as a bank,
but using the Westpac Group's banking license. So that's my disclosure.
Other than that I have no relationship with Anthony. I
have many a couplications before, but.

Speaker 2 (00:56):
In his capacity as a sea of a bank. So
look for to this podcast.

Speaker 1 (01:00):
It's pretty exciting, pretty cool to actually be able to
interview a CEO of one of the four b banks
in Australia and from my point of view, one of
my favorite banks.

Speaker 2 (01:10):
Anthony Miller, well and straight talk.

Speaker 3 (01:12):
Mate, thank you thanks for having me.

Speaker 1 (01:14):
This is pretty unusually it's a I find it as
quite an exciting opportunity to sit in front of a
someone who's the CEO of one of the largest banks
in this country. And of course, you know, for our audience,
you know, Australian banks are some of the most profitable
banks in the world by virtual market capitalization if you're

(01:34):
relative to that, and maybe that don't make the biggest
profits in the world, but they in a relative sense,
they are some of the most profitable banks in the
world and definitely some of the highest rated banks in
the world.

Speaker 2 (01:43):
And you're sitting at the helm of Westpac.

Speaker 3 (01:45):
Absolutely and I've been in the role two hundred and
sixteen days Mark, so enjoyed every single day so far.

Speaker 2 (01:52):
It's pretty amazing.

Speaker 1 (01:55):
I understand you come from fairly humble background. Maybe can
just tell me where's Anthony Miller come from?

Speaker 2 (02:02):
Where we were born?

Speaker 3 (02:03):
But sure so I was. I was born in Canberra
and for various reasons, we moved around a lot as
I grew up. So I lived in Canberra Darwin, Alice Springs, Doubo, Canberra, Brisbane,
and I finished high school in Brisbane. My last two
years of high school were in Brisbane. And so often
people think I'm a Queenslander, and I suppose two years

(02:24):
of high school and five years of UNI sort of
formative years, and certainly have a lot of affection for Queensland,
but I spent a lot of time outside Queensland growing up.

Speaker 2 (02:33):
Under the state of origin rules. That doesn't qualify years
to Queensland, or does.

Speaker 3 (02:36):
It not quite. The way it broke down is that
when State of Origin first came on in nineteen eighty,
I lived in New South Wales double Hoo, and I
was mad Keen Rugua League supporter and it was seared
in my memory that, you know, the frustrations that Queensline
just kept beating us for those first four or five
years until so they beaten But well that's right, and

(02:57):
they had some grades, you know Wally Lewis and you
know mountvin Ingram goodness, you know Eddie's Prime. So it
was almost impossible to win. And so therefore I'm a
little bit partial to see New South Wales competing state
of a blue shirt on yes, that's right. But I'm
a bit of a fan of the queens Land Red's
rugby team because I had the privilege to going to
school and people like Johnny Eels and guys like Mark

(03:17):
Connors that I knew from UNI all played for the Reds,
so I follow the Reds pretty closely. So so I'm
sort of a little bit of it each way.

Speaker 2 (03:24):
Bet there, no, no, no, no, come on, come on,
come on, and no, no, you can't do that.

Speaker 1 (03:28):
You can't do that too, which, Okay, which NRL team
do you follow?

Speaker 3 (03:33):
Paramatta Eels deals And I've been with the Paramatta Eels
since nineteen seventy five when my dad sat me down
and said you can go for any team you want
as long as it's the Eels.

Speaker 2 (03:43):
That's fairly democratic.

Speaker 3 (03:44):
And then and then I was sport because in seventy
six they made the Grand Final. And then it just
felt like for me until I was about seventeen, that
every year the Paramatta Eels were either in the Grand
Final or just missed out on the Grand Final, or
won a Grand Final. And then since then, you know,
it's been pretty barren.

Speaker 2 (03:59):
In terms of your fan brothers, sisters. What's the deal?

Speaker 3 (04:02):
So I'm the ordest of six six kids, six kids. Yeah,
so myself, then my two sisters and then three youngest,
three boys, six kids. Wow. Yeah, you know, it was
a really really lucky, you know, really good upbringing, a
great family. Mom and dad still going really strong. They're
still live. Yeah, absolutely, Wow, that's still going strong. We

(04:24):
celebrated dad's eightieth a couple of weeks ago. He's got well,
they've got six kids, and they've got twenty three grandchildren,
great grandchild.

Speaker 2 (04:32):
Wow.

Speaker 3 (04:33):
And all fit, healthy, all all good people going after
life in the right way.

Speaker 1 (04:39):
You have in your family, as I understand it, either
one or two brothers who were fairly decent with using
their hands.

Speaker 3 (04:47):
Yeah. So my one of my brothers, Paul, was a
great boxer. He represented Australia at the Sydney two thousand
Olympics and Manchester conwalf Games and he won a gold
medal a super middleweight in two thousand and so he
was a very good boxer. All my brothers they can
handle themselves pretty well, younger brothers, that's right. Yeah, So
I got to stay humble when I'm at home. And

(05:09):
and then one of my sisters. Both my sisters were
great sports persons and one of them won a gold
medal at the Sydney Olympics in water polo. Really yeah,
so they left me nothing in the gene covered in
terms of you know, they just all of them super
talented at sport and achieved so much.

Speaker 2 (05:25):
Did you play sport?

Speaker 3 (05:26):
Yeah? I was a really enthusiastic swimmer, really swimmer. Yeah,
and I like I played all my sort of sports
at young football and AFL rugby league, rugby union. I
was really committed to being a swimmer, and you know,
I trained twice a day. I was trained with Joe
King at Leander in Brisbane. Hayley Lewis was one of them.

Speaker 2 (05:46):
Yeah, so she was in the squad.

Speaker 3 (05:48):
She was in the squad. Yeah. She was a terrific
swimmer and obviously represented Australia. I wanted to represent Australia,
just wasn't good enough.

Speaker 1 (05:54):
But because a lot of swimmers in up playing water polo. Yeah,
is that how your sister's gone on a water polow.

Speaker 3 (06:00):
I think a little bit of the influence was that
we were a mad keen swimming family and so at
the pool and good swimmers. I think Gail, you know,
my sister who was a water PLoP player. She could
have been a champion swimmer, could have been a champion
any sports. She is just such a natural athlete and
such a capable, hard working training kind of person, So

(06:22):
any sports she chose, I think she probably would have
succeeded in.

Speaker 1 (06:25):
As a parent myself of a swimmer who was like
one of my sons was an elite swimmer. One of
the things I learned is about swimmers is that there's
a massive amount of commitment to the to the craft
and also for the parents for that matter too. What

(06:46):
do you think you've learned in a character sense from
a being a swimmer, but more importantly watching your parents
sort of adopt or adapt into the commitment of having
a son who wanted to be a swimmer.

Speaker 3 (07:03):
Yeah, great, great question. I mean, in terms of summing,
I'm forever grateful that I was very committed to it,
and also the fact that I didn't get there. I
have no regrets because I trained really hard. I just
wasn't good enough. But I got so much out of
it in terms of friends, but also fitness, and also

(07:24):
just I knew how to set a goal and how
to relentlessly go.

Speaker 1 (07:27):
After And maybe you could explain it a little bit
because most people probably haven't been to US. I haven't
had the experience of it. So your summer holidays was
committed to training when all you're made.

Speaker 3 (07:39):
To do it all year round. So I swam all
year around, but the.

Speaker 2 (07:42):
Trials were and a jenerary.

Speaker 3 (07:43):
That's exactly right through summer summer holidays. Five am in
the water, finished session seven, seven thirty in the morning,
wouldn't do much during the day. Then I'd train in
the afternoon. I'd be swimming anywhere between sort of ten
to fourteen kilimeters a day. I was really going for it.
What was this stroke? Look, breaststroke I wanted. I was

(08:06):
competitive as a breastroker. I tried pretty hard at individual
medally as well, but breastroke was my main sport, particularly
a main stroker.

Speaker 2 (08:14):
And then you swim at minimum six days a week.

Speaker 3 (08:17):
That's right, it'd be twice a day every day, and
then Saturday once this sad day.

Speaker 1 (08:21):
So which means when your mates when you were fifteen
six and your mates is just starting to go to
movies or whatever together and you can't do that sort
of stuff because you're getting up four o'clock.

Speaker 2 (08:30):
So you have to give a fair bit up. Is
it because you're the sort.

Speaker 1 (08:35):
Of personality is that you were compliant as a because
I got four sons, only one that was any good
at this was the most compliant sun.

Speaker 2 (08:43):
In other words, you never challenged me. Don't make it up.
We got to go.

Speaker 1 (08:47):
Was it because you were a compliant kid, or was
it because you were a driven kid?

Speaker 3 (08:51):
Or both? Well? Look, I think I think I was compliant.
I suppose you know, I like to think I was
a good boy, but I was driven. Yeah, I was
very focused on I had a goal. I wanted to
represent Australia. I trained twice a day. I trained really hard.
In some ways, I didn't trade smart. I trained hard
and without sort of nuance and you know, giving the

(09:13):
right things like rest and recovery, the right weight that
they deserved. But that was back in the mid to
late eighties where everyone thought you just just put the
miles in and you'll get there.

Speaker 2 (09:21):
We're keeping log books in those days.

Speaker 3 (09:23):
I kept a bit of a log of you know,
the sessions, but I didn't keep copious notes.

Speaker 2 (09:28):
You weren't doing pulse rates and stuff like that.

Speaker 3 (09:30):
Oh no, we were doing in training sessions and there
was a lot more science coming into if you were
coaching and swimming training then, and the Institute Sport had
been a big contributor to that sort of delivery of
science into it. But I was very focused on just
on the training, and I enjoyed the training. To be

(09:51):
honest with you that you know it was quite social.

Speaker 1 (09:53):
It is you think not, but at the end of
a fifteen hundred have a little bit of a chat.

Speaker 3 (09:59):
Yeah, exactually right, and then look, you know I'm ad
at all boys school and then assuming cent training, there's
lots of girls, so that was also a little bit
of a wow. This is a bit of an interesting dynamic.

Speaker 2 (10:09):
So what do you I mean?

Speaker 1 (10:11):
I can I often ask my son, but he'll tell
me this. But what do you think you might have
gained in terms of character or your character from putting
in many kilomas in the pool, many early mornings, making
lots of sacrifices. Maybe they weren't sacrifices, but when you
look back in hindsight, had to make a call, what

(10:34):
do you think you might have gained in terms of
your character today in what you do at the bank
for example? And I don't mean anything specific, but how
how did that shape Anthony Miller today.

Speaker 3 (10:44):
What I think? How would I? Yeah, that's again a
good challenge, certainly, the idea that you've just got to
sometimes go through a lot of hard work to get
the game, and that you know there's going to be
periods of time where it's just a real grind, and
that there there's not the sugarcoat of every day and
everything's positive always because you're just in the middle of

(11:05):
hard work, training hard you're for going going out with
your friends because you want to be able to train
at your best the next day. But then there's great
rewards at the end of it. And then equally, the
thing I enjoyed, I really liked your training. I like
the sense of, you know, putting one hundred percent in
and just feeling like you've exhausted yourself. And maybe it's perverse,
but I took satisfaction out of being a really hard

(11:27):
trainer and took great pride in that I was one
of the better trainers and the team. And then one
of the things I did learn was, you know, it's
all very well to be good and hard training, but
at that moment when you have to stand on the
block and compete in the race. You know, you've got
to have your head in the game. You've got to
be in that moment ready to deliver. And that's one
of the other great challenges of assuming, is that you

(11:50):
can train for six months through summer and then you've
got two and a half minutes to win, and your
entire summers defined by two and a half minutes.

Speaker 2 (11:57):
In the last race of this it could be one
hundred exactly right.

Speaker 3 (12:00):
And you know if you don't get everything perfectly right
in the race, you know someone can beat you. And
so you know you have to be so focused on
am I doing it all? Am I doing it all right?
Am I getting it all done? And so that sort
of constant challenge of is this right? Am I really
pushing myself as I should? Have I done everything as

(12:21):
I should That constant challenge you imposed on yourself is
sort of like a skill that's really helpful later on
in whatever you decide to do. So I sort of
feel like assuming that I was pretty privileged to be
able to be a swimmer. I thought it really did
give me a lot of opportunities and also the fitness
and health consequences of just being able to swim ten
to fourteen kilometers a day sets you up for life.

Speaker 2 (12:42):
I think that's right in a health sense.

Speaker 1 (12:43):
And I think also you've got to have at least
one parent who's completely committed to that process for the kid,
because it's actually quite when I look back, it's all
encompassing being a parent of a swimmer in the end.
For me, like I was happy to get my kid
of a car and get when he got his license
so he could at least get himself at training at
four thirty in the morning.

Speaker 2 (13:05):
If I then say to.

Speaker 1 (13:06):
You today in terms of your job of the bank,
and by the way, Westpac sits on a number of banks,
well they're not. There's not a number of banks, but
there's a number of brands, that's right. So you know
you've got Saint George, that's right, your bank essays, a
bank essays Bank of Melbourne and Bank of Melbourne and
anyone else.

Speaker 3 (13:22):
And so in terms of bank or bank like offerings.
RAMS also has its own system as well. So what
really Westpac is an amalgam of you know, different banks
sitting under the one group that is Westpac Group. Yeah,
and so it's really actually a collection of banks within
the group.

Speaker 1 (13:39):
Yeah, and they all talk to different customers and they
talk to different emotions from different sorts of customers. Like
Bank of Melbourne is very Melbourne, Yes, Saint George is
sort of not so much Melbourne's Sydney, more Sydney than
anything else. I think, you know traditionally, because I remember
Sir George about I was a customer of Saint George
Building Society, Are you okay? And I went through every

(14:02):
and then Saint George Building Society merged with another credit
union or building society. Come overhood it was, and then
they then ultimately it became St. George Bank, and then
Saint George Bank was taken over under Gail Kelly by Westpac.
That's well taken control by Westpak and now as a
result that I'm now with Westpak, but I'm still with
St George. But I know it's sitting on the west
Bank brand. And as a as someone's sitting on top

(14:25):
of such a it's a large group.

Speaker 2 (14:29):
What do you would you say that.

Speaker 1 (14:32):
The event Isswen, lots of other things happened in your
life will talk about at a moment, but were they
do they build resilience? View? Because like as a bank boss,
I can't imagine I think you'd be putting a bushfires
a lot. I mean there'd be a lot of dramas,
I mean, like within the bank or maybe didn't you
come in you came in after west PAC's major drama,

(14:52):
the drama that sort of occurred during after nineteen twenty nineteen.

Speaker 3 (14:56):
I think, yeah, no, certainly. I joined Westpac at the
end of twenty twenty and that was just in that
sort of a difficult twelve months where you know, there
was obviously infractions under the money laundering and OSTRAK matter,
and then there was quite a bit of work that
Westpac as a group had to do, which was you know,
fixed or immediate processes, and so for a few years
there it was very you know, very much focused on getting.

Speaker 2 (15:18):
Its house in order. We're doing it fifteen hundreds.

Speaker 3 (15:21):
That's exactly right, and so that was just that's just
hard work, grinding way that's right, and more importantly, it's
just getting back to the basics and making sure the
way we deliver products and service to the customers were
done at a standard that met community and regulatory expectations.
And so you know, the bank did a lot of
work on that, and that was also while challenging, also

(15:45):
quite enjoyable in the sense of just you know, as
a leadership team, all of us at the time just
very focused on how do we just get Westpac the
group back to where it should be, which is, you know,
a really good bank, performing well and delivering for customers.

Speaker 1 (16:00):
And share holders, which, by the way, I'll come back
to the customer shareholder thing, because that's a hard one
to balance. Well, there's a balance, but it's a difficult one.
I want to talk to you about how you do that. Yeah,
if I just go back to you left school and
what did you do.

Speaker 3 (16:14):
So I finished school in eighty seven and I went
to university and I did a degree at the time,
which was a little bit unusual. And you might remember
the late eighties, Japan was the second largest colony world
had just come out of nowhere through the seventies and eighties,
and Japan was buying everything in Queensland. It just felt

(16:34):
like tourists exactly right.

Speaker 2 (16:37):
So it was a massive development and everything, Yesdney as well, okay.

Speaker 3 (16:40):
Yeah, well certainly in Queensland. And so when I finished school,
I suppose you know, my father had studied law, so
I was a little bit drawn to I'll study law.
But I decided to do an arts law degree, and
it was the first time it had been offered. There
was only eleven of us in the first class. And
it was a combination of Asian studies majoring in Japanese
language and some other so that's the outside of it.

(17:02):
That's the outside of it, plus a law degree. And
the law degree was at QUT and the Arts or
Asian Studies degree was at griff of the University. So
the two universities had combined and so to be sort
of like Monday at QUT Tuesday at Griffith or vice versa.

Speaker 2 (17:16):
And they were physical in those days.

Speaker 3 (17:17):
Exactly right, quite two different campuses, one in the city,
one out at sort of Mount Gravat. So that was
a really interesting combination. And so I went after that.
And my intention was when I finished that degree that
I'd probably go and pursue, you know what it calls,
like a career, perhaps working in Japan, or I'd go
and study further in Japan.

Speaker 1 (17:39):
And as it turned out, that didn't eventuate. Did you
learn to speak Japanese?

Speaker 3 (17:43):
I study Japanese, that's right. I would say my Japanese
is poor, you know, one of the one of the
challenges is that once you study languages, you've got to
go and live and immerse yourself in the culture. And
I didn't get to do that straight after university and
so missed my window to really cement the language. But then,
as it turns out, through my career later on, I

(18:03):
was in Japan a lot for business. I really enjoyed
working in Japan, and I had teams reporting to me
out of Japan, so I've had a lot of exposure
to Japan over the course the last thirty years.

Speaker 2 (18:14):
So did you ever practice as a lawyer?

Speaker 3 (18:16):
So I did. I finished university and I was a
bit unsure about where I was going to go, and
I was actually playing a little bit of rugby at
Brothers Rugby Club in Britain, and a guy called Paul
Tully and another guy who was working at the law
firm Grand Deal Love encouraged me to join their law firm.
So I joined their law firm for a couple of years,

(18:36):
which was great because I was sort of unsure about
what I wanted to do and where I wanted to go,
and they gave me an opportunity just to work for
a couple of years qualify as a lawyer. And I
did that and that was that was that was great times.

Speaker 2 (18:50):
As a young lawyer.

Speaker 1 (18:51):
Did I guess you just again put just wim me
hot on and you know, you just have to grind away,
do sixteen hours a day, get paid crappy money.

Speaker 2 (18:59):
Do do they do college law in quis? How does
it work?

Speaker 3 (19:01):
No? No, you could do that, but back then it
was an article class. You're an article class because you're
at the bottom of the food chain. And in some
ways that was also, in hindsight, a great thing because
I had to do lots of menial jobs as well
as you know, potentially some of the more interesting legal
and so you just get into work and you start

(19:22):
from scratch and you just work. And the idea of
just having to do hard work and eventually things will
come your way was sort of like, well, okay, I
understood that, you know, I grew up on that premise,
and so I really enjoyed it and I got a
lot out of that. And then what had happened was,
you know, they were very good to me, and I
was enjoying what I was doing there, and I got

(19:42):
married and had a wonderful I had first baby, very
very early, and I sort of sat back and forward.
Do you want to be in a lawyer in Brisbane? Now?
Is this? Is this why I studied art law? Is
this what I thought I was going to do? And
the answer was, actually, I think I want to go
and look out for more and try something else. And

(20:04):
so as a result of that decision, I applied for
a job and I got a job here in Sydney
with Mallison's, you know, the big law firm, and that
was very gracious so then to give me a chance.
And I went from sort of a small suburban, you know,
small highly specialized firm in Brisbane that's really actually bossomed
since since that time, to Mallison's very large firm in Sydney.

(20:28):
And I was put into the banking and finance practice,
which I hadn't worked in before, and I was assigned
to a team. And the partner who I worked for,
he was really tough, but he was really good for
me in the sense that in what way well he
was just so demanding and exacting in terms of accuracy

(20:49):
and detail and work. And I think that was really
good for me because it just set a bar immediately.
You've got to be at this standard if you're going
to prosper in this place. And you know, that was great,
and I just put my head down and I just
I just worked my way through that.

Speaker 2 (21:02):
Again. Well yeah, I just kept going.

Speaker 3 (21:04):
And I just and by and after a period of time,
excuse me, he he was incredibly gracious and generous to me,
allowing me to do more and more and gave me
a lot more run of the place. And I saw
some magnificent partners who I was just so impressed with
how they handled and conducted themselves. It just really lifted
me up and asked me to, you know, think about

(21:25):
the kind of person I want to be, the kind
of professional I want to be in the standard I
need to set myself. And so I got a lot
out of that. And in working at that law firm,
I had some exposure to various banks and then eventually
I moved to one of those banks, and that's how
I went from law into finance effects.

Speaker 1 (21:42):
So a lot of people don't realize that there are
in those big law firms like Mallicon's. I mean most
of them think of it was a bit of a factory.
But and it just greet.

Speaker 2 (21:52):
Me if I'm wrong. We're talking about the early nineties.

Speaker 3 (21:55):
This was ninety six. I came to Sydney into ninety six.

Speaker 1 (22:00):
So a firm like Mallison's, they're probably already merged with
Stephen Jakeson.

Speaker 2 (22:04):
That's Malison Stephen and and now they're now something else.

Speaker 1 (22:08):
But but they got so big relatively speaking, at the
time it was the market was dominated by them and
two or three out the law firms in terms of size,
and they got all the big jobs. Yes, the big
banks that the big work. You would have been in
one of the big four law firms. Does that does

(22:30):
that somehow inform you as to or does that how
to somehow shape you as to your future career that
you end up in one of the big four banks
you were one of the big you were at the
big investment banks too prior to that, or the big
foreign banks who were very active here in Australia. We'll
talk about that in a second. Does do you think
that has some impact on your career path? Did you

(22:51):
say to yourself, Look, I've always been a a I've
experienced at a big law firm. I've now been experienced
at the big non re tail banks here in Australia
and let's call maw it was deutsch Bank and whose
gold missacks. Yeah, so globally two of the biggest banks,
particularly Deutsche and the US and in terms of certain
areas anyway, did that start to make you think this

(23:13):
is the source of environment we've got to stick to
or did you ever.

Speaker 3 (23:15):
Think to someone?

Speaker 2 (23:16):
Wouldn't I going back to a small local law firm
like the one in Brisbane?

Speaker 3 (23:19):
Oh no. So so when I got to Mallison's and
you know, I really enjoyed my time there, and I
really enjoyed as I got to do more, and I
really and what.

Speaker 2 (23:29):
Was it you enjoyed though about it?

Speaker 3 (23:31):
Well, they're all high quality people and who were every day,
you know, going hard at it.

Speaker 2 (23:39):
Your colleagues or the colleagues.

Speaker 3 (23:41):
Colleagues above and below and around. So it was a
very sort of performed kind of environment.

Speaker 1 (23:46):
Yea.

Speaker 3 (23:47):
And it was really interesting and you know, big end
of town kind of works. That was quite for a young,
impressionable guy from Brisbane. It was like, wow, yeah, this
is exciting, and so I really enjoyed it. It was
also the case that I never really had any plans.
I never I sort of oh, that's really good. I'm

(24:08):
going to try that. And I ended up going into finance,
for example, by accident. I didn't start with that initiative.
But then I had a conversation with Credit Sweese and
they said, oh, you know, I want you. You know,
we're looking for a lawyer. Want you join us? And
I joined it as an in house lawyer, and then
I moved into banking quickly thereafter. And it was because

(24:29):
they said I want you to try this, and I said, yeah, okay,
I'll try that. I was never sitting back and saying
here's my plan. I'm going to work in a big
four law firm. Then I'm going to move into a
big investment bank, and then I just never had it
mapped out in my head. And in some respects I
was just enjoying.

Speaker 2 (24:44):
The play was in front of you, exactly what, And
I really.

Speaker 3 (24:46):
Enjoyed the people and working and the intensity required. And
then as I got into that, and you're competing hard
to perform and deliver, people then graciously and generously give
you opportunities, or at least I was in that respect.
And so that's how my career developed was without design,
It was just developed as a result of just people

(25:07):
giving me a chance at things, and I decided, yeah,
I'll try that, and I'll try that.

Speaker 1 (25:11):
And so it's funny you should say this, because I
wondered to myself, is Anthony Miller's propensity and preparedness to
work hard and work with intensity and all those things
you're talking about? Then? Is that something that was socially
formed on him by putting him through swimming regimes or

(25:31):
is that something that his personality always was going to
do and when he ended up going to work, he
was actually had the propensity and the preparedness to do it.

Speaker 3 (25:41):
So I think there were three forces. One is definitely swimming,
you know, trainee experience, experiences, I know I can do
it exactly. And then I think I was a little
bit built that way. And then fairly my parents work.
They worked hard, they put a hundred percent in, and
I was never It was always clear to me, It

(26:01):
was always clear to all my brothers and sisters that
Mum and Dad were working really hard and they worked
really hard to make sure we had opportunities, and there
was no way I was ever going to let them
down by not having one hundred percent effort into whatever
we did or whatever goal or whatever opportunity was given
to me, I was always going to give it one
hundred percent and do whatever it took. And I sort

(26:21):
of like, almost I felt an obligation to make sure
that if I was going to do something, I was
going to do it really well, because how could I
look Mum and Dad in the eye and not have
put one hundred percent into something like a sense of duty,
a sense of duty, sense of obligation. But that's only
because they work so hard and they you know, we
didn't have a lot, but we wanted for nothing when
we were growing up, and the eldest six kids and

(26:45):
everyone was given a real good school. Everyone was given
any sport opportunity they wanted to pursue they could, and
you know, you've got swimmers, footballers, boxes, water pilot players,
any sport anywhere. Mom and Dad would take whoever it
was to that sport and then back them one hundred percent.
And so I think we all felt an obligation to,

(27:08):
you know, work hard and take every opportunity and give
it one hundred percent. So I think there's three forces.
I think the assuming definitely think a little bit of
my own personality and DNA and then clearly that obligation
or responsibility to mom and dad.

Speaker 1 (27:22):
Do you have any memories of any one particular individual
who was a great mentor to you outside your parents
at work in either the law firm or Creswiz or
gold Misax or at Deutsche, was there someone who sort
of took you under their wing and said, you know,
I'm gonna try and this kid along. Yeah.

Speaker 3 (27:39):
Look, I think I was I was lucky in particularly
in my career, that there's been a few people who
took some interest in me and just gave me a
little bit of extra coaching and insights. And there was
a I was working for one partner at Mallison's, a
guy called Michael Gammons who was very good to me,
and he was really really fixated on accuracy and detail

(28:01):
and that helped me improve and I improved a lot
as a professional and as an individual. And there was
another partner in the law firm who had a big
impact on me, and he didn't probably didn't realize it.
And I did catch up with him on a few
occasions after I'd left the law firm and shared this
with him. And he passed away on here a couple
of years ago, and his name was John Stumbles, and

(28:21):
he was the sort of senior partner in the banking
and finance practice. And he was such a nice, decent guy,
incredibly thoughtful and compassionate and incredibly driven, but just so classy.
And I just every time I saw him in action
and every time he spoke, I thought, Gee, this guy
is so impressive. And then he started to just give

(28:42):
me a little bit of coaching and a little bit
of encouragement, and he'd sort of pulled me inside and say, look,
you know, as you're doing this work, i'd be you know,
think about this as you deliver yourself into that meeting Anthony,
or would be mindful of the fact that this is
what people will be looking for. And so I was
very grateful for that coaching from a guy who had
I had put on a pedestal because he was just
so classy and so good at what he did. So

(29:03):
I was lucky there. And then when I joined Goldman's
there was a couple of people there who, again, you know,
it's a highly high intensity, high performance environment, and a
couple of people took the time out to give me
feedback and sort of highlight what my strength is or
what my weakness is and what I should work on,
and so I was very grateful for that.

Speaker 2 (29:25):
That's interesting you should say that, particularly that as a
younger man in a law firm impressed with somebody's let's
call it kindness and generalists because generally speaking, the sort.

Speaker 3 (29:38):
Of more.

Speaker 1 (29:40):
Maybe he's incorrect, but the more accepted proposition of someone
who's very, very successful in an organization like a big
firm is that you have to be a bit of
a bugger to get up there, you know, like you
have to be tough and mean and all those sorts
of things. When someone like you says that they were
impressed as a younger man with someone who actually played

(30:01):
good qualities kindness, gentleness, but also constructive criticism, how much
of that have you taken away from that and put
into your cell phone what you do now?

Speaker 3 (30:11):
Yeah, so that's again a good sort of challenge. Like
I'm incredibly driven, I think in the business today, that's right.
I'm very I'm very competitive. I want to win, but
I don't want to win unfairly. I don't want to
have an unfair advantage and win. I want to I
want everyone to have the same opportunity and you know,

(30:33):
competing in a race, it's no good if you're given
every advantage and the others have no such chance to compete.
It's not really a racist.

Speaker 2 (30:41):
You're talking about internally.

Speaker 3 (30:42):
Now that's internally, that's externally. But you know, competing. I
do enjoy competing and I do enjoy winning. But equally,
if I've tried my best and I wasn't good enough,
then so be it. And so therefore, you know, you
can and should be able to be an effective executive

(31:03):
and an effective leader, and things like making sure everyone
is fairly treated, making sure everyone is heard, going out
a way to help someone who's a little bit less
fortunate in opportunities in the office or opportunities where it
might be seems to me to be like something that

(31:23):
absolutely should be allowed and should be endorsed and should
be accepted. And that doesn't mean you can't be compassionate,
which I think is really important and really important virtues
to be compassionate, but compassionate and thoughtful, but also really
demanding of yourself and then also able to then say
to other people, let's lift your standard. And asking someone

(31:44):
to lift their standard is not unfair inappropriate. If you're
a person who's thoughtful, compassionate, understanding and prepared to the
same as I did the same. And so I suppose
so with that.

Speaker 2 (31:55):
Leadership by example, I think I think.

Speaker 3 (31:57):
It's a little bit of that. Yeah, I think also,
you know, and I think about leadership and what I
have to do at the bank, there's an element of
leadership and we're going in this direction. Equally, as a leader,
I've also got a responsibility to make sure people have
the best opportunity to improve and develop and grow. And

(32:17):
so leadership is a little bit of service as well.
You know, it's not as a leader that's your reward
and look at you and everyone needs to do what
you say. But actually, no, I'm a leader and my
job is to then help everyone prosper, everyone progress, everyone improve.
And so I think that sort of leadership where it's

(32:39):
anchored around you know, look at this dominant personality and
look at how successful they are, and there's this idea
that they're a bit of a bugger and they're a
bit hard nosed. No, I'm not interested in that. I'm
much more focused on that leader who we're here to deliver.
We're going to win, but we're going to do it
together and what can I do to help you to
contribute to where we've got to get to as a team.
So that's how I think about it. That's how I

(33:01):
try and balance it.

Speaker 1 (33:02):
We often say, I mean, you would remember this from
when your brother was boxing styles wind fights, so you
you know, in a long version, then you try to
describe your style. But let's say, as a leader, what
would how would you describe it in a shorter version, like,
you know, how would you describe yourself as a leader?

(33:22):
There therefore as a leader, like the way you lead
the bank, because you know how many stuff you got,
like how many people in the group.

Speaker 3 (33:28):
We've got just under thirty eight thousand in the group.
You're not sort of looking at.

Speaker 1 (33:33):
Let's call it the latest people have been employed in
the last eight hundred or something, and you're not sort
of talking to each on them.

Speaker 2 (33:39):
That's impossible.

Speaker 1 (33:40):
So you've got to build leadership teams as well below you.
So do you build leadership teams as a leader that
follow your style of leadership? I mean, do you sort
of self select or do people self select based on you?
You do you do you pick people in your own
image as a leader?

Speaker 3 (33:56):
Good? Good question, I think I think it's all a
little bit of all of the above, if I can
answer it that way, which is, you know, what I'm
very focused on at Westpac, and what's really important to
me is I want a team, a leadership team, because
I think a great team is always going to be
so much more successful. So what I'm really focused on
is an executive team who have great teamwork, have each

(34:22):
other's backs, clear on what we collectively are going after
where we want to take this bank. What I've also
been focused on, for example, as I've brought people into
the executive team, is making sure that other executives got
an opportunity to meet and to interview those perspective candidates.
Not just your call that's exactly right. I want us

(34:42):
to say, is this a team member. We want part
of our team who will commit and share with us
both the challenge and the upside of what we want
to go after. And so I've been very focused on that.
And what's been very interesting to me is that you know,
we've got a goal we want to take Westpac, but equally,

(35:03):
the executives who've joined us and who want to join us,
and as we build this right across the bank, everyone
wants to join a team. They want to be part
of a team. That is what we are focused on
and what we're trying to create. And so that's been
really really invigorating and encouraging to see that kind of response.

Speaker 1 (35:20):
Because like, you know that you have a limited pool
where to choose your executive team out of. I mean,
unless you bring him in from over sous, perhaps you are.
But let's say we're just looking at the Australian landscape
and that you know the people who are available for
a spot that you need to fill based on what
you want your leadership to to look like. Sometimes you

(35:42):
have to go and see who's out there in the marketplace,
Like we're doing Rabia League at least time, but the
rooster is we're always finding you know, who someone fits
into our system. Yeah, but because you know, someone could
be a great player, have all the talent in the
world for a particular spot position, could be sand a wing, whatever,
But unless they fit into our system, won't we won't
employ Our system has a lot to do with character, style,

(36:06):
et cetera. Is that something you get an opportunity to
do at a bank like yours, Because I've noticed I
saw on the paper today that someone's left one of
the big banks is coming over to join you guys.

Speaker 3 (36:16):
Yeah, so how do you do To use that analogy,
I sometimes use this description of you know, let's get
the right athletes in the right seats, but we've got
to have it. It's got to be a team. And
we've got some exceptional talent at Westpac, and so it's
been a real pleasure and delightful to see and elevate

(36:36):
some of them and have them promoted and you can
see just outstanding performance. But there's definitely been a couple
instances where we thought, you know what, it's probably appropriate
just to bring in someone who can bring a little
bit of more open minded thinking or some different thinking
into the team. And so that's why we have recruited
a couple of external executives, and we will continue to

(36:58):
always look at the talent of the internally and externally
is to make those decisions. But the number one rule
or discipline I've been focused on is making sure that
they will work as a team and they will fit
in with the team, which is why, you know, having
other executives help in the decision as to who we

(37:18):
wanted to bring in and why is in my mind
pretty important.

Speaker 1 (37:22):
But in your game, do you have like understood or
agreed anti poaching rules? I mean, I mean, like how
do you find these people? Or do you meet them
at a function? Or do really good question this dude's
good or that girl's great. Yeah, let's go for us.

Speaker 3 (37:39):
So look at a couple of things. I mean, obviously
we have recruitment firms that help us at the market.
I do think it's my responsibility as a leader and
any leader of any bank, and I certainly see the
leaders of Westpact their job is to constantly understand the
quality of the team they have, the quality of the

(37:59):
talent out they're in the marketplace, and to be constantly
asking themselves, have I've got the balance right? Are we delivering?
And constantly testing and challenging as to whether it's working
and working as it should and making sure that the
team's performing. And equally, have you got the right people
in the right seats with the right ability and attitude

(38:19):
to deliver? And so and so Therefore you know that
idea of finding talent is if you will, probably my
number one job description retaining and investing in people is
probably really my number one job description. And then all
the leaders in the bank have that same obligation, which is,

(38:39):
we've got to make sure we've got the best talent,
We've got the best people on the best seats. And
if I think about banking and where we are today, Mark,
and you think about the world in which we operate,
you know, more and more it's going to be automated
more and more. It's digital. Ninety six percent of what
people do with Westpac is digital. And then you think
about the regulator who says, I want you to be

(39:00):
the same. I don't want you to have more risk
appetite in one area versus another bank that ain't like that.
So and then you put something like AI over the
top of it, and what you have is everything's becoming
much more homogenized and so it's being driven to be
the same. And so therefore, how are we going to
be different and how am I going to differentiate Westpac

(39:23):
in the marketplace? And it's going to be back to
the future. It's your people and how good they are,
and more importantly, the discretionary effort they bring in every
day and the way they feel trusted and empowered and supported.
That's where we've got to go. And that's why I'm
very focused on how I build a team and how
that team then leads the company, and how everyone in

(39:45):
the company understands we've got your back, because the way
we're going to win is by having the best people
with the best in work environment, giving us their best
every day.

Speaker 2 (39:55):
So what is a win for you, Anthony?

Speaker 1 (39:57):
So, like in other words, who are your stakeholders mean
a broad a sort of group of stakeholders, But who
are your stakeholders? And what is it that most of
them are looking for? They're looking for, you know, the
profit cash profit you're going to report. Are they looking for,
you know, a share price or what.

Speaker 2 (40:15):
Are they looking for?

Speaker 3 (40:16):
And so our goal is a number one and I'm
just number one in what regard number one? And so
that's exactly right. It doesn't mean it's the largest. And
what I'm looking for is that, you know, from a
customer customer service proposition, everyone goes, gee, they're the number one,
and we're not there at the moment. There's some pockets
of the bank which are number one in customer metrics,
et cetera, but we're not universally where we need to be,

(40:39):
and so we're after that. So that's our goal. I
don't think you can be number one unless you have
the best employee proposition. So I want to be the place,
and I want to create an environment worst pac and
we have a great environment, great people, but I want
it to be the number one place that people want
to work. So I want to create the number one
employee proposition and people come to work. And if you've

(41:01):
got the best people coming to work, giving their best
every day, then that underwrits your ability to provide that
customer outcome, that outcome that you want, which is number
one customer. If I get those two right, then I
think what I do is I deliver the right return
to shareholders and that's that consistence, sustainable growing return to

(41:22):
shareholder in terms of dividend and obviously share price growth.
And so that's the other element of what I think
is number one. And we need to deliver better return
on equity. We need to deliver better cost income ratio.
Those are all if you will indicators, and if we
can get those right, then I think that will If
you will allow us to claim and be recognized as

(41:43):
number one, doesn't mean we're the largest. It doesn't also
necessarily mean we're always the most profitable. But we are
getting that balance right customer, employee and shareholder, and if
I get that right, then we will be number one.

Speaker 1 (41:56):
Do you see the regulator as a stakeholder because the
regular represent Australia absolutely, and so because we give you,
we give you a license. When I say we, Australia
has given you a license to be, to be, to
take deposits and to be what they call an adi
or a bank so to speak. And the Regulator is
the policeman around this sort of stuff. Policemen also, but
I'm not as not that bad as more they do

(42:19):
a lot of other things as well.

Speaker 2 (42:20):
Now they stakeholder representing.

Speaker 3 (42:21):
All of us. I think that's right. I mean, I
would you know, in the context of if I'm going
to be number one in terms of customer service, I've
got to need a standard. I've got an obligation to
the community and to the regulator in terms of how
to deliver our services. So I feel it's entwined if
I'm going to be number one in that customer proposition
that I'm providing that I'm absolutely viewed by the regulator

(42:44):
and by the community in the same way that I'm
meeting those standards that I need to meet because you're
absolutely right, you know, a license to operate a bank
as a bank is a privilege and we need to
and do recognize it as such, and so therefore need
to make sure and everything we do we meet the
standards that the regulator stroke community expects of us.

Speaker 1 (43:06):
So many many years ago, and I think it was
around about my recollection was about two thousand and one
or two. The very well known and you'll remember Blood Pit, won't,
but it was a very well known CEO of ABHI.
His name was Don Argus. Yes, and Don was asked
I think it was an interview for the AFR. He said,
they said to him whatever they said to what keeps

(43:28):
you up at night? What keeps you awake at night?
And his response was a foreign entity who has the
big balance sheet coming into Australia and either buying a
bank or competing with a bank, And he quoted General.

Speaker 2 (43:42):
Electric at the time.

Speaker 1 (43:44):
General Electory at the time was the world's largest company
by market CAPP was probably the biggest finance financier in
the world in terms of you know, asset finance, and
it's not today, but it was then.

Speaker 2 (43:56):
Because the Gypsy's sort of changed that.

Speaker 1 (43:59):
But and interesting enough general actorly do you come into
Australia If I asked Anthony Miller today, what's something that
keeps you awake at night in terms of the banking sector,
not not just West but but the banking sector. What
is the biggest challenge to you today?

Speaker 3 (44:18):
Look, I mean there's a couple of things. So if
I could sort of have a bit of liberty to
say from one thing, I think you know one thing
I'm very focused on. I think all the chief executives
of the banks are, and chief executives right across Australia,
which is cyber and cyber crime, cyber security data. It's
just such a challenging environment. And we're not just if

(44:43):
you will, dealing with say criminals or you know, unfair
business practices. We're dealing with nation states assaulting the country.
And so that's that's a complexity and a challenge that
I don't think previous CEO sort of any era had
to had to contemplate. And the challenges we face as

(45:04):
we deal with cyber threats to the country are such
that you know that that does deeply worry me. The
other aspect of I suppose what I do worry about is,
essentially banking is increasingly, as I described it, homogenized, commoditized,
and so is it something that we could be further

(45:27):
disintermediated by or impacted by as a large technology company
looks to via their phone essentially say just deal with
me on everything, and I will outsource and if you
will have a white label offering, and I'll have a
deposit over here, and I'll get a bank which will
just be technically the deposit adi institution, but you'll do

(45:48):
it all via me, and you'll do it all via
my phone, for example, like Google. That's right, Google and
other one of the technology giants, exactly right, And so
do they then if you will into the financial services
or the regulated banking sector, and I do worry about that.
I do think other executives worry about that. I do

(46:10):
also reflect on the fact that, however, if that's where
they do go, then they will be captured by regulation
that they're not captured by today, and they don't want
that kind of regulation, And then that will be a
very interesting proposition to put to people, is do you
want these people providing banking services without necessarily the same

(46:33):
responsibilities in the other sides, that's right, and then all
of a sudden, being a regulated bank and being very
good at how you deliver on your regulatory obligations to
both regulator and community becomes not a burden, as it
isn't as advantage, but is part of your comparative advantage
and in fact is something that we should be embracing

(46:56):
and celebrating because if we do that well, then that
reinforce is that license top rate and that right top right,
and reinforces our position in the marketplace.

Speaker 1 (47:05):
You guys are with the banking section, particularly the big
five banks including mcquarie. You're the biggest tax payer in
the country, probably as a group, definitely one of the
most influential.

Speaker 2 (47:19):
Where do you see.

Speaker 1 (47:22):
Your banks or your grouping bank, your bank group obligations
relative to nation building and national policy in relation and
things like super tax. Do you feel as though you
have a position or do you think you feel as
though you should get on the front foot about it

(47:43):
As a bank, I'm talking about.

Speaker 2 (47:44):
As an institution.

Speaker 3 (47:45):
That's a that's a that's a and that's a challenge
for us. A question that we ask ourselves is, well, look, well,
certainly we're a big company and in big industry and
have a big role to play in the Australian community
and economy, and we have a license stop rate, and
we need to be very fixated on we're delivering the
right standard of service to our customers and we're meeting

(48:06):
that community and regulatory expectation in doing that. And we've
just got to make sure we're superb at that. And
if we're superb at that, then I think we've earned
the right to be able to contribute to the public
discourse around particular things like tax maybe industry relations, maybe
policy settings, etc. But I think we've got to make

(48:28):
sure we're very very good on delivering that service to
the standard our customers want and the community expects if
we're going to contribute to these discussions. And I would
say that perhaps you could. You know, over the last
ten years there's been a period of time where the
banks haven't been at the standard needed to and Royal
Commission and other things revealed that. But I do think

(48:51):
we perhaps particularly with COVID and what's happened in the
last few years, hopefully people do feel banks are working better,
working hard to deliver customer service to the right standards.
Community expects and so therefore we can and should contribute
a little bit more to some of these bigger topics
and bigger discussions. But we've got to be a little
bit honest with our sales marketing on until we've got

(49:12):
that standard. We got ourselves to that standard consistently, we're
going to be careful.

Speaker 2 (49:17):
The Glas Houses argument, this.

Speaker 3 (49:18):
Is exactly right, and we've just got to be a
little bit humble about how we put our selves forward
into these into these kind of debates. I do think,
for example, Westpac is Australia's oldest company. First, they're going
to help us bank first and oldest bank, and the
fact is that our success has been tied to the
growth and progress of this country, and so we have

(49:41):
a heavy responsibility to contribute to Australia's growth and support Australia.
And one of the things I would sort of say
that we've done is we've committed to retaining our businesses
in Papua New Guinea and Fiji because that's part of
what is important to Australia's natural interests as we go forward.
And we've therefore got a great working relationship with Canberra

(50:05):
in making sure how we do things and what we
want to do in P and G and FIG is
something that they're comfortable with and is serving the national
interest as we go forward. And I think that's been
to me and I think that I'm very proud of that.
I'm very proud of the Voice Pact doing that. And
that's an example of the kind of things we know

(50:26):
we need to do more of in helping Australia, because
if Australia prospers, then being a bank with the market
share we have, we naturally prosper as a results, and
so thinking much more nationwide is sort of also part
of my job description.

Speaker 2 (50:40):
Now, two more quick questions. The first one is.

Speaker 1 (50:43):
Cryptocurrency and all the usual players in relationship cryptocurrency and
a bigcoin, et cetera, ethereum.

Speaker 2 (50:52):
What's the bank's position in relation to that?

Speaker 3 (50:55):
So the underlying technology where continuously working with our peer
banks international and domestic the Reserve Bank on how we
might use that technology, particularly in the context of international
payments for example, and tokenization of deposits and our sets
all of a sudden could reduce a lot of friction

(51:17):
quick couldn't make it all quicker and more efficient. What
we've got to be careful of is you know, as
things go faster and more efficiently, you know, frauds and
other matters are affected more effectively and efficiently. And so
we've got to make sure that, you know, as we
go further with this, that we are still retaining certain
protections that community and customers expected us. In the context

(51:41):
of cryptocurrency itself. Uh, you know, we continue to see
an enormous amount of fraud and scam activity in generation
around cryptocurrency, and so we are conservative in terms of
facilitating payments into crypto exchanges and payments out of crypto

(52:04):
exchanges using these train well the Westpac banking system, and
I think that's a statement probably applies to all these
train banks because there is just such a hyperpensity for fraud,
scam and criminal activity that we're very cautious about that.
And so until that is addressed, it's hard to see
how we just go and embrace that asset class in

(52:25):
a way that some of the uses of it are
advocating we should go. And so and one of the
other interesting things for me is this interesting and emerging
challenge for the United States, which is it's embracing on
the one hand, bitcoining crypto. But the US's pre eminence
in the world is one of the reasons for that
is it's US dollar, and the US dollar is the

(52:48):
currency that everyone goes to and goes between as they
do their international trade or if you will, complete transactions.
So why would you you gebilize jeopardize that by encouraging
something such as a bitcoin as an alternative where there

(53:09):
is no ability to truly monitor, trace and if you will, govern,
And that would only start to weaken US position globally.
And so I'm finding that a little bit of an
interesting development, which is, you know, US Hedgemeny is at
risk if you allow bitcoin the full run or the
cryptocurrency universe to have the full run of international payments,

(53:29):
et cetera. So how do we get that balance right?
That's to me a little bit unclear, and it also means,
you know, let's be thoughtful crypto.

Speaker 1 (53:39):
So basically your position to let it play out and
see what happens. It's one of those areas where I
don't think you have to be first, you just got
to be right. Yeah, and so let's be right. So
final final question, more of commentary. I noticed when we're
doing the work on this podcast. Some two books you've read.
I'm sure I've read many books. But two books you

(53:59):
read is called Why Nations Fail, and the other one
is called The Count of Monte Christo.

Speaker 2 (54:03):
But I just want to look at Why Nations file
that book.

Speaker 1 (54:06):
That book was actually quite an interesting book and I
remember it as well. But it was sort of proffering
a position that nations that fail are the ones that
sort of only look after the elite and lock out
everyone having an opportunity, fair opportunity to innovate through innovation,
to become.

Speaker 3 (54:27):
Better what they do?

Speaker 2 (54:29):
Is that a Is that a book?

Speaker 3 (54:31):
Big?

Speaker 1 (54:31):
Does that book sort of somehow describe how Anthony Miller
feels and thinks about just about how things should happen
in the world.

Speaker 3 (54:38):
Yeah, look, it is a book. I've read it a
couple of times and have reflected on it. Certainly, you know,
the nation's failing because the essentially the gap between the
have and have not gets too far. But more importantly,
they have nots don't think they have any hope. I
don't think they have any opportunity. And so that's a

(55:02):
really critical challenge, exam challenge for society today.

Speaker 1 (55:07):
And we have that with young people's right. I feel
that relative to people, say my age, the boomers, that's right.

Speaker 3 (55:13):
And then in particular, perhaps the example that most brings
this out, which is housing and access to housing. And
so you know, I own my house, and everyone of
my age and generation, you know, we all got opportunities
and we have brought property, and I think we've enjoyed
the wealth effect of house and house prices growing, but

(55:34):
we're currently not building enough or creating enough house or
unit supply so that everyone feels they're a chance of
getting it. Doesn't mean you guarantee that they get it,
but they've got to feel like this hope that they'll
get it. And so one of the things that I
drew out of the Wye Nations file is that unless
we are working much harder at ensuring those who don't

(55:58):
have property, as an example, feel there's at least hope
and there's things in place that give them a chance
of getting access to property, then that's a real problem
and we've got to solve that. And those who have
property and those who are, if you will, in the
incompor position that many of us are today, we have

(56:18):
a bit of a responsibility to say, well, what else
can we do? Now? What should we be doing to
ensure that others have the same opportunities we had our
bit circumstances different and you know, the environments different, But
we've got to give them the same opportunities, the same
hope that we all had that drive our behaviors to buy,
and they obviously enjoy owning property.

Speaker 1 (56:38):
And the reason I asked you because and to some extent,
I've sort of set you up a little bit. But
and then I apologize to that. But it goes back
to my earlier question about banks having a say on policy,
because if I just use young people, anyone under the
age of thirty, who's looking at and by the way,
I'm going to sound like a heretic saying this, but
would be thinking themselves like I can't afford to go

(56:59):
and bid against ants the middle because Anthony Miller's got
Maybe you're not the boss of Westbak, you're just a
school teacher, headmaster at a school. But you've accumulated two properties.
Your income from the two properties now is being added
to your other income from your wage, and given negative gearing,
Anthony Miller might get approved for more money to buy

(57:19):
the property against one of my young producers. He's only
twenty two, and Anthony Miller is going to use negative
gearing to.

Speaker 2 (57:24):
Build up more of a portfolio.

Speaker 1 (57:26):
And by the way, I'm not against eve viearing. I
think it's a great thing that's being great for Australia.
But at the same time, this summit that's being held
a productivity summer, they're they're going to address tax reform
and as I sound, going to sound like a heretic,
but to some extent, wealth has been created in this
country by using sort of tax concessions that really only

(57:47):
benefit blokes like you and me today and women like
you and I, you know, like people in our position,
and it is largely unfair for the younger people because
whilst they can use negative gearing, they actually don't ever
call a five for loan. And we're always going to
be a to able to add bid them because then
the eggy gearing, we're going to be able to say,
you know, and I want that property and my income

(58:08):
is better than yours, mister twenty one year old. Therefore
I can always abid you, and as a result of
our bidding, you never get on the ladder.

Speaker 3 (58:14):
We can't.

Speaker 1 (58:15):
I don't think we can solve more housing. I mean,
it seems like an issue we can't solve. When we
saw somebody coming out of Treasury which is leaked somehow,
they saying that Treasures already advised the government that they
will not meet there one point two million housing guide
the new houses. So if we can't solve the housing issue,
affordability issue for younger people. And you know, younger people

(58:35):
are big, big cohort in your business. I mean they're
very important to you because they're the next generation. You know,
we're all going to die off at some stage. You've
got to fill the bucket back up with younger people.
And you've got to attract younger people, which is tasting
back to the question I should before and given you
know your you know why nations fail book, it's because

(58:57):
institutions governments talking about not restructuring or changing the structure
of the system to allow people to get back on
the ladder younger people.

Speaker 2 (59:11):
Where do you think?

Speaker 3 (59:11):
So I come back to that idea that people need
to feel that they have an opportunity, that there's hope.
I do think we have not done anywhere near what
we should be doing to create more supply in the
context of housing. And so when you talk about there's
a lot of us within this element of incumbency that
can therefore just keep buying and thus squeezing out those

(59:32):
who don't, you certainly can try to temper that demand
by limiting how many properties you might own, and obviously
that just creates our cottage industry of arbitrage, etc. And
what we've done and continue to perhaps put too much
weight on, is how do we solve the demand side
in Australia. So why don't we lend more money or
give more money to first home buyers or cap interest

(59:52):
grant and they're all good things, and we should do
all of those things. But what we've got to do
is solve supply. And if I just keep this simple
sort of proposition in front of us, which is supply
at the right price point, so that all those people
who can't at the moment by a property can see
there is an opportunity or potential opportunity and they have hope.

(01:00:13):
We've got to create that. And so if I think
about the median income in Australia is about ninety thousand dollars,
as a bank you would land probably five times someone's
income subject to expense verification maybe six times subject too
expense verification against their income a mortgage. So therefore that

(01:00:36):
tells you we need a lot of houses in that
sort of five hundred to six hundred thousand dollars zip code.
If we're going to solve what is currently available in
terms of financing and matching the two that's right. And
so then you break it down and say, okay, we
need more five hundred and six hundred thousand dollars houses,
and so median income median house prices in Australia over

(01:00:59):
million dollars at one point six million dollars in Sydney
Regional Australia as median house price is five hundred thousand dollars.
So if we're going to go after house price houses
units at the right price point, why aren't we thinking
a lot more about how we create more opportunity in
regional Australia just given the price point there meets so

(01:01:20):
much more of what we need to solve. Second thing
is is that maybe we have to continue to work
harder at densifying and providing a lot more properties in
the city rather than the big home which obviously costs
an amount and well, because of costs and because of
a whole host of other issues are more expensive than
five to six hundred thousand dollars, how do we create
a lot more five hundred to six hundred thousand dollars properties?

(01:01:43):
And we're not putting that exam question in front of
everyone in the property ecosystem to deliver. And I think
if we then said let's go after that, you'd be
surprised at what could be achieved if that's the goal.
And more importantly, we say to every single council, your
job is to make sure that there's fifty new units
or houses at the price point at five and six

(01:02:04):
affordable house, Yeah, but not affordable in the sense of,
you know, a slightly pejorative Oh it's a low socio demographic.

Speaker 1 (01:02:12):
No.

Speaker 3 (01:02:12):
No, this is just price of property at the right
price point to meet to demand that at the moment
is not being Do you think.

Speaker 1 (01:02:19):
The word affordable is probably the wrong word to use
because it is pejorative, It sort of sounds like and
to develop as.

Speaker 3 (01:02:25):
Some people will feel like, you know, it's a little
bit sort of patronized affordable housing. No, no, no, just
got to get more property at the right price point.
For people who can pay that price.

Speaker 1 (01:02:36):
It's a better narrative, much better narrative because the people
whore buying it, I don't want to be thinking the
buying affordable housing. They want to think I've bought the
price because that's the price I can afford. It might
be a bit smaller, might you know, might have you know,
slightly one bathrooms, but it might be just slightly different
to be affordable from the developer's point of view. But
that's what it makes sense. And I think the change
in the narrative is really important. And you know the

(01:02:57):
industry more than better than anybody.

Speaker 3 (01:03:00):
Know who you are. We've certainly got good insights on
the industry and we know better than anyone. But we've
got good insights on the industry, and we're very keen
to support the industry. And you know, and the job creation,
the nation building opportunities in building let's put more into
regional Australia. And then you think about regional Australia, Northern Australia.
We need a lot more of our population living in
Northern Australia for a whole host of reasons, not the

(01:03:24):
least of which is it's not it's a reasonably elegant
potential way to deal with cost of housing at the
right price point for the demand that we have. The
only other thing I'd say about that book which I
thought was really important was, and you drew on it
in some of your observations, that what you when you
read the book is about the power of having innovation

(01:03:46):
and the way private property or intellectual property laws and
protecting people who come up with great ideas and giving
and thus stimulating and challenging people to innovate and come
up with new things. So and that's one of those
things which you know we should continue to ask ourselves.
Are we're doing enough? And I think we have great

(01:04:06):
intellectual property protections in Australia, but are we creating enough
of an environment and enough room for people to try things,
create things, trial and error, because we've got to innovate
and we've got to be really open minded and courageous
about trying things if we're going to I suppose, succeed
as a nation. And if there's one thing you sort

(01:04:28):
of could argue the US has as an advantage of
everyone else in the world, is they believe every day
that they're going there's a chance to get ahead. They
believe in the American dream, and they believe in the
idea that they can innovate and they can create. And
obviously their technology industry and what the innovation and the
ambition they have is extraordinary, and that is to underpin

(01:04:50):
so much of the success in the United States. We
need to encourage that a lot more in Australia, in
my view, and create a lot more context where people
feel to go and try to try an experiment. And
one of the issues in Australia is sometimes I think
we're a bit tough on each other, hiding behind that
idea of the tall poppy syndrome where we drag people

(01:05:11):
down for trying. I think we've got to start to
really endorse and celebrate and get behind people who are
trying things and create a much more positive culture around that.

Speaker 2 (01:05:21):
Anything like that.

Speaker 1 (01:05:22):
That's actually pretty cool that you actually said that, because
innovation and the innovation nation, which is what Malcolm turn
Will try to turn Astralia into when he was the
Prime minister here is probably my biggest bug beer. I
think we've lost a little bit of that, and not
that we're without talent.

Speaker 3 (01:05:38):
I mean I think we've got enormous talent.

Speaker 2 (01:05:40):
Amazing.

Speaker 3 (01:05:41):
Just liberate that talent and give it every run of
the place. Well mate, thanks very much. I really appreciate
it things. Thank you. That's very gracious to as so,
thank you very ch I'm.

Speaker 1 (01:05:50):
Actually privileged to have a CEO and your of your
elk into the organization, so thanks so much.

Speaker 3 (01:05:54):
And that