Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1697646218648.pdf (Australia)
1 Brett: Wilson Economics Legislation Committee Banking Amendment (Deposits) Bill 2020 For the attention of the Committee Members; My name is Brett Wilson, a subject and elector who has a major concern for our financial and banking system, and have an interest in protecting the rights we the people have as participants in that system.
I am making this submission with regard to the Banking Amendment Deposits Bill, which amends the Banking Act 1959 to: provide that the conversion and write-off provisions do not extend to the bail-in of deposit accounts; and provide that nothing in the Act or any other subordinate Commonwealth legislation, gives the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority the power to implement, authorise or direct the implementation of bail-in of deposit accounts, a responsibility that must not be placed in the hands of a single Government Department like APRA.
It should be a principle goal of important economists and responsible Ministers of Parliament, to terminate the ability of the private banking system to create credit to finance its own speculations and return the power over money to the government from private banks, which was the intent of the framers of our Commonwealth Constitution, for our Parliament to control the money supply.
The Australian banking and financial system, appears to be wrongly designed in the best interest of the maximum profits of the Big Banks to the detriment of the protection, welfare and financial wellbeing of we the people.
We the people need to know that a legislative safety net, a Bill passed into law protecting our deposits from a bail in/out will always be available to us, in times of emergency, and the parliament must not go down the regulatory road by leaving it open to whatever practices the private banks deem most profitable for them to the detriment of we the people.
Why should the public be responsible to bail in the private banking sector where each bank is a privately listed company on the ASX, responsible for its financial decisions like every other listed company who’s customers have no lawful obligation to bail them in or out in a time of crisis, because of their bad financial management.
Banking Amendment (Deposits) Bill 2020Submission 106 2 This is not the responsibility of the public and non-shareholders or should the public be financially burdened and placed into hardship by having their deposits confiscated to bail in the 1% who are majority major shareholders of the banks in question.

Why should seigniorage (profit to the issuer of fiat money) go largely to the private sector rather than entirely to the government (the commonwealth)?
When did we the people vote via a Referendum to allow this mismanagement of our sovereign money supply and usurping of our monetary security?

The control of the money supply and seigniorage and security of our deposits must sit entirely with the parliament rather than largely with private banks.
Banks should no longer be able to live the alchemist’s dream by creating money out of nothing and lending it at interest, or using customer deposits to bail them in/out of their bad financial bets and reckless banking practices.
All quasi-bank financial institutions should be legislated out of having access to customer deposits for the use of a bail in/out, and customer deposits must be protected by statute, and the banks should be regulated as commercial banks subject to 100% reserve requirements as soon as practicable.

With customer deposits protected by statute, there is no danger of a run on a bank during a crisis, leading to a shortage of physical fiat money and cascading collapse of the banks caused by a bank run.
If the Commonwealth controlled the money supply, the Parliament could not be frightened into giving huge bailouts to some failing banks to avoid the “contagion” of failure, because the money supply would no longer be controlled by the private banks.
Any given bank could fail by making imprudent loans, and due to over exposure to toxic derivatives, but its failure, even if a large bank, would not disrupt the public utility function of money, in particular, when customer deposits are protected from plunder by private banks.
The nationalising of money must be considered as it is a natural public utility in the first instance and the intent of the framers of our Commonwealth Constitution who arguably would not have dreamed of legislating to allow private banks to steal customer deposits to pay for their own financial failings.
The fact the nationalising of our money idea, is hardly discussed today in our parliament, in spite of its common sense, is testimony to the power of vested interests the 1% undemocratically has over our nations sovereignty.
Banking Amendment (Deposits) Bill 2020Submission 106 3 In Summary: It is my will that deposit accounts be protected from bank bail in, and that nothing in the Banking Act 1959 or any other Commonwealth legislation extends power to APRA and that APRA be denied the power and authority to implement the bail in of a deposit account.

It is my will that write-off provisions of the Banking Act 1959 do not apply to deposit accounts as defined in the bill.
Brett: Wilson Banking Amendment (Deposits) Bill 2020Submission 106