Customer-owned banks and major banks unite behind cash distribution bill

COBA and the ABA both back the Cash Distribution Framework Bill, though pricing concerns linger for smaller lenders News By Mina Martin Jul 22, 2026 Share Australia's banking sector presented a united front at a Senate inquiry this week, with both the Customer Owned Banking Association (COBA) and the Australian Banking Association (ABA) backing the Cash Distribution Framework Bill 2026 — even as COBA flagged unresolved concerns over how pricing will ultimately be set. COBA's case: regional access and financial inclusion COBA chief impact officer Stephanie Elliott (pictured) appeared before the Economics Legislation Committee on behalf of the association's 47 member banks, joining virtually from the World Credit Union Conference in Sydney, which COBA is co-hosting with the World Council of Credit Unions. Elliott linked the bill to the sector's long-standing focus on communities outside the major cities. "The importance of cash is closely tied to our sector's long-standing commitment to financial inclusion," she said. Nearly three-quarters of COBA's member banks are headquartered outside Sydney and Melbourne, and Elliott pointed to Reserve Bank data showing cash use remains disproportionately high in these regions, where digital infrastructure and power reliability can be inconsistent. "For reasons, including resilience, regional access and financial inclusion, COBA strongly supports the Cash Distribution Framework legislation and urges its timely passage," she said. The ABA told the committee that the sharp decline in cash use — down from 70% of all payments in 2007 to a small fraction today — combined with the emergence of what it called a virtual monopoly cash distribution provider, meant the market could no longer be relied upon to guarantee fair, affordable and reliable cash distribution on its own. On that basis, the ABA argued a permanent legislative framework was needed to provide regulatory certainty, ensure sustainable pricing, and guarantee service standards in regional and remote areas. The ABA also stressed the timing was urgent, noting the bill's transitional provisions matter because Armaguard's existing ACCC enforceable undertakings — which currently constrain its pricing and service levels — expire in September 2026. Pricing mechanism still the sticking point Despite backing the Bill, COBA cautioned that it had not yet had the opportunity to assess the proposed Independent Pricing Mechanism, noting Armaguard is yet to lodge the framework with the ACCC. At the same hearing, Armaguard chair Peter Fox told the committee the company has incurred losses of around $130 million in recent years. Against that backdrop, Elliott said the eventual pricing structure still needs to work for smaller players, not just the major banks. "Ultimately, it is essential that the final pricing framework delivers fair and sustainable outcomes for all participants in the cash system, including customer-owned banks , which do not have the negotiating leverage of larger institutions," she said. COBA is also pushing for accessible dispute resolution mechanisms, including confirmation that multiple affected customer-owned banks could pursue collective arbitration where they face common conduct from the same cash-in-transit provider — an approach intended to spread costs that would otherwise be prohibitive for individual mutuals. Get the hottest and freshest property and mortgage news delivered right into your inbox. Subscribe now to our FREE daily newsletter .