Good morning and welcome to the 2020 Annual General Meeting of ANZ Shareholders, which, as there is a quorum present, I now declare open. My name is Paul O'Sullivan, and it's an honor to have been recently selected by the board to serve as your chairman. I'm joined here at our Melbourne Head Office by our Chief Executive, Shayne Elliott, as well as by our Chief Financial Officer, Michelle Jablko. All our other directors are participating in the meeting but are doing so remotely. Before we begin, I'd like to start by having Amelia Caldwell from Gadigal Country and a graduate in our institutional business deliver an acknowledgment of country.
Thanks, Paul, and Good day, welcome to all of you joining us today. I'd like to undertake the important duty of acknowledging that I am joining you from the lands of the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation here in our Pitt Street office in Sydney, as well as acknowledging the Wurundjeri and Boonw urrung people of the Kulin Nation in Naarm, Melbourne, and pay my respects to elders both past and present. I'd also like to acknowledge the traditional owners of the lands in which all of you are joining us from today, and pay my respects to those elders past and present. In being here today, I'd like to pay my respects to the elders of the country on which I was raised, took my first steps, and became a young woman on, Ngarigo Country.
The Ngarigo are people of the snow, and the traditional lands are what's now known as the Snowy Monaro and the Upper Murrumbidgee. In the spirit of reconciliation and truth-telling, and paying heed to the message of NAIDOC Week this year, I would also like to acknowledge that sovereignty was never ceded over the numerous lands now known as Australia, and that this always was and always will be Aboriginal land. Thank you.
Thank you, Amelia, for a wonderful acknowledgment of country, and I'd also like to personally acknowledge the Wurundjeri and the Boonw urrung peoples as the traditional custodians of this land, and to pay my respects to their elders past, present, and emerging. Now, this is clearly a very different Annual General Meeting in what's been a very unusual year. It's true, restrictions have eased somewhat, but we felt, given the serious nature of the virus, as well as government and health advice, it was still appropriate to hold a virtual meeting. While this new format does have the advantage of allowing shareholders from all around Australia to engage in the meeting, we do plan to be in Adelaide for next year's AGM in person, which, of course, was the planned location for today's meeting.
So, to help with the smooth running of this virtual format, our Deputy Chief Executive, Alexis George, will be assisting with the facilitation of the meeting, including the shareholder questions. Alexis will now take us through some detail on voting and on asking questions.
Thank you, Chairman. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. As the Chairman said, my name is Alexis George, and I'm pleased to be the moderator for today's meeting. The Chairman has asked me to run through some housekeeping matters, particularly in relation to voting. I'll also explain what will happen if there's an unexpected technical problem. We have sent a virtual AGM guide, and an FAQ document to all shareholders explaining how to vote and ask questions. If you need another copy, it is available at anz.com/AGM. For voting, when the Chairman opens the poll, a voting icon will appear on the voting platform. When you select the voting icon, it will take you to another page where you can choose either for, against, or abstain for each item. The selected box will change color, and your votes will automatically be recorded. There is no submit or send button.
Your selection is automatically recorded. Of course, you can change your mind or cancel your vote at any time before the poll is closed, and the Chairman will announce when that's about to happen. Wayne Hopkins from Computershare has been appointed returning officer, and Alison Kitchen from our external auditor, KPMG, has been appointed as a scrutineer. Alison will also be available in the event shareholders have a question of the auditor. In relation to asking questions, if you are listening by phone, please press star one to be put through to an operator to submit your question. If attending online, you can select the question icon on the ANZ AGM online platform. This will allow you to type your question in the chat box at the bottom of the screen. Once you've done that, simply select the send icon.
Please note you are limited to 1,000 characters, and we ask shareholders phoning in to be equally concise. Questions and comments received from shareholders will generally be read out verbatim, with changes made only to fix any grammatical errors. You can submit questions and comments in relation to any item as soon as the Chairman allows questions to be submitted. If it is regarding a specific item of business, it'll be stored and put to the meeting when we get to that item. Please do not wait for that item before submitting your question. Item six is a contingent resolution, and the Chairman will not put item six to the meeting unless item five is passed.
As such, we propose to answer questions in relation to item six and questions or comments relating to ANZ's approach to environmental matters, including our policies, business activities, and disclosures on such matters at item one. This is where the Chairman will take questions on the annual reports, as well as general questions and comments in relation to the management of the company. I can assure shareholders that ANZ takes its obligations relating to the proper running of the AGM very seriously. To give all shareholders the opportunity to participate equally, we ask that shareholders try and limit their questions to two per item of business and to submit each question separately. This being a meeting of shareholders, it's important to note we'll generally not comment on specific customer matters or any matters subject to legal or other dispute.
As such, these questions or comments will not normally be put to the meeting. As I'm sure you can also understand, ANZ will not put any questions or comments to the meeting that are abusive, obscene, or defamatory in nature. The Chairman, while consistent with the Corporations Act, looks to ensure that a reasonable opportunity is provided to shareholders to ask questions and make comments on each item of business and the meeting itself. Where we receive questions or comments that are the same or fundamentally similar, we may read out one or a representative selection for the Chairman to address. In the case of multiple questions on the same topic that have already been responded to, the Chairman may opt to advise that those questions have been adequately answered and move on.
The Chairman has also asked me to outline the process should there be any technical issues that impact the meeting. If there are issues, on confirmation from the Chairman, we'll either continue with the meeting if that's possible until the matter is resolved, or if that's not possible, we'll temporarily suspend proceedings while we try to get back up and running. If we cannot fix the problem in a reasonably short space of time, the Chairman will formally adjourn the meeting and look to resume at 3:00 P.M. Melbourne time this afternoon, using the same login details as now. If this happens, and we hope it doesn't, we'll announce this to the ASX as soon as possible and also provide an update on anz.com.
Please note we cannot control any internet problems experienced by individual shareholders or their representatives, and we will not suspend proceedings should individuals be having problems of such a nature. The Chairman will now address the meeting. Over to you, Chairman.
Thank you, Alexis. I now declare the polls open on items two to five, and I encourage shareholders to begin submitting questions ahead of the formal business of the meeting. Now, while it may seem a distant memory for those not directly impacted, 2020 began with the catastrophic Australian bushfires that dominated headlines around the world and devastated many regional communities. As that crisis unfolded, I was very impressed by how our people supported customers, even at a time when many of our staff had themselves been personally impacted. I was equally impressed by how our staff stepped forward to support customers through COVID-19. So, on behalf of the bank, I would like to extend our sincerest sympathies to those who have been adversely impacted by either of these tragedies.
As we come to the end of a year that none of us could have imagined, I'd like to now provide some insight into how the board is evaluating the future, as well as to make some comments on my priorities as the new incoming Chairman. Firstly, the economy appears to be ending the year in better shape than most of us had originally feared. The coordination between the governments, industry, and regulators has meant that our customers are in a far better position today than they would have been without these measures. I am, however, a realist. While the signs are positive, we know many businesses are continuing to struggle, and sadly, some may never fully recover. We know there are many individuals who have had an incredibly demanding year despite the considerable support from the governments in Australia and New Zealand.
We're also acutely aware that much of this assistance will need to unwind in the early part of next year, understandably, but this may present further economic challenges that will need to be very carefully navigated. Fortunately, the hard work undertaken by management in recent years to simplify and strengthen ANZ meant that we went into this crisis in a strong position. It's also meant that we've been able to support our customers through one of the most difficult periods in generations. Now, let me talk briefly about our performance and the dividend. It was, of course, COVID that had the most material impact on our profitability this year. We posted a statutory profit of AUD 3.58 billion, but this was down 40% on last year. I think it's important to provide some perspective, though, on the business trends.
On an underlying basis, profit before provisions was down 1% for the year, with both revenue and expenses broadly flat. But quite correctly, international accounting standards now require all banks to put aside provisions for potential future losses. And so this year, reflecting the possible economic impact of the pandemic, you saw each of the major banks setting aside substantial amounts. At ANZ, we set aside a further AUD 1.7 billion, taking our total reserves to more than AUD 5 billion. It's also been a highly unusual year in that it is the first time in ANZ's history that we elected to defer a decision on the dividend as we concluded the first half.
While the regulator strongly encouraged all banks and insurers to defer dividend decisions until there was greater clarity, that advice actually reflected the board's own thinking, and our decision ultimately proved to be both appropriate and prudent.
Pleasingly, we were able to announce a AUD 0.25 per share dividend, which was paid on the 30th of September, and this was followed by a AUD 0.35 per share distribution, which we paid to shareholders this morning. Both of these were fully franked. We agreed with APRA that a reduced dividend was prudent in 2020. Moving forward, the board will continue to review our approach in the new year, particularly given an improving economic outlook and APRA's announcement yesterday that it will remove its cap on payout ratios. Ultimately, our final decision as a board will be influenced by how the remainder of the crisis evolves, particularly from a macroeconomic perspective and our views on the long-term sustainability of our dividends. But let me assure you, your board is acutely aware of the reliance many shareholders place on a regular dividend and on the value of franked dividends.
Before getting on to the substance of the meeting, I thought, as a new Chairman, I might spend a few moments just saying a few things about where I will focus my attention. Firstly, it's clear that our bank is in a very good position. The strategy that management and the board have executed over the past five years has radically simplified the business, significantly improved its capital position, and remediated many of the problems of the past. That's what allowed us to weather the storms of 2020 in good shape, and it means we're well placed to take advantage of the opportunities that a post-pandemic world will offer. One way of thinking about what I see as the focus areas moving forward is to think about it as four C's: customers, costs, capital, and culture.
Looking at the first of these, around the world, technology is rapidly changing and improving how companies understand and serve their customers. And to grow your bank sustainably, we must continue to focus on how we can service the customer better. We must continue leveraging technology so we can amplify the voice of the customer in the bank and reduce the friction involved when dealing with us. We want to better anticipate our customers' needs and ultimately make faster and smarter credit decisions. During the next 12 months, you'll hear a lot more from the team about our digital banking offerings, which have been a big focus of our investments. The second C is costs, and banking, like so many industries, will continue to face downward pressure on margins.
While ANZ was early to this, and indeed we are regarded as leading the Australian banks in that respect, we must keep relentless pressure on our cost base. The third C is capital, and I'm going to spend a little bit more time talking about this. Efficient capital allocation is the key to sustainably growing shareholder value over time. Over the past five years, your bank has been a leader in the management of capital. We have not needed to raise capital by diluting you, our existing shareholders, through the recent COVID crisis. In fact, in contrast to our three major Australian bank competitors, we have actually reduced the number of shares on issue over the last few years, increasing the potential earnings per share for you, our owners.
Currently, we remain one of the strongest capitalized large banks in the world, with a Common Equity Tier 1 capital ratio of 11.3%. To put that into even better perspective, that's $34 billion more than what we had the last time we went into a major global crisis, the GFC. However, the response of governments and central banks to the crisis has been to expand money supply with an associated reduction in interest rates. As a result, we believe we will be in an environment of significant liquidity, low interest rates, and intense competition for some time to come. While this will help our customers, it will also require intense focus from the board and management on not only how we manage our capital, but also how we deploy our shareholders' funds.
The final and fourth C is culture, and your board understands it has an important role here in ensuring we have the right culture within the bank. We've made good progress here. We have a diverse and experienced management team leading from the front on values. Employee engagement scores are sector leading, and our people are saying they feel empowered to speak up when something isn't right. An ethical decision-making framework is also now being used by leaders across the bank, as well as guiding decisions at our Ethics and Responsible Business Committee. So, wrapping up the four C's, let me assure you that my focus as incoming Chair will be on improving shareholder returns through a focus on good customer outcomes, cost discipline, the efficient use of capital, while continuing to build a strong culture.
Before finishing, I also want to give you the board's perspective on some of the resolutions that have been put to the meeting today. First, let me talk about the adoption of the remuneration report. While Ilana Atlas, the Chair of the Human Resources Committee, will talk specifically to our approach, I think it's appropriate that I make some initial comments given the impact COVID has had on our business this year. The board was pleased with the way the bank responded to this global pandemic. From an operational perspective, we took immediate steps to ensure that our people could safely and productively work at home while still supporting customers during a very difficult time. However, as I've said, provisions and impairments relating to the pandemic reduced profits and impacted the amount we were able to return to you, our shareholders, through dividends.
While management did an excellent job, it is important that the impact on shareholders be reflected in the remuneration of our executives. Therefore, the board used its discretion and applied a 50% reduction to the variable remuneration outcomes for our disclosed executives. This reduced the total remuneration by an average of 15% for those that were in the same roles as last year. I should also point out, however, that our frontline staff on award contracts received a 2% pay rise this year, and we think, given their performance through the crisis, that is totally deserved and appropriate. The other resolutions I want to specifically address relate to climate change and to our lending in the natural resources sector.
The global economy is clearly making a major transition to a lower carbon future, and our key markets of Australia and New Zealand will be at the forefront of new investment and opportunity that reflects that. We believe at ANZ that we have a role to play as an enabler of a net-zero future, and we are already embracing that role. This transition will take time, however, and we appreciate that some shareholders listening today may want us to get there sooner rather than later. Paradoxically, other shareholders feel we may be moving too quickly. As such, we recently released an updated climate change statement, which focuses on, firstly, that we will encourage and support our top 100 emitting large corporate customers to identify climate risks and opportunities, create transition plans, and report publicly on their progress.
Secondly, that we will support the transition of our economy to a low carbon future. We've set aside AUD 50 billion to help fund this, and I actually expect that number will likely grow over the next few years. Thirdly, that we will reduce our own impact by managing and reducing emissions from our own operations. This will include sourcing 100% of the electricity needed for our business from renewables by 2025. But probably the most important thing to state is that the heart of our climate strategy is a dialogue with our customers. We want to better understand how they are thinking about this transition and these issues and how we can assist them to act on these challenges. What's been encouraging so far is that the vast bulk of our customers have welcomed that engagement and are clearly taking these issues seriously.
In conclusion, it's been a very difficult year for many of our customers and for the nation. If 2020 has taught us anything, it is that things can change very fast. The lesson for companies like ANZ is that it's important to be both flexible in planning and agile in response. There will still be challenges ahead, but we have the balance sheet strength, along with record levels of provisions, to ensure we are able to support our customers through the remainder of the crisis while still providing a decent return for you, our shareholders. Before I hand over to Shayne, it would be remiss of me not to make a few comments about my predecessor in the Chair role, David Gonski.
David retired from the ANZ board at the end of October, having made an enormous contribution to our bank, particularly over the last seven years as our Chair. He steered the board through some testing times for the industry, and he helped build an organization with a strong focus on governance, accountability, improved culture, and enhanced customer outcomes. There is no doubt ANZ is in much better shape as a result of his leadership. We are a much simpler and more focused organization with a strong, diverse, and stable management team. We are one of the best capitalized banks in the world without having the need to dilute existing shareholders through the recent crisis, and we have remediated many of the issues of the past while still investing in our future.
Perhaps most importantly, his efforts to strengthen and champion the bank's work in the area of environmental, social, and governance have given us the foundation to be a leader in the industry on sustainability issues. On behalf of all shareholders, I thank David for his efforts. Finally, given the events of 2020, it's reassuring to know we have a workforce of more than 38,000 people who are so dedicated to serving their customers and the community. I'd also like to acknowledge our customers for, again, trusting us with their banking, and especially thank you, our shareholders, for supporting us through the year. Your support is very much appreciated by the board. Whatever 2021 brings, ANZ enters it with strength, confidence, and optimism. And with that, I will now ask our Chief Executive Officer, Shayne Elliott, to address the meeting. Shayne.
Thank you, Paul, and good morning to all.
I'd also like to extend my welcome to you today and acknowledge the Wurundjeri and Boonw urrung peoples as the traditional owners of the land from which we are broadcasting this morning. Now, as Paul mentioned, the thoughts of all of our people are with those who have suffered either from the bushfires that began the year or the pandemic that defined it. I know that at ANZ, we've had many staff impacted by both events, and the team here has rallied around colleagues and families impacted. Tragically, one of our international colleagues recently passed away after contracting COVID in their local community, and we're doing everything we can to support their family and loved ones.
Now, this only highlights the devastating impacts that will be with us for some time, and it's also why our purpose to shape a world where people and communities thrive has never been more important. In fact, it was our purpose that guided the way we worked with customers in need. When the bushfires struck, we provided much-needed assistance to both our customers as well as volunteer fire services and community organizations. And as the effects of COVID restrictions became clear, we moved quickly to provide those impacted with loan repayment deferrals. Now, this was aided by the massive levels of financial support provided by governments as well as industry and regulators working closely together. Now, some shareholders have rightly questioned if this support was at the expense of shareholders, but the answer is clear. This was completely aligned with your interests.
Treating customers with respect and providing help in the tough times earns respect and loyalty in the good times. Now, in addition, in a time of ultra-low interest rates, giving customers a chance to work things out is cheaper than at any time in our history. And so, providing time through deferrals can be a very rational response for many of our customers while delivering greater long-term value for ANZ and the community. Now, we're also mindful of how we approach deferral, particularly for those customers already finding it tough before COVID. For these customers, we relied on the tried-and-tested assistance measures normally applied in difficult circumstances. And unlike some of our competitors, we did not automatically opt our small business customers into a deferral. Instead, we had thoughtful conversations with each of them to ensure it was the right thing to do for them.
In such times, it's also natural for an organization to be consumed by managing the immediate impacts while missing longer-term challenges. So, while protecting your business is of prime importance, it's not all that we have been doing. We are getting on with the job of maintaining a well-managed business and preparing for future opportunity. Now, our strategy hasn't changed. We want to improve the financial well-being of our customers because we know that when our customers do well, we do well. And to do this, we'll have the right people who listen, learn, and adapt. Our ability to mobilize hundreds of people to help customers through the pandemic and the bushfires are worthy examples of this. We'll put the best tools and insights into the hands of our people and customers, such as our ability to open accounts for new-to-bank customers using only the ANZ App.
And we'll focus on a few things and do them really well. And this includes helping people buy and own a home, start, run, and grow a small business, or conduct business around the region. Our work to simplify and strengthen the bank has materially lowered our exposure to potential credit and operational risk. Now, it's worth remembering how we have de-risked your bank over the recent years, including actions like exiting Asia retail and Asia small business, selling the Esanda motor dealer finance business, and prioritizing owner-occupied home loans over investor loans. We've not provided a retail home loan offering to self-managed super funds, and we've maintained the lowest exposure to commercial property of the major banks. And of course, more recently, we exited life insurance, superannuation, and financial planning.
Along with the progress we've made on remediating the failures of the past, these decisions meant that your bank faces far fewer operational risks during this crisis. It's also provided us with the capital to stand strong in tough times. Now, it was, of course, COVID that had the most material impact on our profitability this year. With operating profit before these provisions broadly flat, the largest driver of the profit reduction was setting aside a further AUD 1.7 billion for possible future losses. Now, to be clear, to date, we've not lost a single dollar in terms of credit losses resulting directly from COVID, but we've built up a substantial rainy day fund if they do occur. And looking through the immediate impact of the pandemic, our diversified business delivered a decent revenue performance.
Now, in Australia, we achieved six months of consecutive market share growth in our targeted owner-occupier market, while deposit growth remained very strong. We also introduced new processes to help customers move to online banking. The work we've spoken about for several years to simplify and refocus the institutional bank proved massively beneficial. In fact, our institutional bank outperformed, and I'm very proud of its transformation and it demonstrates the value of a well-balanced, diversified portfolio in a market that's defined by high levels of liquidity and low interest rates, plus, of course, the geopolitical tensions. Now, in New Zealand, it was a tough revenue environment, but we maintained leadership in key segments, and we remain well-positioned to benefit from the economic recovery that looks like it's well underway, and right across the group, an intense focus on costs allowed us to continue to invest at record levels.
Now, there's obviously a lot of interest from shareholders about how our customers are faring in these difficult times. Now, the customers we approved for deferrals were good customers who, up until the pandemic hit, were making their payments on time and, in many cases, were actually ahead of schedule, and through no fault of their own, they were stood down from their job or their business was forced to close. Now, fortunately for many of our small business customers, the worst of the health crisis appears to be under control as we enter into the most important trading period of the year. Our card data for the first week of December in Australia is up 14% year-on-year, and spending is also up in New Zealand, so these positive trends are also flowing through to our deferral numbers.
In our Australian business today, 92% of home loan customers that were granted an initial deferral have already rolled off or have advised us of their intentions to do so. And while our exposure to the small business market is much smaller, the data here is also looking very positive, with only 3,000 business loans still on repayment deferrals. Now, there's been much talk this year about managing through a crisis. Overnight, organizations like us have had to adapt to new business models or completely rethink their distribution. Now, at ANZ, we moved from 11 large buildings globally, each housing over 1,000 colleagues, to a network of almost 40,000 home offices. We became a distributed network overnight, and as a result, we're more responsive and flexible than ever before. Now, there is another way of thinking about a crisis. This is, of course, just a period of rapid change.
In fact, many of the great companies we think of today, companies like Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon, forged their success in periods of great dislocation. And that's because, in a time of crisis, customers have new needs, and good companies figure out how to provide for them. And this is where my focus and the focus of my team is, and we stand ready to take advantage of the opportunities that will arise. We're supporting our best customers, and we'll emerge with stronger relationships than we started. We'll continue to reshape our portfolio to produce a more balanced, lower-risk business that generates decent, more predictable returns. We're going to continue to make the bank simpler and easier to manage. Our recent decision to partner with global payments leader Worldline is a great example.
This is a partnership, and it'll provide our small business customers with access to the world's best technology, which will allow them to get paid quickly, safely, and at low cost, and it also releases ANZ investment dollars to deliver new capabilities that will strengthen our customer proposition. Now, in particular, we're really excited about the opportunities in sustainable finance and open banking, better utilizing our customer data, and, of course, expanding our banking-as-a-service offering. In fact, ANZ is already the largest provider of banking services to other financial institutions in Australia and New Zealand. This includes our leading market share positions in clearing, as well as providing the New Payments Platform infrastructure to other banks. No doubt, this has been a tough year, and shareholders have, unfortunately, been impacted. We take our role in protecting and enhancing your wealth seriously.
Through our actions over the last few years, we've freed up AUD 12.5 billion of your capital, which has enabled us to invest in the business while still buying back more than 100 million ANZ shares. As a result, we're the only major bank in Australia that has not diluted your shareholders in recent years. And this puts us in a very strong position to support customers while still providing you with a decent return. And it also means we can play a leading role in financing the recovery in Australia and New Zealand. Perhaps one of the most pleasing aspects of 2020 has been how our people have responded to the challenge. We've achieved a great deal this year, and none of this would have been possible without a passionate and engaged team. It hasn't been easy for our people.
Most have been forced to work from home, with many having to juggle multiple commitments, including remote learning for young children, but despite this, they haven't missed a beat, possibly best evidenced by the record volumes of home loans processed through this period, and I'm really proud of what they've achieved, and I'm proud to call them my colleagues. Now, I've been before you at these meetings as Chief Executive Officer for five years now, and in that time, we've seen incredible change in the environment in which your bank operates, whether it's the global compression of interest rates and margins, the wave of regulatory intervention, or the challenges of the global pandemic, and during these challenges, I believe your bank has changed even more significantly. We have a substantially simpler business that is less focused on dealing with problems and more focused on winning and keeping customers.
We've got a workforce with record engagement focused on our customers. We have a management team that is diverse, talented, and stable, with a proven track record of delivery. I believe this sets us up to win in the coming years as we help shape a world where the people and communities we serve once again thrive. Now, finally, I'd also like to acknowledge the passing of our former Chief Executive Officer, Will Bailey, in August. Now, many of you will remember that Will was Chief Executive between 1984 and 1992, having started as a teller in the Oakleigh branch of the old ES&A Bank in 1950. Now, I didn't have the pleasure of working with Will, but I did meet him at several retired officer functions.
He was a mentor to many future ANZ leaders and made a significant contribution in building the ANZ that we all know today, particularly in his efforts to modernize the bank through the use of technology. And we pass on our condolences to his wife, Dorothy, as well as his family and friends. So with that, I'll hand back to the Chairman, Paul. Thank you.
Thank you, Shayne. We now come to the Q&A section of the meeting. Before we discuss the formal items of business this year, we again invited shareholders to send in questions prior to today. While Shayne and I have addressed the major themes in our opening statements, including our approach to dividends and remuneration, this year, we also received many questions about our new carbon policy. Some shareholders suggested we're not responding to concerns about climate change fast enough, while others felt we are not supporting the resources sector. Let me outline our approach and state quite clearly that it's a very simple approach. We want to allocate shareholder capital in a responsible way that generates a sustainable return. Ultimately, as bankers, this is about assessing risk. We want to make decisions that are balanced and in the long-term interests of our shareholders.
Core to our new policy is encouraging and supporting our 100 largest carbon-emitting customers with their public commitments to transition to a net-zero economy. While it is still early days, we've been very pleased with the positive response from customers so far. In fact, in many cases, our customers' thinking and strategies are further evolved than ours. But I want to be very clear, this is about supporting our customers. We also know that we don't have all the answers, and that's why we're in a regular dialogue with our regulators, customers, governments, NGOs, and others to help us understand the social, environmental, and economic challenges of the transition. I'm pretty confident there's going to be more questions on this topic, but hopefully, this provides everyone listening with some initial context on our approach.
We now turn to questions and comments in relation to the formal items of business, and can I please remind shareholders to continue to submit any questions they want to raise via the online platform or the telephone? The AGM is for you and for you to raise any questions you wish to in respect of the business. If you have a question or comment in respect of a specific item of business, please don't wait until we get to that item. Submit it now, and it will be stored and responded to when we get to that item of business. We will start with questions and comments on item one, the annual reports, together with general comments and questions about the management of ANZ.
In addition, item six is a resolution requisitioned by a small group of shareholders to request ANZ to disclose strategies and targets to reduce exposure to fossil fuels in our annual reporting. It will only be put to the meeting in the event that item five, a special resolution requisition by the same group of shareholders that seeks to amend ANZ's constitution to allow for such resolutions, that that passes. And so I will take questions on item six, including any questions or comments in relation to environmental matters, including climate change, now, together with questions on the annual reports and general questions about ANZ.
If the results are that item six is not put to the meeting, I will still show proxies received in advance of the meeting on that item in the interest of transparency and pursuant to the listing rules. They will also be announced to the market after the meeting, so with that, can I please take the first question, Alexis?
Yes, Chair. We have several questions here from the Australian Shareholders' Association. Good morning. My name is John Whittington, and I'm a volunteer for the Australian Shareholders' Association. Today, we hold proxies from 1,055 ASA members and non-members for approximately 4.2 million ANZ shares, which, if consolidated, would make us the 14th on your top 20 shareholder list. Congratulations on a solid result in very trying circumstances. Our thanks go to you, the board, and all ANZ employees for their commitment to the company during this difficult year. It is unfortunate that in the circumstances, you must have a virtual AGM, and we hope that next year we'll be back to a normal or perhaps a hybrid format. Second question, Mr. Chairman, are 70% franked dividends the likely norm going forward, or does the highest balance of franking credit since 2015 mean 100% franking is coming back?
Thank you, John, for your question. For the benefit of all those listening this morning, the Australian Shareholders' Association is a largely volunteer organization which does terrific work in ensuring that companies are accountable to shareholders and that the processes of accountability are clear and open. Thank you for the work that you do. In terms of the initial question about our AGM, as I mentioned in my opening comments, our hope next year is to be in Adelaide and to return to the traditional AGM format, which I know is very much welcomed by shareholders. In terms of franking credits, it's important to say that we recognize that franking credits are worth a lot more to our shareholders than they are to us. As we headed into 2019, we had exhausted the surplus credits that had been built up in previous years.
Indeed, in the second half of 2019, our decision to apply a roughly 70% franking credit actually reflected the geographic contribution of the Australian business to our overall group profits. Moving forward, you've noted that actually we have a surplus of just under AUD 500 million as we finished FY 2020, and clearly, we will take that into account in our deliberations in the year ahead. I can't predict the future, but obviously, our decision-making will be guided by the ongoing contribution of the Australian business to our profitability, the tax we pay in Australia, and above all, by the board's realization that these credits are worth a lot more to shareholders than to us, and therefore, we need to work quickly and efficiently to get them into our shareholders' hands. Hopefully, that's helpful, and I look forward to hopefully seeing you in person at next year's AGM.
So next question, please.
Yes, Chair. We have a question from Mr. Craig Edward Corfield. What does ANZ see as the impact of repealing responsible lending regarding your approach to lending and credit risk appetite? And if repealing responsible lending laws are not going to affect the bank, does ANZ's board support a proposal that removes consumer rights to take legal action for irresponsible lending?
Thank you, Craig, for your question. This is actually a topic that's had a lot of publicity recently, and we know a lot of people are quite concerned about it. It's important to say that we're still waiting to get the full detail of what's proposed so that we can work through it. I will add a few comments to give some perspective on how we see it. One of the points that often is lost in the debate is that by our estimates of what we understand, close on 90% of what's covered by the responsible lending laws is also covered by requirements that are set for us by the Prudential Regulation ( APRA). It's also the case that we have other obligations which guide our lending practices. For example, we have the Banking Code of Practice.
And above all, as a commercial operating bank, there is absolutely no incentive to write bad loans or to lend irresponsibly, as ultimately, we have to write those off. It's true that removing duplication could remove complexity and cost as we make loan decisions and could allow us to speed things up. But overall, I want to reassure everyone that we have many different codes of practice in place that guide our lending responsibilities and that we do not see this as in any way encouraging us to be irresponsible in the way that we operate. Hopefully, that's resolved your question. Next question, please.
Yes. A number of shareholders have asked questions regarding climate targets. We've chosen two as representative of this topic from shareholders Jack Bertolus and Rachel Rainey. The first question. In August, 25 leading scientists at Australian universities wrote that achieving the Paris Agreement means the time has passed for any new fossil fuel infrastructure, including the proposed expansion of the gas industry in Australia. Yet, according to analysis by Market Forces, between 2016 and 2019, ANZ loaned AUD 2.2 billion to 17 new or expansionary fossil fuel projects that would enable the release of 4.1 billion tons of CO2. When will ANZ rule out funding the expansion of the fossil fuel industry?
The second question, a new global report on how finance is blowing the carbon budget has identified Woodside's Burrup Hub gas developments in WA in the top 12 proposed fossil fuel projects globally that would make it impossible for the world to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees as agreed under the Paris Agreement. As a supporter of the Paris Agreement, how can ANZ be comfortable funding companies whose investment and growth plans would directly undermine the goals of this agreement?
Yeah, thank you, Jack, and thank you, Rachel, for the question. And those are probably representative of a lot of the questions that I and the executive get when we're talking to shareholders. I think they're very important topics. Let me just again frame where we stand as a bank on the whole issue of climate change. We've really got three core priorities. One is to work with our top 100 emitting customers to develop transition plans to a lower carbon future. Secondly, to help fund the investment that will be required for companies and individuals to make a transition to a new low carbon future. And thirdly, to reduce our own footprint. In terms of carbon and fossil fuels, we've recently updated our policy and been very explicit in that regard.
That is to state very clearly that we will not lend to any thermal coal projects where the customer has a greater than 10% revenue or reliance on thermal coal in their generating activities. Second of all, that we won't directly finance any new thermal coal plants or mines, and that we would expect as a result of our policies that we will pretty much withdraw from funding thermal coal over the 2020s and by 2030. Let me talk as well about where we're at in terms of funding, in terms of some of the questions about fossil fuels. Funding to thermal coal mining is now less than 0.1% of our total book and has reduced by 70% since 2015. Similarly, our lending to oil and gas has been fairly flat.
It's fluctuated between AUD 7 billion and AUD 8 billion over the last four to five years. Overall, if you look at power generation, 87% of our lending is to renewables and only 8% to gas and 5% to coal. And again, that lending to companies involved with fossil fuels and power generation is down 70% as well since 2015. I give you those stats because overall, what you can see is we have a clear policy, and we're making headway on that policy to work with customers to develop transition plans and to reduce our funding for carbon fuels. Next question, please.
Yes, we have a question from Mr. Dariush Peshek. Was there any on-market share buyback between March and May 2020 when the price was around AUD 16?
I think there's a couple of important aspects to that. First of all, no, there wasn't. And indeed, the regulator made it clear that that was not permissible. But I think it's also important to note that unlike two of our major competitors, we also did not do a capital raising during that period by seeking to raise funds in the market by increasing the number of shares. Two of our competitors did that. We saw that as something which was quite dilutive on shareholders. Thanks to the good work that's been done by management over the last several years, our capital management strategy meant we had a strong balance sheet and did not need to dilute shareholders during that period. Next question, please.
Yes, we have a question from Mr. Krepp. I'd like to thank Mr. Elliott and Mr. Gonski for their engagement at the 2019 AGM. At that meeting, Mr. Elliott stated ANZ's chief economist, Richard Yetsenga, would be best to respond to my question on NAIRU and NAIBER and full employment. A month later, I received an email from Richard, and I introduced him to Dr. Steven Hail of the University of Adelaide to respond on my behalf. I've been informed that the interaction was very fruitful. Could Mr. Yetsenga give the AGM a brief overview of that interaction?
Thank you, Mr. Krepp. And yes, Richard is indeed a great asset for the bank, and his work is widely read. Unfortunately, we're not in a position to facilitate him presenting to the AGM today, but I'm quite confident that if there is a suitable forum you'd like to have Richard attend, he'd be very willing to do so. Next question, please.
Yes, we have a question from John Whittington of the Australian Shareholders' Association. Mr. Chairman, we applaud your reporting of Net Promoter Score. It is excellent disclosure appreciated by shareholders. The figures mentioned on page 20 and page 72 of the annual report show ANZ as third or fourth out of four in Australia and fourth or fifth out of five in New Zealand on all non-institutional banking. And there seems to be little sign of improvement. Given the scandals encompassing your competitors, we would have expected you to be higher up the list by now. Why do you think you haven't moved further up the list?
Thank you, John, and for the benefit of everybody, when we talk about Net Promoter Scores, that's a metric we use for measuring customer satisfaction, and you're quite correct, John. The scores are not where we'd like to be when we look at them at the aggregate level. You'll notice, John, that in my speech, I talked about one of my four top priorities being customer, and I know after discussing it with the executive that it's also a top priority here in the bank. In that spirit, it's actually worth going and breaking down the numbers just a little bit because they tell a slightly different story when you get into some of the detail, and I'm going to ask Shayne to maybe share some of the metrics below the aggregate score with you now.
Sure. Thanks, Paul. And I appreciate the opportunity. And again, just to expand on that, Net Promoter Score is an industry standard. In fact, not just across banking. It's used in a lot of consumer-oriented businesses. And it's a very valuable score. And you're right to point out the fact that our scores at an aggregate level are not where we would like them to be. But what's really interesting about it is when you really get into that next level of detail and just to reassure shareholders, there's a couple of ways we measure Net Promoter Score. One is at the aggregate. Just, are you happy with ANZ? Are you happy with Westpac or Bendigo, etc.? And that's what this data refers to. But from our perspective, more importantly, we really measure it at quite a detailed level.
If you today applied for a credit card using our app, for example, we will survey every day hundreds of people who'd go through that experience and say, "How was that experience for you? And would you recommend that to a friend, etc.? Would you promote that experience?" We do that in home lending. We do it in credit cards. We do it through our—if you ring with a complaint—we do it certainly through the branch experience. And in fact, my colleague Mark Hand, who runs the Australia business, has access to a screen, and we can literally monitor that almost in real time during the day to see. We are really interested in those experiential promoter scores as opposed to the overall. We do believe over time that as we improve those experiences, it will result in a better score overall.
I don't have the data at hand. I'm happy to share that with you, John. But I can assure you that those episodic scores are high and improving in the areas that we are focused on. Owner-occupied home loans, the credit applying for a new bank account, those sorts of experiences which we think are highly valued by customers, ANZ has scored extremely well and continues to improve.
Thank you, Shayne. And just to close off, John, I can assure you that your board spends a lot of time scrutinizing these metrics and having discussions with board and management on how we can continue to make good progress in this area. Thank you. I'll take the next question, please.
Yes, Chair. A number of shareholders have asked questions regarding fossil fuel projects. We've chosen two as representative of this topic from shareholders Anne Kennedy and Anusha Muller. First question. I'm the president of the Artesian Bore Water Users Association and a farmer who relies totally on our Artesian Water, as we all do. We are deeply opposed to Santos's Narrabri Gas Project, which would completely destroy our precious groundwater. There is a mountain of evidence from Queensland of the irreplaceable damage that CSG Mining has done to the groundwater there. Over 120 vital water bores have failed, and a reported total of 571 bores will be drained. Why does ANZ continue to fund companies like Santos? And the second question.
ANZ is a financier of Origin Energy, which is pursuing dangerous plans to frack the Beetaloo Basin, which would cause devastating climate change impacts to groundwater that communities rely on and the destruction of culture. Traditional owners have repeatedly refused consent. Will you continue to invest in Origin Energy?
Yeah. Thank you, Anne and Anusha. As this is a public meeting, I don't think it's appropriate that I should actually talk about individual customers. However, let me talk about the bank and our overall approach to lending and how we take into account environmental and social issues. We have a very clear social and environmental framework that we apply to all of our lending decisions, and this requires us to sit with the customer and understand what are the potential consequences for the local community and the environment as a result of their activity.
We want to understand what approvals have been sought and granted by the necessary regulators and authorities, what consultation has been taking place with the local community on these issues, and what metrics are being applied and will be reported on to make sure that the projects are executed in a responsible and compliant way. What's very pleasing is that in the majority of cases, what we find is that when we sit with our customers, they're actually ahead of us on these issues, not surprisingly because the success of their projects and of their acceptance in the community relies very heavily on these. Where we can't satisfy ourselves with that, then our decision will be to cap lending or indeed to decline the lending requests and move away. I hope I've given you some reassurance on that issue, and I'll move to the next question.
Yes, we have a question from Denmark Dream Pty Ltd. Chairman and Board, could you confirm if ANZ obtains external litigation funding for our complaints through companies such as Omni Bridgeway? This includes funding for ANZ complaints raised through AFCA. Funders create bonds in the litigation funding process. These bonds include forged mortgages. What flow-on impacts do you see this having on ANZ?
Thank you, Denmark Dream Pty Ltd. I'm going to briefly pass to Shayne, but that's a question that I think both of us may have to take on notice because it's so specific.
Yeah, I think I'm not aware of the Omni Bridgeway example, Chair. I think what we might do is see if we can get that shareholder's details, and we'll get a bit more information from them, and we'll respond directly.
Okay. Thank you for raising the question, and obviously, we'll be keen to understand it in more detail and to make sure we get back to you with a response. Next question, please.
Yes, a question from Lee Naughton and Associates. NAB is committed to reviewing its gas and oil policy by September next year. Is ANZ following suit? And if so, when will this review be complete and policy updated? Does the scope of the review include direct project finance and extend to corporate finance?
Thank you, Lee. And look, I think it might be helpful at this stage just to frame exactly how we're approaching this issue and give upfront a real understanding of how ANZ thinks about this. From our point of view, this is not about engaging in a debate on the political situation. Our job as bankers and indeed our responsibility to you as shareholders is to make sure that we're allocating capital wisely and sensibly. That means looking at the opportunities that exist in the market and balancing those with the risks associated with those opportunities. There is no doubt that if you look globally and here in Australia and New Zealand, there is a major transition underway by business and by individuals to a low-carbon future. Over the next couple of decades, that represents a huge opportunity as borrowers seek to get the funds to make that investment.
We think it's important that ANZ is well positioned and at the forefront of lending and supporting that transition to a low-carbon future. There's also a risk assessment here. You, as the owners of the bank, would not want us to put the bank in a position where we are overrepresented with customers who are not planning to make that transition and therefore might be overexposed to measures such as a carbon tax or indeed to a consumer response because they've chosen not to make that transition. So for us, it's a balance of risk and opportunity. We are committed to supporting the transition to a low-carbon economy. In terms of your question, policy is not something that is static. It's an ongoing transition. We're reviewing it on an ongoing basis. You saw us update in October, and we'll continue to evolve it as the situation evolves externally.
But fundamentally, we see the move to renewables and the investment in sustainability as a major opportunity for the bank, and we're positioning ourselves to be at the forefront of that. Next question, please.
Yes, we have a question from Amy Gordon. The federal government's cashless debit card is punitive and doesn't work. 81% of people who are forced to use the card right now are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. The evidence shows that compulsory income management doesn't work, doesn't improve health and well-being outcomes, limits people's ability to purchase various permitted goods and services because of a lack of cash, and destroys people's right to privacy. Are you considering administering a national rollout of the cashless debit card?
I can answer that. So look, thanks for the question. And we're very aware of the issues relating to this proposal. All I can tell you is that, at ANZ , we were not part of the pilot around this, but we are engaged with the government. We're keeping an open mind. We haven't made no commitments either way at this stage. We understand there's an intention, some good intentions here in terms of the rollout, but we totally accept there are risks that you point out. And as I said, we're engaged with the government. We keep an open mind. We will try to give them the benefit of our own observations and our own business, but it's a work in progress. And I can't tell you what will happen or where that will end up for ANZ.
Thank you. Next question, please.
Yes, we have a question from Mr. Krepp. The monopoly external disputes resolution body in this country is the Australian Financial Complaints Authority, a private company limited by guarantee that is mandated by the AFCA Act to put consumers first. The vast majority, if not all, AFCA members and staff are from the supply side of the financial industry. AFCA excludes demand-side industry members and in doing so excludes those that have the experience of the real constraints of customers. This leaves AFCA exposed to, at best, unconscious bias. Would ANZ proactively demand that AFCA include real demand-side industry members on the AFCA board, that AFCA recruit proportionate staff from the demand-side of industry and encourage their membership?
Thank you. Thank you for your question. And let me start by saying clearly the setup of AFCA is a matter for the government and not for us. But let me talk more generally and say that from our point of view, our goal is to actually avoid as much as possible complaints ever needing to be escalated to an external body. One of the goals that we've set internally in the bank is to resolve as many of our internal complaints received by customers both quickly and effectively and without the need for escalation. And that's a key metric that the board and I will be monitoring moving forward. Thank you. Next question, please.
Yes, Chair. A number of shareholders have asked questions regarding climate targets. We've chosen two representatives of this topic. The first one is from Didi Bear Pty Ltd. and Ligido Dion Nominees Pty Ltd. The question is, in 2020, ANZ says it funded and facilitated sustainable solutions to the tune of AUD 9.08 billion across 89 transactions, disclosing that 15 of these transactions were for renewables. What was the dollar value of those transactions? Why isn't the dollar value disclosed? ANZ is committed to fund and facilitate AUD 50 billion by 2025 towards sustainable solutions. What proportion of these funds are earmarked for renewable energy? And the second question, ANZ reports AUD 19 billion of exposure to the coal, oil, and gas sectors compared with just AUD 1.5 billion for renewable energy. In other words, ANZ appears 12 times more exposed to fossil fuels than to renewables.
Further, NAB's half-year results presentation shows that ANZ has lent half as much to renewable energy when compared to NAB. When will ANZ leave behind the polluting industries of the past and catch up to the performance of its peers?
Thank you. This is a couple of fairly interesting questions on climate. Let me start with what's a good question around our lending to renewables and sustainable. Clearly, there are some restrictions in terms of our transactions in terms of what we can always publicly disclose, and for that reason, you won't always see us publicize the details of every transaction, and in terms of your question moving forward as to the AUD 50 billion we've committed to lending to renewables and sustainable sources of energy, we're actually flexible on that, and as I said in my speech, you will find that we expect that that number may actually increase beyond the AUD 50 billion over the next few years, and so it is fungible in that sense.
In terms of the second question, which really goes to the heart of overall approach on climate policy, I think I've given you a good understanding of our approach. We are committed to working with our customers and with future customers to support a transition to a low-carbon future. That's a policy that we think makes the best sense commercially for the bank. We are actually, if anything, a leader in this space in the Australian marketplace. If you look at some of the external metrics on our performance, the Dow Jones Sustainability Index, for example, puts us as the only bank inside the top 10 globally, and we're actually rated this year as number seven. So your bank is actually a leader in that space. And I don't agree with the characterization that was present in the second question.
But look, we've had quite a few questions on that aspect of our climate policy. I'll continue to take questions on it, but provided they're on a new theme or a new aspect of it. Otherwise, I want to make sure we have enough time in the AGM for all shareholders to ask their questions. And so if we can, we might avoid repeating similar questions. On the next question, please.
Yes, Chair. A question from Mrs. Francesca Mitchell. Modern slavery is a high priority for voting Australian super funds, which make up substantial shareholders in a majority of ASX 200 companies. What has ANZ done or is undertaking to do beyond due diligence of first-tier suppliers? Thank you.
We're actually publishing our first modern slavery report in line with legislation in the coming year. And yes, there's a significant amount of work that has been going on with that inside the bank. We have a dedicated group at the board level, the Environmental and Social Responsibility Group, who take a keen interest in this topic. And Shayne leads a group at the CEO at the executive level, which also looks at modern slavery. We are working at the moment, as you say, on vetting all of our suppliers and working down the supply chain. And our commitment is that over the next few years, we'll be increasing our visibility and scrutiny of those in our own supply chain and working with them to improve their checking of how they source. On to the next question, please.
Yes, we have a question here from Denmark Dream Pty Ltd. ANZ's ESG 2020 presentation heading of Our Purpose, Our Priorities says fundamental to our approach is a commitment to fair and responsible banking and improved reputation and community trust. How is this remotely possible with securitization of customer loans and when the bank has assigned its rights and obligations to another party? ANZ do not explain the complexities of securitization and assignment to customers or its horrific high risks, which are well beyond a customer's knowledge or control. Is ANZ's statement misleading?
Yeah, thank you for the question, and probably if I can give it some context so that everyone can understand the rationale behind the question, and I'm going to ask Shayne in a moment to comment on how we raise funds. But this really relates to the fact that one of the ways in which banks raise funds is to securitize things like their mortgages and to receive external funding for them. The question goes to the heart of a concern that in that process, the bank may cede control and responsibility for something like a mortgage to a third party and that that third party might behave in an irresponsible way. So Shayne, do you want to talk briefly about that?
Yeah. And I think you just hit the nail on the head there. So there is absolutely no risk to customers of ANZ through the securitization process. ANZ retains the responsibility and obligations as the lender. This is purely just a way of raising funding. So if I just stand back a little bit and think about what is securitization and why do banks use this tool? In order to lend customers money, we have to raise either deposits or we sometimes go to the financial markets and issue bonds. And one way of doing it is we can take some of those loans and using a legal term, we securitize those and we go and borrow money from the markets and provide those loans as security, hence the term securitization. But actually, as I said, the obligations of the lender still remain with us.
We're still the party you talk to. It has no impact on your rights if you are one of those home loans that's securitized. It's a well-understood, well-articulated, well-regulated sector globally. To put it into perspective for ANZ, it's a very, very small part of what we do. Our home loans in Australia are about AUD 280 billion. Of that, the securitization pool is less than AUD 2 billion. So it's less than 1% of our home loans. But again, for those just wondering the nature of the question, there's no risk to anybody. And I sort of dispute the idea that it has the quote, the horrific high risk. There's no evidence that that is the case whatsoever.
Thanks, Shayne. I'll take the next question, please.
Yes, Chair. We have a question from Mr. Craig Corfield. As we come out of COVID, many customers have fortunately recommenced loan payments. However, a cohort of ANZ customers have not been able to recommence repayments. Whilst acknowledging ANZ says they will work with customers where a borrower encounters legal proceedings from ANZ, does ANZ ensure that customers are first offered a fair mediation prior to ANZ taking action to sell or repossess their home business or farm?
Thank you, Mr. Corfield. And let me just talk very clearly about our approach on this. And it's been important because there have been other banks who've also made a public comment on how they will approach this. In terms of this, some of the other banks have talked about ensuring that during this period, they would not look to repossess or bring to an end a mortgage arrangement with a customer. We actually think it's very important that we have a conversation with each customer and understand what's best and what's right for them. It's absolutely not in our interest to find a customer in default on a mortgage. And there are different situations and different contexts faced by everybody.
But our ultimate goal will be to try and find the right outcome for the customer because, as I say, it's absolutely not in our interests to find ourselves in dispute or on the end of what we would characterize as a bad loan. I'll take your feedback in terms of the mediation process. Shayne, is there anything you want to add on that?
No, just as I think the question's totally reasonable. It's always in our interest to work with our customers. In particular, Mr. Corfield, you're referring to people on loan deferrals. And as we said in my speech, these are people who, through no fault of their own, found themselves in a difficult position because they were stood down from their job or their business was unable to operate through this pandemic. And obviously, we were very sympathetic to that situation. And it's in our interest to give people more time, if that's what's right for them, to be able to restructure their loans in case, for example, we could move people onto an interest-only or some sort of different sort of payment plan. And to date, that's exactly what we've been able to offer to those customers. That'll continue to be our approach.
There is no desire to move quickly into any sort of legal proceedings. And I think our history shows that ANZ's always been as responsible in these situations as we can be. Sadly, sometimes it does get to a position where the right thing to do is for a business to sell up or a home, but it's actually pretty rare. And mediation is a tool we use a lot, particularly, as you well know, Mr. Corfield, in the areas of farming and agriculture, but also in businesses and with homeowners.
Thank you. I'll take the next question, please.
Yes, Chair. A number of shareholders have asked questions regarding board meeting format. We've chosen two as representative of this topic from shareholders Ms. Natasha Michelle Lee and Mrs. Sally Robin Millick. First question, while a physical meeting is always preferable, given next year's meeting will be in Adelaide, will ANZ allow interstate shareholders to participate using an online platform, that is, be able to ask questions, etc.? And question two, will the board give consideration to a hybrid AGM going forward to allow those of us who cannot attend in person to attend in real time and hear the AGM dialogue? How many are logged in at present?
Thank you, Natasha and Sally, for your questions, and as I said at the beginning, the move to a virtual AGM this year has some advantages because it does allow people to participate nationally, but it also has quite a few disadvantages. I know a lot of shareholders much prefer the opportunity to attend in person and to be able to observe the dynamics of the AGM live. Next year, our hope is to be in Adelaide and to return to the traditional format. We will look to try and provide an opportunity for questions to be provided to us in advance so that we can take them into account, but I think the challenges of running a hybrid AGM are quite significant, and in all honesty, I think that's something we would not be keen to do if we could avoid it. Next question, please.
Yes, a question from Mr. Reuben Dewearn Pack. Why is the financial statements for the parent company split from the group annual report? Peer companies like NAB, CBA, and Westpac keep them all in the same document.
Yeah, thank you, Mr. Reuben. I'm going to pass that to our Chief Financial Officer, Michelle, to answer.
Thank you, Chairman, and thank you, Mr. Reuben. We split it essentially for simplicity so that it's easier to look at the group consolidated results. Having said that, we're happy to consider whether we should put them together in the future. Thank you, Chairman.
Next question, please.
Yes, we have a question from Denmark Dream Pty Ltd. It's Rita. ANZ's internal dispute resolution plays a vital role in protecting customers. Fair and robust IDR assists with recognizing and fixing problems that arise, both at an individual and across the business level. ANZ established a customer resolution portfolio in early 2020. It informs us when we're not meeting customer or community expectations. We've commenced a program to review and improve our IDR policies, systems, and practices. How will improved IDR assist long-standing aggrieved customers who ANZ continues to ignore? And there's a second question. ANZ's mortgage Breakfree loan accounts had 137 issues, which were reported to ASIC in 2010.
Two key components were the incorrect application of interest rate discounts to home loans attached to the package and a failure to link offset accounts to home loans so customers could get the benefit of offsetting deposits held by ANZ against eligible home loan accounts. Could you confirm ANZ has contacted every affected home loan customer and remediated all affected customers? What is the remediation value to date?
Thank you, Rita. And those are two fairly detailed questions. But let me just say at the beginning and reiterate the point that from the board and management's point of view, one customer failure is a customer failure to many, and we do take our obligations very seriously in terms of responding to customer complaints and ensuring that they're adequately completed. But Shayne, did you want to pick up some of the more specific items of that question?
Thanks. Thanks, Rita, for the questions. In terms of IDR or internal dispute resolution, as you rightly point out in your question, it's a very, very important part of the service that we provide for customers to know that if things do go wrong, that people will get a fair hearing in the bank and that we put things right as quickly as we can. The tone of your question seemed to suggest that we have some sort of time limit or that we treat customers in 2020 differently than we have in the past. I can assure you that all customer complaints are dealt with equally. All customer complaints that are the numbers get reported through to the board. And certainly, any of those that are long-standing get further scrutiny to ensure that we're doing everything we can to resolve those amicably and do the right thing with customers.
In terms of the second question regarding the Breakfree Package, you're right. Unfortunately, we have uncovered some errors in the way that some of our products, and this is one of them, have been applied over many years. Most of these errors refer back to sort of five to 10 years ago. We have a significant program of work, which has been well reported, where we have around 1,000 people working diligently to correct those errors and to get money back to customers where we have made a mistake in the past. And of course, that includes any sort of penalty interest and to put things right. What I can assure shareholders is that it's a significant piece of work. It's undertaken very diligently.
In terms of where we are in Australian banking today in terms of remediation, I don't remember the specifics about the case you're referring to, Rita, but I can tell you we have remediated 2.9 million customer accounts. That's an awful lot, of course. The average remediation for a customer account is AUD 77. And so on average, we are sending a check or depositing AUD 77 into those accounts. We believe we're well through the worst of it, and we've still got some work to do, and we'll continue to diligently follow up on any errors that we've made and put things right for customers. Thank you.
Thank you, Shayne. Next question, please.
Yes, Chair. A number of shareholders have asked questions regarding responsible lending. We've chosen two as representative of this topic from shareholders Mr. Krepp and Denmark Dream Pty Ltd or Rita. The first question, what is the ANZ's board position on the proposed repealing of responsible lending laws in direct contradiction to the recommendations of the Financial Services Royal Commission? And the second question, ANZ says one of the ways we are bringing our purpose to life is through helping to act on complex issues that matter to society and are core to our business strategy. A commitment to fair and responsible banking underpins our approach. Most retail customers, many hardworking mums and dads, don't know anything about complex financial products, including loans.
How would a customer know if ANZ was acting fair and responsible when they don't know what they don't know and when ANZ and other banks haven't to date as evidenced in the Financial Services Royal Commission?
Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Krepp and Rita. I do, as I said earlier, want to make sure we allow time for all shareholders to ask questions today. If we are getting repeat questions on the same theme, we will move on. Just very briefly, because I have answered it previously, it's important to state that the responsible lending laws are one thing, but actually, there are a number of other obligations we have. For example, we think there's a 90% overlap between those set by APRA, the regulator, and those in the responsible lending rules. Likewise, we have the banking code of practice. Above all, commercially, it is absolutely not in our interests to get involved in irresponsible lending because ultimately, we have to write that loan off, and it comes out as a loss on our bottom line.
I'm going to suggest we don't take any more questions that are specific to that topic and that we allow time for other shareholders as required. So any more questions, Alexis?
Yes, thank you, Chair. A question here from the Finance Sector Union of Australia. ANZ staff have had a remarkable year with some transitioning to assisting customers from home while others have continued to serve their communities in the retail branch network throughout the pandemic at risk to themselves and their families. We appreciate the comments recognizing the incredible contribution of staff to the strong results being reported today. In this context, staff are experiencing increased workloads, unpaid overtime, and the stress of working with customers facing financial hardship and emotional distress. What commitments can the board make to ANZ staff who feel they are working harder and under increased pressure with no recognition?
Thank you, Ken. And I absolutely agree with the sentiment of the question and comments. I think it's been just outstanding the way our frontline staff have responded to the crisis. As Shayne mentioned in his speech, we had 95% of our people move to working from home right at the beginning of the crisis. And unlike some of our competitors, there was no major hiccup in terms of our customer support or ability to meet our customers' needs. As you've seen in the Remuneration Report, the board did apply discretion in the last 12 months to remuneration for executives. We applied a 50% reduction in their at-risk or variable pay. Likewise, we've announced this year that there will be no pay increases for management or for the executive in the bank.
However, in recognition of the outstanding work that's been done by the frontline staff, for those staff who are covered by the Enterprise Agreement in Australia or the CEA/IEA in New Zealand, we have agreed to apply a 2% pay increase. Some people might argue that in the COVID environment, we shouldn't be paying any increases, but we think, given the outstanding performance of our frontline, that these are appropriate and justified. And Shayne, you might want to add to that.
Yeah, look, and thanks for the question. And it's really good that we do acknowledge the great work our frontline have done in really difficult circumstances. And I agree with all of the sentiment in the question. I just want to point out a couple of other things we've done to give shareholders a little bit more information. We also put our resources into some well-being support. So a lot of people were struggling in terms of not just if they were in a branch, but also working at home, particularly as I mentioned, with young children and other stressors. And we built a well-being app. We gave access to psychological support for mental well-being and others.
We put in place special pandemic leave for those that might be caring for a loved one at home or who were struggling in terms of looking after their children or who are unable to cope with some of the stressors depending on their personal situation, and really importantly, we allocated two days' thank-you leave to all employees to recognize the extra effort that people had gone to through what was a very challenging year. Now, what I will say is that what we were really pleased to see was just the overwhelming support of our people, and that came through an engagement survey, so for shareholders who may not be familiar with that, we survey our staff regularly just to see if things are going okay. Are they coping? Are they happy? Do they feel well-supported? Do they understand what the priorities are?
Our staff had hit a high of 86% of our people telling us that they were incredibly engaged at the bank and felt well-supported. Despite the challenges, what's really exciting and very rewarding as a leader in the bank is that despite those challenges and dealing with customers in difficult circumstances, as you point out in your question, people felt enormously proud of what they were able to do. We've been sharing a lot of those stories right across the bank to sort of just reinforce that sense of purpose and value in what our people do every day. Thank you.
Thank you, Alexis. Next question, please.
Yes, a question from Mr. Isho Sagi. To encourage environmental responsibility, would ANZ consider providing competitive products, example, loans for personal or business customers that support purchases such as electric vehicle fleets, rainwater capture, and solar or wind technology?
It's excellent feedback. And again, Shayne, would you like to comment on that?
Yeah. Thank you for the question. It's a very exciting opportunity, and I agree with the sentiment here. So just a couple of things that we are doing. So actually, the first trial we had of this was in New Zealand, where, for those who may be familiar, in New Zealand, there has been a problem with damp housing and all the health issues that come from that. And we were able to work with the government to launch a product where if you were a home loan customer of ANZ, you could borrow up to NZD 5,000 interest-free if that money was put to damp-proof your home or insulate your home. That was being really successful. And that's the sort of idea that we want to take broader to exactly do what you're saying.
How can we encourage, incentivize our customers to do what's good for them, what's good for the environment, what's good for the community, and do so in a way that's also good for shareholders in the bank? So we have quite a bit of work underway in the areas that you're talking about. And then the other point I would just reflect on, it goes back to an earlier question of the AUD 50 billion in sustainable finance commitment. AUD 1 billion of that is actually being committed to resilience. And what we mean by that is many in the community who suffered from bushfires or floods, etc., how do we provide financing to help those farms, those businesses, those homes build better disaster resilience into that, whether that's through the way they run their businesses, whether that's through providing water access, etc.?
So some really interesting innovation and ideas there. I think we're at the really early stages, but it's something when I mention sustainable finance, those are exactly the sorts of things that we are excited about being able to offer in the future.
Okay. Next question, please.
Yes. Question from Ms. Wei-Ping He. Could the board share their views on the property market in the short term, and how would that affect the banking business?
Thank you for the question. I think it's quite important we don't get involved in predicting the future or the outcomes as they take place other than to observe that we are watching different reactions in different markets to a low-interest environment. But at the end of the day, I think it's important that every customer takes their own advice professionally and forms their own views on any investment decisions they seek to make. Next question, please.
Yes. A question from Mr. Jeffrey Frank Wells. Mr. Wells asks, "Regarding the $1.7 billion provisioning for possible future risks. Can you please indicate examples of the most likely of such risk events as you see them and how the bank is mitigating their impacts and costs to the extent possible?
Thank you, Jeffrey. It's a really important question because it goes to the heart of the provision, which has clearly impacted our profitability for this year. And the point I want to emphasize is this is a provision for potential losses. One of our requirements as a board is to make sure that the bank is properly provided for moving forward so that we can absorb any losses and continue to trade successfully and support our customers and meet our obligations to shareholders. So we have a number of ways in which we estimate these potential losses. But as we looked at the COVID crisis, we used our detailed financial models within the bank. We applied a number of different scenarios. We looked at various ways of stressing the economic environment and seeing what the likely rate of default would be on things such as home loans.
As a result of all those models, we then had a number of executive committees with experts and ultimately the board evaluate the outcomes from those models. That's how we arrived at the provisioning for potential losses arising from COVID. Now, clearly, as you've heard from some of the releases of our bank and other banks in the last few weeks, we're seeing people return off their loan deferrals, which were put in place at the beginning of the crisis, and return to payment. Over 80% of ANZ customers are now back making payments on their previously deferred loans. That implies that the environment has been improving, but there is still a lot of uncertainty out there.
So your board will continue to keep an eye on the provisions, continue to estimate whether or not they are adequate or indeed whether they may be overprovided for, and at the appropriate time in the future, update you and the market on how we see potential losses in the future. But I hope that's given you a good understanding of the process as to what provisions are all about. Next question, please.
Yes. We have a question from Mr. Craig Edward Corfield. "I've never been asked for my NPS feedback after dealing with customer complaints or customer advocate. NPS does not identify the extreme negative impacts on long-standing legacy complaint customers versus a customer who had a good experience making a small transaction at a branch. More granular measurements are required. John Lonsdale, the Deputy Chair of APRA, has called for greater scrutiny here. Will ANZ undertake investigating a much broader scope of metrics in determining customer satisfaction that feeds into executive bonuses?
Thank you for your question, Craig, and I think there are a couple of elements to this. First of all, in terms of individual experience, can I just highlight that this is an area of strong focus and investment in the bank? In fact, we're implementing a brand new system this year, which will improve our ability to capture, track, and report complaints and report them all the way up to the board. That's done today, but this is an even more sophisticated and enhanced system, so it's an area of great focus and investment by all of us. In terms of your second question, which is how they feed into executive bonuses, they actually do feed in in a significant way today. That's detailed in the annual report.
And while we do take account of specific metrics, we also take account of a number of other inputs, such as inputs from board committees, as well as inputs when we talk to our regulators and understand how they see our performance stands relative to competitors. And that's where board applies some of its discretion. So thank you for your questions and your input. And let me assure you, it's an area we take very seriously. Next question, please.
Yes. A question from Mr. Salvatore Giuseppe Bonanno. "Does ANZ have any risks or liabilities coming from the Banking Royal Commission? Nothing of the Royal Commission was mentioned in the chair or CEO's statements, speeches.
That's a good question. Yeah. Thank you, Salvatore. And on pages 16 and 17 of the annual report, you'll see that we give quite a lot of detail in terms of the Royal Commission. We made 16 commitments coming out of the Royal Commission. And of those, 11 have been completed, four are awaiting legislation, and one relates to our ongoing culture. We're also giving regular updates on the Royal Commission to the Parliament of Australia through the Economics Committee. I don't think we've got anything to add other than what we've disclosed already. But if you have any further information, please let us know. You will find extensive reporting in the annual report. Next question, please.
Yes. A question from Mr. Krepp. "Mr. O'Sullivan and Mr. Elliott, as a consequence of COVID-19, unemployment and underemployment have increased significantly. Expensive stopgap and poorly targeted federal fiscal stimulus such as JobKeeper and JobSeeker have limited the damage but were seen wanting and remain so. Based on the literature that you received from me after the last AGM, surely it would be better for ANZ's bottom line that the superior and cheaper federal fiscal stimulus would be a locally administered job guarantee that pay a living income.
Thank you, Mr. Krepp. And look, I think that's feedback which is interesting to hear, but probably more targeted at the political layer, who are the people who make these decisions. I did note in my comments that we do feel that the intervention by government this year has been a big help in helping ameliorate the impact of the COVID crisis. So we thank you for your feedback, and I would encourage you to give it at the political level. Next question, please.
Yes. A question from Mr. Craig Edward Corfield. "The CEO of the Commonwealth Bank, Mr. Comyn, has now conducted two transparent customer forums, both publicly, which I attended. This is a terrific step to engaging transparently and move to restoring trust. Will ANZ follow this example of accountability and hold a public forum to engage with customers?
Thank you, Mr. Corfield. And look, we'll take the feedback, but let us say that we have a fairly comprehensive approach to how we want to get customer feedback and make sure we are addressing customer satisfaction. A customer forum may be one element of that, but there's actually quite a significant investment and amount of detail involved in making sure that we're able to capture customer experience and feedback all the way from the branch level all through the organization, and that it also is used effectively to redesign our products and our processes so that they are more customer-friendly. So I thank you for the feedback. We'll add it to our consideration. But as I stressed in my opening comments, this area of customer satisfaction is a big priority for myself on the board and the executive in the year ahead. Next question, please.
Yes. We have a question here from Christina Wu. "The ANZ Strathfield branch was closed for four months for renovation, which was a huge inconvenience for local customers. At the end of that period, the renovated ANZ branch was much smaller and only had one teller counter as opposed to three tellers before the renovation, resulting in long queues because it is a very busy branch. Both ANZ customers and staff are very frustrated by this new situation. And staff mentioned that this reduced number of tellers is because ANZ wants to move customers away from face-to-face service to ATM machines. But the problem is also compounded by those ATM machines, which are very old, more than 35 years old, and break down frequently. ANZ staff also expressed concern for their own job security because of this trend.
Is this the direction of ANZ going forward to reduce the level of customer service and move towards more impersonal banking? Sadly, this is very impractical and disappointing and will definitely result in loss of market share for ANZ.
Christina, can I say thank you for your custom and support of the bank? And can I also thank you for the feedback? And can I apologize for any inconvenience that we have caused you? In my own family, I have members of the family who rely quite heavily on the branch network, so I can understand the frustration if you've found it has been disrupted by renovation or indeed by an under-resourcing of the branch. In the wider sense as to how we address this, look, I'll make sure your feedback is captured and responded to at the branch level. But it actually goes to a wider question, which is how do we balance the evolution of customer behavior in terms of branch banking? And as many of you will know, there are a couple of trends at work here.
As we've seen through the crisis, increasingly, our customers are choosing to use the internet and digital platforms in order to transact with the bank, and second of all, what we're seeing in the wider economy is that people are increasingly using cards and electronic payments such as off their phones rather than using cash. On the other hand, there are still people, like my own family, who rely quite heavily on the branch network. As shareholders, what you'll be wanting us to do is to balance carefully how we evolve with those changing customer needs, and indeed, the activity that goes on in our branches has changed significantly over the last few years. We're seeing fall in foot traffic, and we're seeing a change in the nature of what goes on in branches.
So we are trying to balance what's an appropriate level of branch presence in the network versus the increasing migration of customers to digital. And as you point out, it's always difficult. We will continue to consult very widely in communities where we are looking to make changes to branches, and we'll continue to seek feedback such as yours. And I can assure you we will respond specifically on your concerns about Strathfield. Thank you for the feedback. Next question, please.
Yes. We have a question from Denmark Dream Pty Ltd or Rita. Question is, "ANZ Ethics, Environment, Social and Governance Board Committee oversees measures to advance ANZ's purpose, focusing on ESG matters. It states, for example, who we bank and list sensitive wholesale transactions. Please explain clearly to shareholders what these sensitive business transactions are and why they are sensitive. You can understand we are all cautious about AML issues and breaches. Also, carbon policy. Please explain how this policy benefits borrowers. Where can shareholders obtain a copy of the carbon policy from?
Thank you, Rita, for your question. And I think briefly, I can assure you there is nothing that we're not disclosing that relates to anti-money laundering or breaches. And that's not the reason for not disclosing. But as you can imagine, there are issues where we have to respect confidentiality in commercial transactions. And in terms of carbon policy, full details of our climate policy and our carbon policy are on our website. Next question, please.
Yes. We have a question from Mr. Craig Edward Corfield. "The AFCA data cube appears to show that ANZ has more complaints than any of our major banks when compared on a pro-rata basis. This evidence indicates ANZ has more failures at resolving complaints internally. What is the board doing to resolve more cases by the bank? Is there a customer committee at board level? If so, how many customers does this committee meet to understand complaints from a customer perspective and not what is raised from the bank's perspective?
Craig, thank you for the question and it's a very important point. Clearly, if we are to achieve our goal of being Australia's leading bank in terms of customer satisfaction, we need to make sure that we reduce the number of complaints going through to AFCA. Your data point is one that I am well aware of. Indeed, it's a topic that I've discussed myself with AFCA and with the executive. As I mentioned earlier, there's a major investment on customer satisfaction ongoing in the bank. It relates on everything from the NPS that Shayne described to the way we capture complaints and ensure that they are resolved in a timely manner. There's a major new system being implemented in the coming 12 months, which will support this. A key goal for us is to reduce the number of complaints passing through.
I'm quite confident that will be achieved. In terms of board, the board actually captures these metrics itself at a board level. Your board takes these issues very seriously, and we insist on getting these metrics reported to us and discussed at our board meetings. Next question, please.
Yes. We have a question from John Whittington from the Australian Shareholders' Association. "Mr. Chairman, we continue to have serious concerns regarding the cash flow statement in the annual report where, a few years ago, you have moved away from the direct method, which is preferred method in the accounting standard, and is the method used by all the other major Australian banks, that is CBA, Macquarie, NAB, and Westpac. We've discussed this in the past three years, provided examples, and nothing has changed. So why does ANZ insist on maintaining a method of presenting cash flow that does not allow retail shareholders to compare ANZ with its domestic peers? What is there to hide?
Thank you for the question, John. And interestingly, we are the bank that is complying with international accounting standards as opposed to following what is a local standard. But I'll let Michelle talk a bit more about that.
Thank you, Chairman, and as you say, the accounting rules allow for both methods of presentation. The outcome is the same under both. There are some presentational differences, but no difference to the outcome. As you say, Chairman, the way we present is very consistent with many global banks, and it is audited by KPMG as well. I think when you're looking at a cash flow statement for a bank, which is a little different to other companies you might be trying to evaluate, the biggest driver of our cash flow is cash coming in in the form of whether it's deposits or other funding and the way in which that's put to use for customers.
In addition to the cash flow statement, there's quite a lot of disclosure, public disclosure we have about the sources and uses of our funding and our cash and how we manage our various regulatory requirements to make sure our liquidity ratios are very strong, and all of them are well above regulatory minimums, so thank you, Chairman.
Thank you, Michelle. Next question, please.
Yes, Chair. There are no more questions for this resolution.
Okay. Well, look, I thank everyone for their questions and for the high level of interest that we've seen. I think there's been a reasonable opportunity to hear from everyone. So we'll now move on to the formal resolutions. Obviously, if there are any further general questions on other topics that come through during the course of the meeting, we may have some time at the end to respond to those. But let's now move to items 2A and 2B, which relate to the re-election of directors. Two of your directors, Ilana Atlas, AO, and John Macfarlane, are seeking re-election. Their experience and their profiles are included in the notice of the meeting. The board, excluding the interested director in each case, recommends that shareholders vote in favor of each director standing today.
The resolutions in relation to each person will be introduced separately, and there will be an opportunity for shareholders to ask questions about each candidate. So let's turn first to the re-election of Ilana Atlas, AO. Ilana joined the board in 2014, and she was last re-elected by shareholders at the 2017 AGM. And she's retiring in accordance with the company's constitution. Being eligible, Ilana offers herself for re-election. We'll now play a short presentation from Ilana in support of her candidacy.
Thank you, Paul. I'm privileged today to be considered by you for re-election for a third and final term as a director of ANZ. This has been a challenging year for ANZ, its employees, customers, and shareholders. I'm very proud of the performance of the bank through this tumultuous period and am sure that it will emerge stronger than ever. This is the result of the hard work of Shayne, his team, and all the employees at ANZ who, with the guidance of the board, have been working to make ANZ a simpler, more adaptable organization. I hope to contribute to the bank's success in the future by bringing my skills and experience to the board and the broader organization. I was first elected to the board in September 2014. Before that, my executive career was in financial services and the law.
I trained as a lawyer and became a partner at one of Australia's largest law firms, Mallesons Stephen Jaques, which is now called King & Wood Mallesons. I practiced in the area of corporate law and also held management roles in the firm. I have experience in many areas of law relevant to ANZ's business, all aspects of risk management, and a deep understanding of corporate governance. My financial services experience came through a decade at Westpac, where I was group secretary and general counsel before being appointed to the role of group executive people and performance. This role included responsibility for human resources, corporate affairs, and sustainability. As a result, I have expertise in all areas to do with employees: recruiting, training, well-being and safety, remuneration, and succession planning, all matters relevant to ANZ with employees spread across a number of different geographies.
I also have expertise and experience in the various matters that are relevant to the long-term sustainability of organizations. That means developing long-term relationships with customers, shareholders, and employees, and caring about the environments and the communities in which the ANZ does business. As an independent non-executive director at ANZ, I chair the Human Resources Committee as well as being a member of three other committees: the Audit Committee, the Ethics, Environment, Social and Governance Committee, and the Nominations and Board Operations Committee. I take my role on the board as an independent representative of shareholders very seriously. I've been careful to limit my other public company board roles so I have sufficient time to dedicate to ANZ. Beyond the corporate world, I'm proud to work with a number of not-for-profit organizations, including Chair of Jawun, a member of Adara Partners, and a director of the Paul Ramsay Foundation.
I look forward to working with my board colleagues with the common objective of acting in your interests. I will continue to be a passionate advocate for the bank and work to ensure its performance brings benefits to everyone who has an interest in its success, particularly you, its shareholders. I thank you for your support of the board and the entire team at ANZ.
Thank you, Ilana. And with that, I'm going to open up to give an opportunity for any questions. So Alexis, are there any questions?
Chair, there are no questions for this resolution.
Okay. Right. As there appear to be no questions, I'll now show details of the proxies received before the meeting. Let's have a look at those now. Thank you. We now come to the re-election of John Macfarlane. John Macfarlane also joined the board in 2014 and was last re-elected by shareholders at the 2017 AGM. John is retiring in accordance with the company's constitution and, being eligible, offers himself for re-election. We'll now play a short presentation from John in support of his candidacy.
Fellow shareholders, my name is John Macfarlane, and I've been an independent non-executive director of ANZ Banking Group since May 2014. I'm seeking your support today for re-election to the board for a third term. I wish we were meeting in person today so I could speak to you face to face. But let me tell you a little bit about my role at ANZ and a little bit about myself. I'm a member of four committees of the ANZ board: Audit, Risk, the Digital Business and Technology Committee, and the Nomination and Operations Committee. During the past year, I attended all 13 meetings of the ANZ board as well as 24 meetings of the board committees of which I am a member. I take a great deal of care and effort to ensure I come to those meetings well prepared to contribute.
I bring to the board four decades of experience as a government treasury advisor and as an international banker, having worked and lived in New Zealand, the USA, Japan, Papua New Guinea, and of course, Australia. I began my executive banking career in Australia in 1988 with Bankers Trust, and I finished it as Chairman and CEO of Deutsche Bank in 2014. My experience is mostly as a risk manager, and hence I was particularly pleased to be able to contribute to navigating the challenges presented by COVID-19 through the course of this year. As a longtime customer of the ANZ Bank, I'm always keen to put a customer view to the board and to management. Beyond my interest in banking, I play an active role in the real estate, retailing, agricultural, and tourism sectors through my own business interests and as an advisor to non-public companies.
My only other public company directorship is of the L1 Long Short Fund. I also have a long-standing commitment to community health and to medical research. I was a director of St. Vincent's Institute for 10 years, and since 2016, I've been a director of the Aikenhead Centre for Medical Discovery, which is a collaborative joint venture between St. Vincent's Hospital and many of Australia's leading medical research institutes and universities. You have an energized and talented executive team working for you at ANZ, and it is a privilege to be able to offer my experience to shareholders and to management as a member of the board of directors. The bank has undergone great change in recent years, both operational and cultural, and that will continue well into the future. With your support, I would be proud to play my part as an independent director.
Thank you, JT. And I'm going to pass to you, Alexis, to ask, have we any questions?
Yes, we have a question from John Whittington from the Australian Shareholders' Association. "Mr. Chairman, a question for Mr. Macfarlane and the same question for Ms. Atlas. COVID has been a great example of a black swan event and provides an opportunity for all companies to learn about how they manage unexpected events. What would you say has been the biggest lesson you have learnt regarding risk management during this crisis?
Okay. Well, we might start by putting that question to JT, and then we'll move to Ilana. So if we're able to bring JT in, JT, would you like to respond as to what you see as being the biggest lesson learned regarding risk management during the crisis?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr. Whittington, for the question as well. Both the chairman and the CEO have commented on the focus of the business on simplifying the way that we run and operate ANZ. And that simplification has brought with it considerably greater flexibility. As Shayne referred to in his speech, I think the simplest and best example of adaptability that we have seen was the transition of the organization from operating in the 11 major premises to being, as Shayne referred to it, a 40,000-networked home office enterprise. And I think that that flexibility and ability to adapt quickly enabled the bank to service its clients in a much superior manner to perhaps we would have been able to do in the future, sorry, that we would have done in the past. And I think that that would be the major takeaway.
It has reinforced the notion that simplification and flexibility do allow us to deliver superior service, particularly to our customers.
Thank you, JT. And I'm also now going to pass over to Ilana if she would like to respond on the same question. Ilana?
Thanks. Thanks, Paul, and thank you very much for the question, John, as well. Look, I agree with everything that's been said by everyone in relation to the response to COVID-19, and I just simply add that the way that we responded to customers was, I think, a great example of how you appropriately should respond to enhance trust, and I think that really was an outstanding way to respond to, clearly, the risk that resulted from so many people and businesses facing difficulty through COVID-19, so I would say the way we responded to customers really gives us a good example of what we can do in the future as well.
Thank you, Ilana. Alexis, have we any other questions?
Chair, there are no more questions for this resolution.
Okay. As there are no further questions, I'll now show details of the proxies received before the meeting in relation to the election of John Macfarlane. Okay. Thank you. We now move to matters concerning remuneration. Item three concerns the adoption of the remuneration report. Full details of how we structure compensation are contained in the remuneration report, which is included in the annual report. To give you an overview of both the remuneration report and the proposed issue of performance rights to Shayne Elliott, which is the following item of business, I will play a short presentation from Ilana Atlas, the Chairman of the Human Resources Committee. Let's have a look at that video now.
While it's clear 2020 was not the year we planned, management navigated difficult conditions extremely well and delivered the vast majority of the objectives agreed with the board at the beginning of the year. Solid growth in our key markets, a continued simplification of our operations, and maintaining a disciplined approach to costs were key highlights. Not contemplated at the beginning of the year was a pandemic. Effectively managing the impact of COVID-19 was an additional significant accountability. The board was pleased with the way the bank responded to the challenges for all our stakeholders, particularly our employees and customers. However, as shareholders would be acutely aware, increased provisions and impairments relating to COVID-19 reduced the profit available to be paid in dividends. Our share price was also adversely affected.
Despite much of this being outside management's control, the board still used its discretion to apply a 50% reduction to the variable remuneration of the executive team. This reduction resulted in an annual variable remuneration outcome of 33% of maximum opportunity for the CEO and an average outcome of 36% for disclosed executives. I know there was always strong interest from shareholders in the performance and remuneration of our CEO. Shayne had a successful year and has our bank well positioned in what is the most challenging environment in decades. Shayne role-modelled ANZ's values and culture. He demonstrated outstanding leadership, particularly in managing the impact of COVID-19, and he also made strong progress in simplifying and improving our operations. As shareholders may have noted in the annual report, the board engaged PwC last year to conduct a detailed benchmarking review of the remuneration of our CEO and disclosed executives.
As a result of this review, we rebalanced Shayne's remuneration mix on 1 October 2019. I note this was pre-COVID-19. While Shayne's target total remuneration remains largely unchanged, we increased his fixed remuneration from AUD 2.1 million to AUD 2.5 million. This is the first increase to Shayne's fixed remuneration since being appointed as CEO in January 2016. It also recognizes the skills and experience he brings to the role, as well as better aligning his remuneration to the external market. Shayne's annual variable remuneration target remained at 100%, while his long-term variable remuneration was reduced from 200% to 140% of fixed remuneration, or in dollar terms, by AUD 700,000. Importantly, the board also determined that for this financial year, there will be no increases to fixed remuneration for either the CEO or disclosed executives. Today, we are seeking your approval for the granting of Shayne's performance rights.
We noted in the remuneration report that the performance rights awarded in December 2016 were tested at the end of last year and did not vest. They all lapsed. The performance rights awarded in December 2017 were recently tested, and I'm pleased to advise have partially vested. This partial vesting related to ANZ's total shareholder return compared to its financial services comparator group over the three-year performance period. This resulted in vesting of 43% of Shayne's total long-term incentive for that award. The remaining 57% of that award did not vest. Turning to the future, we are seeking your approval today to allocate performance rights to the CEO with a current face value of AUD 3.5 million at full vesting. This is down from AUD 4.2 million last year.
Whether Shayne receives any value for these rights will again depend on the extent to which the performance hurdles in each tranche are met in four years' time. They will be delivered in two tranches with forward-looking performance hurdles. These are: Tranche 1, 75% of the rights measured on ANZ's total shareholder return relative to a financial services comparator group. Tranche 2, 25% of the rights measured against the absolute total shareholder return target set out in the notice of meeting. The hurdles remain challenging, and the board recommends shareholders vote in favor of items three and four. Thank you, and I hope to see you in person next year.
Thanks, Ilana. And now I'm going to pass over to Alexis to see if we have any questions regarding the first part of Ilana's presentation, which addresses the adoption of the remuneration report. So, Alexis, any questions, please?
Yes, we have a question from John Whittington from the Australian Shareholders' Association. "Mr. Chairman, while on balance, we are supporting this report this year, we're uncomfortable that financial metrics have only a 35% weighting for the AVR. While we understand the current APRA BEAR policies, we don't agree with them as non-financial metrics are too easily manipulated. On the other hand, some of the APRA proposals we strongly support, and we'd encourage you to speedily take up the six-year deferral of the recent APRA proposals.
Thank you, John, for that question. And you've touched on a really live and key issue in terms of remuneration policy in the industry at the moment. On the one hand, the regulators are keen to see a greater focus on non-financial metrics. And on the other hand, we know from feedback from shareholders such as yourself that there's a strong desire to increase the representation of financial metrics. So that's the environment in which the board operates. I think it's very important, first of all, to say that the variable remuneration framework actually takes account of a number of factors, all of which are outlined in the annual report. But it's also important to note that there is board discretion applied to the variable remuneration.
Indeed, as was the case this year when the board looked at the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on outcomes for shareholders, so from profit all the way through to share price and dividend, our view was that we needed to adjust that downwards by 50%. So if you take into account that we were actually reflecting financial metrics in that decision and take into account the fact that the long-term remuneration, which Ilana just talked about for the CEO, is linked very much to financial metrics such as total shareholder return and relative shareholder return, then actually well over, close on two-thirds or more of the CEO's remuneration is linked to financial metrics. I hope that reassures. I think there was a second element to your question, which was how quickly we adopt the recommendations that will come from the regulator in terms of CPS 511.
Look, we're currently digesting the latest release of that, which came out just about a couple of weeks ago. Yes, there are recommendations in there on the vesting periods that relate to performance rights or share grants to executives. And we will take those into account and respond to that very clearly and very quickly. Thank you. On to the next question, please.
Yes, we have a question from the Finance Sector Union of Australia. "Despite a difficult year, ANZ has performed well, in large part due to the hard work and dedication of your staff. ANZ staff have worked tirelessly through what has been an emotionally and physically taxing year. The chairman spoke of the importance of the four Cs, one of them being culture within ANZ. Despite this, he stated that a 2% pay rise for some staff was totally deserved and appropriate. How does ANZ justify this 2% pay increase for Group 5 and 6 staff and no pay increase for Group 4 staff when other banks are paying 3% or more? Mr. Elliott said he was proud of how ANZ staff have contributed this year, yet these remuneration outcomes are leaving committed staff feeling disrespected and undervalued.
Thank you for the question. And it's a very important topic as to how we make sure that there is equity and recognition for the performance of people, particularly in the front line. But I'll take it in a couple of parts. First of all, I think it's very important to say that it's not apples with apples. It's not simply a case that you can compare our remuneration arrangements with those at other banks. We have different arrangements and different frameworks.
And if I take the second part of that, I think in putting some context as to how we do remunerate with front line staff, if you look at our pay reward system over the last five years since 2016, and we look at the increases we've applied, then we've been able to increase staff under the EBA in Australia and those under the CEA, IEA, and New Zealand by approximately 14%-15% over that period, which we hope is seen as us wanting to make sure we're remunerating effectively and appropriately. We do very much appreciate the amazing contribution given by our front line staff every day. We know our customers value that as well.
I just want to reassure that in an environment where there are no pay increases for overall staff at the bank, we have made sure that this year there will be an increase, as I said earlier, for staff on the EBA and IEA, CEA arrangements in New Zealand. Thank you. Next question, please.
Yes, we have two questions from Ms. Natasha Michelle Lee. First question: "I know some directors do not seem to have significant shareholdings. What is ANZ's policy on directors' holdings? To ensure directors have skin in the game, they should be required to hold at least twice their remuneration in shares. Do you have any comments?" And the second question: "The Royal Commission findings resulted in ANZ having to refund customers AUD 62 million in 2020. Notwithstanding the short-term bonuses lost, the CEO LTRs were reduced AUD 1.4 million in 2018, AUD 2.1 million in 2019, and AUD 1.75 million in 2020. It does not seem fair that the bulk of the penalty falls upon shareholders while directors and executives get off lightly. Why doesn't the loss of bonuses better reflect the penalty imposed?
Yeah, thank you for the question, Natasha. And first of all, in terms of our policy on director shareholdings, that's on page 98 of our annual report. And we have a very clearly stated policy: over a five-year period, a non-executive director is required to hold 100% equivalent of their base fee in ANZ shares or associated securities. And in terms of myself as chair, I'm required to hold 200% of the NED, the non-executive director base fee. As I said, that's outlined in the annual report. In terms of your second question, when we look at long-term performance and look at the threshold for paying bonuses, those are very much linked to shareholder outcomes. If I look overall at our executive pay, roughly 70% of our executive pay is at risk in a combination of short-term variable remuneration and long-term remuneration.
And when we look at long-term remuneration, as I mentioned earlier, the threshold for vesting of the long-term incentive scheme is a performance measured against a relative shareholder return, how we've gone compared to a comparative set of equivalent banks, and total shareholder return over the period. So, in fact, the impact of any of these fines on shareholders is very much aligned through that mechanism with how we reward our executives. And I also want to reassure you, as I hope I did earlier, that the board is constantly evaluating the impact on shareholders of all the consequences of the bank's performance, and as we did this year, that we exercise our discretion appropriately. Next question, please.
Yes, we have a question from the Finance Sector Union of Australia. "We note the chair's comments regarding a reduction in executive variable remuneration. However, even with this reduction, executive remuneration increases are substantially above the 0%-2% increases being received by the majority of your staff. How does the board justify these high salary increases for executives with below-market increases for staff?
Thank you for the question. I think, again, it's an important question for people to be able to get comfortable and understand the remuneration framework. For non-executive staff, they're on a different framework where the majority of their pay is at fixed, and there's a small amount which relates to the group performance dividend. Typically, over 90% of non-executive pay is not at risk. It's very different when you get to the executive, where, as I've mentioned earlier, up to 70% of annual remuneration is at risk, and the award of that is based on the items we've outlined in the annual report, both on short-term variable remuneration and on long-term variable remuneration.
If you look at the disclosed executives in the annual report this year, those who were in the same role last year and compare their year-on-year pay, actually, that's fallen by 15% year-on-year, reflecting the performance of the bank and indeed reflecting what's been the impact on the market overall. So I hope that gives you some confidence that we do reflect performance very strongly in executive pay, and there is a much higher percentage of pay-at-risk for the executive than for the average staff member in the bank. We think that's the most equitable and appropriate way in which to remunerate. Thank you. Next question, please.
Chair, there are no more questions for this resolution.
Okay. Well, seeing as there appear to be no further questions, I'll now show details of the proxies received before the meeting regarding the remuneration report. Thank you. We now move to item four, dealing with the grant of performance rights to Shayne Elliott, which forms part of his at-risk pay, which Ilana also covered in her presentation. We're going to put the words of the proposed motion on display on screen now. And what we are doing here is seeking shareholders' approval to grant Shayne Elliott 159,308 performance rights. The number of these performance rights was determined by dividing the face value by the volume-weighted average price of the company's shares traded on the Australian Stock Exchange in the five trading days up to and including the 22nd of November 2020. That's the start of the four-year performance period.
That price was AUD 21.97, and that was announced to the market on the 27th of November 2020. Of course, the number of performance rights that Shayne will ultimately be able to exercise, and therefore the number of shares he will ultimately be entitled to acquire, will, as I've said, depend on the extent to which the relevant performance conditions are met. Details of these performance conditions are set out in the notice of the meeting, and Ilana has provided an overview of them in her summary, and I have also referenced them in my response to the earlier questions. The board, in this case excluding Shayne because of his interest, recommends that shareholders vote in favor of item four. Alexis, are there any questions in respect to this?
Yes, we have a question from John Whittington from the Australian Shareholders' Association. "Mr. Chairman, we'll be supporting this item this year, but we would request that in future years that the VWAP period be set earlier so that the actual number of performance rights be issued can be included in the notice of meeting.
Thank you, John. And there is a rationale as to why we do it the way we do. The VWAP is set at the start of the performance period, which is the 22nd of November, and then we make the announcement to the market on the 27th of November. And that's because it aligns with the performance period that we use for our executive in terms of measuring performance in order to grant shares at a future date. That's the performance period that relates to the metrics we apply on total shareholder return and relative shareholder return. And we'll take your feedback on notice, but as you can see, it's a fairly complex issue and not a simple change. Thank you. Next question, please.
Chair, there are no more questions for this resolution.
Okay. As there appear to be no further questions, I'll show details of the proxies received before the meeting. Thank you. Let's move on to item five. This is an external proposal to amend ANZ's constitution. This item has been requisitioned by a group of shareholders holding approximately 0.01% of the company's ordinary shares on issue. The wording of the resolution will now be displayed on screen. The effect of this resolution would be to amend ANZ's constitution to allow shareholders to put non-binding advisory resolutions to general meetings, such as the one in item six. Full details are set out in the notice of meeting. I should note that this item is not endorsed by the board.
As set out in the notice of meeting, it is the board's view that if people believe such a change to allow non-binding advisory resolutions is desirable, then the appropriate mechanism to effect this change is to engage with the Australian government and to seek to legislate the change rather than to seek to change the constitution of individual companies on a piecemeal basis. For item five, to be passed, at least 75% of the votes cast by shareholders who are entitled to vote on the resolution must be voted in favor of the resolution. If item five is not passed, as we've set out in the notice of meeting, then I will not put the resolution proposed in item six, which is an example of such a non-binding resolution, to the meeting. Are there any questions, Alexis?
Chair, I have a statement to read. "Market Forces work with shareholders to coordinate items five and six. Jack Bertolus has asked that we read this brief statement in support of the resolutions. Item six requests that ANZ report strategies and targets to reduce fossil fuel exposure in line with the climate goals of the Paris Agreement. This presents an important opportunity to improve corporate governance and risk management ahead of further market and regulatory changes required for the world to meet its commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement. Despite committing to support the Paris Agreement, ANZ has failed to align its lending practices or policies with these goals and lags its peer group in this regard. Failure to bridge this gap leaves ANZ exposed to needless climate change transition risks and reputation risks.
ANZ's decision to give undiversified coal companies another five years to formulate transition plans and its failure to appropriately manage oil and gas lending warrant investors calling for corrective action. We ask shareholders to support this resolution with a long-term interest and sustainability of the company in mind.
Thank you, Jack. And in the interest of transparency, I think it's very healthy that we've given that opportunity to make that statement. I don't want to engage in protracted debate on this right now because the item in front of us relates to the change in resolution, but I will respond to it maybe later in the meeting. Are there any further questions in terms of item five?
Chair, there are no more questions for this resolution.
Okay. I will now show details of the proxies received before the meeting. Ladies and gentlemen, item five is the last of the resolutions that are not contingent. As such, and as the voting on items two to five has been open since very early on in the meeting, I will now close the electronic voting on items two to five and the ability to submit questions in approximately three minutes at 12:18 P.M. As mentioned earlier, if there are general questions on topics that have not been covered, there will be an opportunity to respond to them at the end of the meeting, and while we wait for the results, we will play a short video.
Mount Zero Olives is a small family-owned and operated business in the Grampians in regional Victoria, producing and processing certified organic olives, olive oil, and table fruit. They also partner with local growers to produce a range of pulses and grains. The business has been hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic. An ANZ customer for almost two decades, they found themselves drawing on their strong relationship with the bank, developing a roadmap to guide the business through the pandemic. With the help of ANZ and their business advisor, they put together a vision which saw them quickly pivot to engaging directly with customers through an online platform. In a matter of months, they had been able to grow what was around 5% of direct sales to customers to around 35%.
On October 1, 1970, the Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited was launched when ANZ merged with the English, Scottish and Australian Bank Limited. With this merger was launched a brand logo which remains, to this day, subtly evolved over the decades. The bank's purpose, shaping a world where people and communities thrive, may have only had that form of words for a few years, but that ethos has been evident from the very beginning. As ANZ Chief Executive Shayne Elliott says, "When I look through the chapters of our history, I don't just see a sepia picture of a bank serving migrants coming ashore three-quarters of a century ago, but the fabric of who we are today, a bank prepared to back those with a vision for a better life.
Fifty years after the merger with the ES&A which created the bank of today, our ambition is to run our business and serve our customers in a way which values that history for the next fifty and beyond." According to participants surveyed in the 2019 MoneyMinded Impact Report, almost 50% of people in Fiji and Kiribati frequently run short of money for food and other regular expenses. To help improve this situation, ANZ has partnered with the United Nations Development Program, or UNDP, to deliver its adult financial education programs, MoneyMinded and Business Basics. The program will be delivered to female small business owners in rural areas across Fiji, Kiribati, Solomon Islands, Tonga, and Vanuatu. A large part of the program focuses on helping women in low-income households to have financial security and control over their future and the future of their families.
Building financial literacy and business acumen translates into confidence, and over time, these women emerge as community leaders, entrepreneurs, and successful businesswomen. The partnership with UNDP enables ANZ MoneyMinded to reach deeper into rural communities and target different groups of people, particularly women.
The electronic voting on items two to five is now closed, as is the ability to submit questions. The results will now appear on screen and, subject to a final check by Computershare and KPMG, will be released to the Australian Stock Exchange later today. The results show each resolution having been passed with the exception of item five, which has clearly not received the necessary support from shareholders. As such, item five has not passed, and item six will not be put to the meeting, and a poll on it will not be held. We did discuss the item earlier in the meeting. In addition, in the interest of transparency, I will now show the proxies received in advance of the meeting in respect of item six.
While this concludes the formal business of the meeting, there were a number of general questions and comments received during the later stages of the meeting on topics that were not covered, and I think it is appropriate that we briefly respond to them now. So, Alexis, I'll take the next question, please.
Yes, we have a question from Mr. Craig Edward Corfield. "Mr. O'Sullivan, you speak of your focus on building a strong culture. I worked with ANZ on introducing Model Litigant Principles. ANZ was the first and published the most comprehensive and user-friendly list of principles. Without identifying any cases, ANZ's actions failed to meet their promises. These failures exacerbate failures where external lawyers, including Gadens, fail to uphold Model Litigant and fairness principles. ANZ is not serious in their culture reform actions despite glowing words. What quality control measures and oversight does the board have to ensure these fairness principles are upheld in fairly dealing with customer complaints?
Thank you for your question, Mr. Corfield. First of all, if there's a specific issue behind those comments, can I ask you to make sure that those are raised to us? We do have a customer advocacy group whose role is to ensure that there is fairness and equity applied in our evaluation of all comments. And as we heard earlier, of course, there's also an opportunity for any dissatisfied customer to raise those issues with AFCA. In addition, the board does regularly review our customer complaint statistics and gets a detailed briefing from our general counsel on any litigation that is underway. We have a keen interest in those topics, and we do engage in some detail in ensuring we are well-briefed and understand the issues involved. I hope that answers your question. Next question, please, Alexis.
Yes, we have a question from Denmark Dream Pty Ltd or Rita. "Chairman and Board, will shareholders be paying for the legal fees involved leading up to and for the criminal cartel federal court case? It would be unethical for ANZ to expect its shareholders to bear these costs. Please explain how the legal fees involved with this matter are and will be paid." And there's a second question. "Shayne's earlier reply reads securitized loans. Could you confirm the following? Is ANZ in a position to, one, protect their customers who are the original borrowers through these third-party commercial decisions, and two, when third parties commit unfair or unlawful actions which negatively impact an innocent borrower, does ANZ have any legal rights to take action against the third party?
Thank you, Rita, for the question. If I can just address the first one, clearly you'll understand that I can't comment specifically on a case that's in front of the courts in terms of our current status. But what I can say is this: that ANZ is confident that we have engaged in no wrongdoing, and we are defending our position strongly. And likewise, we are supporting our employees in defending our position strongly and in their situation. Shayne, did you want to respond to Craig's second question?
Rita, yes. So, Rita, look, I think I covered this in the previous answer. I think I've made it clear that customers are not impacted by these decisions. And so I don't think there's much more I can add to that in terms of the nature of your question.
Thank you, Shayne. Alexis, next question, please.
Yes, we have a question from Mr. Grant Alexander Fairweather. "I'm not sure if this question was asked, but does ANZ's social program really benefit the company to grow as a business? Do you have evidence? As a shareholder, I prefer to have my money spent on financial services to grow my share price, not on issues outside the control of the company.
Thank you, Mr. Fairweather, for your question, and it's a very good question. And I can tell you, as a former chief executive myself, that I'm highly aware that the sustainability of any social programs depends on it being able to demonstrate clear value to the business, but in that respect, I think if you look at the findings of the Royal Commission in Australia over the last few years, it's very clear that maintaining a strong dialogue between the bank and the community is an important priority. It makes sure we understand trends among customers. It makes sure we understand key concerns in the community, and it exposes our own staff and through volunteering and other activities with people who are also active in the community performing important social and other obligations.
We are very confident that the work we do provides us with a much better culture inside the bank and allows us to be much more responsive in understanding the concerns and needs of the community on a day-to-day basis. Actually, I think I could say the board is very proud of our achievements in that respect, and you'll see us continue to be committed to what we see as very effective and successful programs. Next question, please.
There are no more questions, Chair.
Look, can I say a major thank you to you all for your interest today? I hope we've demonstrated that there's been a good opportunity for all shareholders to ask questions and make comments and provide feedback through the course of the meeting. On behalf of my fellow directors on the board, on behalf of Michelle, Shayne, and Alexis, I thank you all for attending this virtual meeting and for your ongoing interest as shareholders of ANZ. I hope that as restrictions ease in the future, the board and I and fellow members of the executive get a chance to meet many of you in person at future AGMs. I now declare the meeting closed and wish you all the very best for the festive season. Thank you.