Without the associated money making powers, yes. One of the functions that a bank/credit card company/etc serves is being the accountant tracking who owes what to who within its customer base as they make transactions between each other and how to deal with defaults among its various creditors. Whether banks would want such a non-government institution tracking/insuring interbank transactions is debatable, but there are enough market-players willing to play such a role if that is what is wanted. Hence, it is not a role required to be filled by the RBA. Yes, the interbank lending market benefitted from such a player when trust (and therefore liquidity) dried up at the start of the GFC, but if it wasn't for the presence of the central banks (and associated monetary laws) in the first place, it would never have built up to become the issue it was.
Be very careful on WHAT YOU SAY about this topic or you may find yourself on the wrong end of the law. Regards Errol 43
In a democracy, secrecy for govt=good and necessary (national security), secrecy for citizens (privacy)=bad and a danger to security.
I admit I don't know what exactly has transpired! However I believe that I have every right to be aware of the facts ie this matter is in the Public's interest. The things I would be interested to discover for example would be who, what, why, where, and when...the choices should be from attending the court hearings in person or reading a reported summary of the facts presented via the newspapers, TV , radio, internet etc If any/most of these allegations prove true my further instructions , that I believe would be supported by almost all the informed voting human beings with the ability to vote, would be if it is good enough to print/allocate funds for bribery purposes then it is good enough to print funds to cover the "taxation" and living costs for all the living human beings . Person like corporations etc can be encouraged to volunteer to continue to pay and play if they wish!
