The Reserve Bank today will announce what's to happen about interest rates. Official rates are expected to be cut to 6.5 per cent.
But the banks are throwing out any number of hints that because 50 per cent of their cash comes from overseas, their costs of borrowing will prevent them from passing this on in full.
So it's expected that those in Struggle Street will get a cut of a quarter of a per cent.
Now there are more than 300,000 Australians with owner-occupied homes holding loans of between $250,000 and $500,000.
So for the average person on a $300,000 mortgage, a quarter of a per cent cut will be a reduction each month in repayments of almost 52 dollars.
It's better than a wage increase, you don't pay tax on it. But of course if the whole lot were passed on it would be $104 a month.
However there are plenty who say that the difficulties of the banking system have been dramatically reduced by the $700 billion American injection and the $4 billion injection by the Australian Government last week.
Malcolm Turnbull is saying that the one lesson from the credit crunch is that financial institutions should be more accountable. And he said it's not populist but responsible common sense to question their assurances about financial matters.
He quotes the Reserve Bank less than two weeks ago, telling us that the headline profits of our five largest banks were around $10 billion for the latest half year and, as Malcolm Turnbull says, that's a 12 per cent increase compared to the same period a year ago.
And Malcolm Turnbull is asking why is the Prime Minister putting the case for the banks, and no one seems to be putting the case for the thousands of small and medium businesses that depend on credit for their operations, growth and survival.
Malcolm Turnbull, having been accused of being a populist on the Reserve Bank issue, asks is it populist to take the Reserve Bank's own appraisal of our banks at face value.
Malcolm Turnbull admits that we need profitable and secure banks, but the very good point he makes is we also need households that can afford to meet their mortgage payments and plan for the future.
Some statistics very much strengthen the Turnbull position.
While Mr Rudd and Mr Swan seem to be falling into line with the banks' determination to hang onto at least 50 per cent of the cut, for the March quarter this year, that's 90 days, the net profit of the four big banks was $5.039 billion.
That's an increase in profit of over 40 per cent compared to the March quarter 2006.
You'd have to wonder what other business increased its profit by 40 per cent in the last two years.
And you have to ask when is enough enough.
We do need a stable banking environment, but how much profit do the banks need to bleed out of consumers and small business?
And one of the things that caused a delay in approval of the $US700 billion dollar bailout was a question about Wall Street salaries.
Well, the ANZ boss here takes home something like $9 million a year.
The NAB boss took $8.75 million in his first year.
Westpac's new chief executive's got a deal worth $8.5 million.
The Commonwealth Bank's boss will get $8.66 million.
So while, for example, the Commonwealth Bank cries poor and says it can't afford to pass on any interest rate cuts to struggling consumers and small business, they can increase the pay of their CEO by two million a year.
Are the banks feeding on small business and consumers to the detriment of the entire economy and is this, more than the financial crisis, the real threat to the economy.
Kevin Rudd had a lot to say at the weekend about greed.
Malcolm Turnbull is entitled to ask whether that includes the greed of the banks by not passing on interest rate cuts.
Is our Federal Government too gutless to stand up for consumers?
Has our Federal Government become an apologist for big banks?
On this issue, Malcolm Turnbull seems to have all the facts on his side.
