Efforts to minimise compensation owed to customers was a policy backed by senior NAB management, the banking royal commission heard yesterday.Delving into a policy later abandoned, Michael Hodge, counsel assisting, steered the royal commission through one low cost version of any "journey to grow and change" (a Thorburn quote), in connection with questionable fees charged on over 200,000 MLC accounts over the last ten years."Do you accept that NAB charged fees for no service?" commissioner Kenneth Hayne pressed NAB witness Paul Carter yesterday.The former NAB head of superannuation platforms replied that: "in this particular instance, as distinguished from the advice service fees, the view was that services were being - general advice and support services - were being provided." There were "discussions occurring as to the quantum of compensation?" Hodge later asked Carter. "Yes," he said.Papers from a NAB Group Risk Return Management Committee meeting on 19 October 2016, record that the bank's head of wealth, Andrew Hagger "updated the committee on the Wealth Plan service fees incorrectly charged [by MLC] totalling $34.3 million". "Hagger noted that Wealth had self-disclosed the breach to ASIC and that the quantum of compensation, ranging from $15 million to $40 million, was being discussed with the trustee and counsel?" Hodge put to Carter."Yes." "And then the committee expressed disappointment that customers had not been remediated earlier, given the matter originated in 2012, and that consequence management had not been implemented earlier, given key stakeholders have now left the business?""Yes""The issue that was being confronted all the time was, 'Who do we have to remediate and how much is going to cost?' Do you agree?""That would be an outcome, yes," Carter agreed.    Avoiding a full priced compensation bill was an option studied with care by NAB.Hodge uncovered an earlier look at the topic, taking Carter to "the middle of September … you were arranging to give a presentation to Andrew Hagger about the fee remediation issue". Hodge said papers referred to "three documents then having being provided to Mr Hagger. Two of those documents are legal advices and the third document is the latest version of the management briefing paper?""Yes," said Carter. Hodge asked if this record cites "what you describe as the current thinking of eligible services?" and Carter agreed.Hodge continued: "And I want to suggest is, consistent with the attitude that was demonstrated by your team over this now four and a half months, which was to attempt to find some service that could be said to justify keeping the plan service fees?"Carter replied: "Again, I would say that what we were doing is making sure there was a full understanding of the issue and contemplating all the questions that I might get asked about the issue. And so this was one of the areas that we were looking into. That is correct. "Hodge: "And the fundamental question would be that you were contemplating being asked would be, 'do we actually have to repay all of this money?'."Carter: "We were understanding the nature