The House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics quizzed APRA chair Wayne Byres and his leadership team yesterday, with the starting point as the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority's 2015/16 annual report.  Byres observed in his opening remarks that APRA's annual report was published some time ago, "but many of the issues it discusses are still relevant".  "We called out risks in the housing market, the funding profile of the banking system, poor experience in some segments of the insurance industry, and the need to enhance governance and transparency in the superannuation industry. These issues remain prominent today," he said. Byres then went on to an update on APRA's response to the recommendations most relevant to it from the Committee's Review of the Big Four banks. Among the action items was a discussion paper on proposed revisions to the licensing framework for ADIs, released in August.  This includes a version of the 'two phase' licensing regime recommended by the Committee, designed to make it easier for applicants - particularly those with innovative or otherwise non-traditional business models - to navigate the ADI licensing process while at the same time maintaining overall entry standards.  "The Government responded to these recommendations with, amongst other things, the new Banking Executive Accountability Regime (known as the BEAR)," Byres said, noting that, "as a package, this is not new territory for APRA. The core objective of the BEAR - establishing clearer accountabilities for, and expected standards of behaviour by, senior executives within banks - is being constructed in a manner that is consistent with APRA's prudential mandate.  "While there are a range of new elements in the proposed reforms, the BEAR should essentially be seen as a strengthening of the existing prudential framework. Indeed, once the new framework is put in place for banks, APRA will consider whether some of the concepts within the regime have wider application." And then Byres noted how the issue of community trust and confidence was an important consideration behind APRA's recent decision to establish an inquiry into the Commonwealth Bank of Australia.  "After the Austrac matter came to light, it was difficult to see how the bank could quickly remedy the situation by itself. Our inquiry provides the opportunity for the CBA to demonstrate that it has and will take these issues seriously, and is responding to them."We very much see the Inquiry as making a constructive contribution to strengthening the reputation and public standing of the bank," Byres added. This last point led the Committee to later ask Byres if he saw APRA's role as repairing CBA's reputation. "It's important that people understand and trust the banks are well-governed and prudently managed," Byres responded. "There are question marks over what's real and what's perception, and to the extent that there are genuine shortcomings [at CBA] it's important that they are addressed." On this point, Byres was quizzed as to when APRA was informed of the Austrac action against CBA.  "On the morning of the announcement," Byres said. "We are aware that they had done work at the