Bankers today called on the Federal Coalition to base criticisms on facts, not false and misleading statements.

Australian Bankers' Association Chief Executive Steven Münchenberg said: "Having a debate about banking in Australia is one thing. Basing that debate on assertions that are without foundation only increases the risk of harmful and costly regulation being imposed on banks and the broader economy."

The Shadow Treasurer has repeatedly based his calls for increased regulation of the banking sector on an assertion that taxpayers are underwriting the banks and therefore Government should have greater control over banks' commercial decisions, ABA said.

The Shadow Treasurer has proposed a range of potential government interventions, including punitive measures against banks that move interest rates other than in accordance with the Reserve Bank's cash rate and restrictions on banks developing businesses in the growing Asia-Pacific region.

Mr Münchenberg said: "Many of Mr Hockey's claims are based on an assertion that taxpayers' money is at risk, therefore Governments should have greater control over banks. But taxpayers' money is not at risk."

"Under the deposit guarantee, in the unlikely event that one of Australia's heavily regulated, closely supervised banks, credit unions or building societies collapses, no depositor or taxpayer will be left out of pocket, because the rest of the industry will be levied to cover any shortfall."

"Far from being underwritten by taxpayers, it is the industry itself that underwrites the deposit guarantee. A Shadow Treasurer should be aware of that simple fact."

"As for the wholesale guarantee, Australia's highly rated AA banks pay the Government on average $100 million a month for that guarantee. So far, the Government has earned $2 billion from the banks for the use of that guarantee, on top of the $8 billion in tax paid by banks last year. With a close to zero probability of that guarantee being called upon, the wholesale guarantee is a very sound investment for the Government and taxpayers."

The banks recognise that these emergency moves, put in place at the height of the global financial crisis (GFC), have benefitted the banks as well as the rest of the economy, however, they are not justifications for intrusive government intervention in the banking system as proposed by the Shadow Treasurer.

ABA said the Leader of the Opposition has also made a number of claims that are misleading. The Leader has stated on a number of occasions that banks did not move interest rates other than in accordance with official cash rate movements during the term of the Howard Government, according to ABA.

There can be no comparison between the long period of global economic stability up to 2007 and with the largest financial dislocation the world has experienced in several generations, it said.

Mr Münchenberg concluded: "It is meaningless to compare the situation during the GFCs and after, when banks' funding costs skyrocketed and have remained elevated, with the long period of funding cost stability before the GFC. Such comparisons are just misleading."