ASIC MIS funding will support platform oversight

4 responses to “ASIC MIS funding will support platform oversight”

1. 

   Ross Smith

   May 15, 2026

   In 1998 Treasury Legislation was passed for single Responsible Entities, which is a fiduciary weak structure. Before 1998, it was a fiduciary strong Dual Structure: Trustee-Manager, where the Trustee held the retail investors, controlled the fund expenses, paid the manager’s fee and monitored manager’s performance to be in line with its mandate. In 2013, New Zealand updated its Dual Structure: Trustee-Manager. Minister Mulino after his PhD does not research. Treasury should be compensating every investor who lost thir investment under the failed single Responsible Entity regime. Journalists are not telling the Minister – cannot get this message across? $17.8 million should be put into CSLR to reduce levy cost to small businesses who have done nothing wrong in their communities.

   Log in to Reply
2. 

   SONJA

   May 15, 2026

   From the ASIC regulatory oversight failures a Victims perspective. Throwing another $17.8 million at ASIC is not “reform”. It is an admission that the regulator already had the powers, the intelligence, the warnings and the legislative tools — but failed to act.

   The elephant in the room is not data. It is will.

   ASIC already receives mountains of information:
   • breach reports,
   • bank records,
   • investor complaints,
   • platform intelligence,
   • AFSL data,
   • trust structures,
   • suspicious fund flows,
   • direct whistleblower reports,
   • and repeated warnings from industry participants and investors.

   Lion Property Group, Shield and First Guardian did not collapse because ASIC lacked “real-time platform oversight”. They collapsed because ASIC repeatedly failed to intervene early, failed to identify obvious regulatory red flags, and failed to use the powers Parliament already gave it.

   Now we are told the answer is more surveillance of investor flows.

   Australians are entitled to ask:
   If ASIC could not properly act on direct evidence already sitting in front of it, why should anyone believe another data feed fixes the problem?

   The real issue is cultural and structural:
   ASIC has evolved into a reactive enforcement body — a financial coroner — rather than the proactive cop on the financial beat Australians fund it to be.

   And while ordinary Australians lose homes, retirements and life savings, Treasury and Finance continue constructing an almost impenetrable accountability shield around ASIC itself.

   The irony is staggering.

   Government now proposes monitoring “flows” into risky MIS structures while simultaneously refusing to properly examine whether ASIC’s previous failures contributed to billions in losses across the MIS sector over two decades.

   The CSLR explosion is not a market accident.
   It is the accumulated cost of regulatory failure.

   Industry levies are now socialising the cost of regulatory incompetence across advisers and consumers while the institutions responsible avoid genuine scrutiny.

   Daniel Mulino says “prevention” is the goal.

   Good.
   Then start with the obvious prevention measure:
   Hold ASIC publicly accountable for why existing powers, existing intelligence and existing warnings repeatedly failed to protect Australians in the first place.

   Because no amount of new funding fixes a regulator that already had the money, already had the powers, but lacked the institutional will to act.

   Log in to Reply
3. 

   Jeremy Wright

   May 15, 2026

   After nearly 40 years in the Financial Services Industry and having dealt with every type of entity that is involved, from clients to Advisers, practices, Licensees, Insurers, Investment providers, Regulators, Government ministers and the Government bureaucratic system, the one overriding fault in the whole shebang, is the protocol of getting vast information from everyone with a vested interest and virtually ignoring the very people who will be impacted, like experienced Advisers, ( hence twelve thousand exiting the Industry ) and based on REAL experience, who would have brought to the table, alternative issues that would have highlighted far reaching consequences of “Utopian” grand plans. What we have in Australia today, is an inability to see ALL the variables of ill thought-out, dart board solutions. Australia has become a nation of blinkered analysis, where the real world is ignored and absolute naïve solutions are seen as the best result, are implemented and the merry go round of Billions stolen, misused and wasted, continues to roll along causing mayhem for so many people who deserve better than what our Government and Public servant institutionalized system provides.

   Log in to Reply
   1. 

      SONJA

      May 15, 2026

      Jeremy Wright has summed up in a few paragraphs what many Australians and industry professionals have been saying for years.

      Forty years of real-world experience counts for far more than another round of theoretical “consultation” designed inside bureaucratic echo chambers.

      Congratulations Jeremy on having the courage to say plainly what so many know privately — that Australia’s financial system is drowning in process, data collection and institutional self-protection while practical experience and common sense are increasingly ignored.

      The tragic reality is that billions continue to be lost not because there is insufficient regulation, but because the system repeatedly fails to listen to those who actually understand where the risks are emerging in the real world.