ASIC’s long track record of funding consumer groups
ANALYSIS
Financial advisers should not have been surprised to learn that the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) provided funding to Super Consumers Australia for the creation of a web site to help consumers lodge claims flowing form the collapse of the Shield and First Guardian funds.
While ASIC has yet to outline precisely how much it contributed towards the web site takeyoursuperback.com it is a pretty sure bet that questions will be asked during the next hearings of the Senate Economics Committee.
But the bottom line is that ASIC, both directly and indirectly, has been providing funding to consumer-related issues for years and confirmed to a Parliamentary Committee in late December, 2020, that while it did not have a dedicated budget it from time to time supported funding allocations of between $10,000 and $15,000 for the preparation of consumer submissions.
The ASIC answer was given the context of its Consumer Advisory Panel members of which were, at the time, paid $395 per meeting inclusive of GST with the chair receiving $1,800.
The Consumer Advisory Panel is these days known as the ASIC Consumer Consultative Panel and meets three times a year and, not surprisingly, Super Consumers Australia has a seat at the table.
Indeed, the latest information available on the ASIC names the panel members as including:
- Morgan Campbell, CHOICE
- Jean Skeat, Consumer Action Law Centre (CALC)
- Roberta Grealish, Consumer Credit Legal Service WA (CCLSWA)
- Chandni Gupta, Consumers’ Federation of Australia (CFA)
- Dr Domenique Meyrick, Financial Counselling Australia (FCA)
- Julia Davis, Financial Rights Legal Centre (FRLC)
- Jillian Williams, Indigenous Consumer Assistance Network (ICAN)
- Dana Beiglari, Legal Aid NSW (LAN)
- Bettina Cooper, Mob Strong Debt Help, Financial Rights Legal Centre (FRLC)
- Rachna Bowman, South East Community Links (SECL)
- Katrina Ellis, Super Consumers Australia (SCA)
ASIC has been upfront in encouraging consumers and investors affected by the Shield and First Guardian collapses to pursue their rights via the Australian Financial Complaints Authority.
Last week it noted that, so far, less than 2,000 of around 11,000 Australians who invested approximately $1.1 billion in Shield and First Guardian have lodged complaints with the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA).
It said this had prompted ASIC to take further action to ensure investors understand the impact.
“From tomorrow (Friday 6 February 2026), ASIC will begin sending further information to investors, including a link to a dedicated consumer website that contains trusted and independent support, and options to make a complaint: takeyoursuperback.com.
“The new consumer website has been independently developed by Super Consumers Australia with funding from ASIC,” it said. “Super Consumers Australia is an independent consumer advocacy organisation that is helping consumers impacted by the collapse of First Guardian and Shield understand what they can do.”
Hey ASIC, a couple of thoughts:
These quango’s offer little benefit to anyone other than themselves.
And the Consumer Advisory Panel members seem to be 90% female, and from activist organisations.
No wonder ASIC is destroying the finance industry.
It’s perverse and sick. Bleeding the private advisers who want to help clients WITHOUT product ties, by consumer groups co-funded by corrupt ASIC and Industry Funds. Won’t be able to sustain much more, no other profession has contracted to 20% of its past level in 8 years. Only in Australia achieves this level of corruption and applies such bias. paid adversity to those who fund the regulators. Treasury ASIC AFCA and the corrupt bias Anti-Adviser consumer groups all prosper, while advisers who want to help Australians, and Australians who can no longer access objective or affordable advice, suffer.
This is pretty poor – if ASIC had done their job, then we wouldn’t be funding this.
Australia is a joke.
So the FAAA and professional adviser bodies should and must call for this funding to be deducted from this ASIC levy.
I dont care if it is $2 per adviser.
The principle and acknowledgement by ASIC of the principle here matters.
They’ll never cave, but the tension needs to be ratched up.