ASIC didn’t know all the platforms carrying Shield
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has told a Senate Committee that while it issued a direction to Macquarie regarding the Shield Master Fund in May, 2023, it was unaware the product was available on other platforms.
Directly asked by Victorian Liberal Senator, Jane Hume whether ASIC considered notifying other superannuation platforms, the regulator it had no information to suggest it should.
ASIC’s answer to a question on notice from Hume from Senate Estimates confirmed that in May, 2023, it issued a direction to Macquarie requiring it to “give a written statement to ASIC about the amount of funds invested in the Shield Master Fund through Macquarie’s platform and the names of the relevant financial advisers”.
However, ASIC noted that section 912C directions of the type sent to Macquarie are sent to Australian financial services licenses “who we have reason to believe have information to provide to ASIC”.
It said the s912C directions “do not provide information about the nature of our interest or concern”.
“We did not send a s912C direction or any notices for production of documents to any other superannuation trustee at that time, as we had no information to suggest the Shield Master Fund was available on other platforms at that time,” ASIC’s reply to Hume said.
“ASIC takes public action when we are able to do so. We were not in a position in May 2023 to issue a stop order on the Shield Master Fund (which would have stopped all platforms and advisers industry-wide from selling Shield). It was too early to make such an intervention.”
“The stop order came in February 2024, once we had enough information to do so. A stop order is a significant intervention and before doing this we need to obtain the necessary information and evidence to support this decision. We also needed to consider and understand the impact of the stop order on the Shield Master Fund and its investors, and satisfy ourselves that it was in the public interest to make such an order.”
A decade of 60 complaints about Dixon’s MIS fiasco and ASIC do nothing effective.
ASIC are useless and need to be held accountable.
Had anything been learnt about ASICs total failures with Dixon’s then it is likely Shield & First Guardian would have been caught much earlier.
But no Jane Hume and other Canberra Pollies & Bureaucrats have buried the Dixon’s enquiry.
Corrupt Canberra tripping up itself and many more burnt by them.
Seriously what the actual?
This is appalling.
ASIC are a disgrace. They are keen more than ever to throw everybody else under the table over this, yet they had the power to stop the fraud early. And that’s their actual job!
No, it’s NOT there actual job, Annon 3. It’s their job to be cop on the beat; and ASIC can’t be ahead of the game – just as so many advisers weren’t ahead of the game. They can only catch crooks after the fact, just like any cop on the beat. Fund them better and you’ll get your worst nightmare, more and BETTER regulation! But it’s what you and your clients need. I warned a platform provider decades ago to stop letting advisers push them on admitting products to their platform. The owner/major shareholder was a friend and he said “Philip; I have to be guided by advisers and if I don’t give them what they want I’ll lose them…” So, I put trhe blame squarely at the feet of those advisers who stupidly used/want to use these dumb products, almost as much as the crooks managing them It’s still happenning and will continue while everyone has a hole in their bum. It’s called greed and herd mentality. Advisers have little idea what they’re doing a lot of the time and they think they know more than ASIC…which may be true and THAT also explains why neither the advisers nor ASIC will ever be ahead of the game as long as advisers believe it’s their job to recommend products and investments. They should stick to what they (can) know – broad strategy, tax rules, super rules, savings and investment planning (not portfolio design – that’s beyond most) and (above all!) risk management. When was the last time any of you suggested a Stop-Loss was placed on any investment??? Nup – something you recommended falls by 20% and you all tell clients to “hold for the long term” but none warned their c;lients that the recommended investment could fall by that much, did thay? I’ve watched for 43 years as advisers have consistently got things wrong and blamed everyone but themselves. For my sins I still write a 4000-word newsletter every fortnight to help people understand markets, risk, self-awareness with money and family education around money so that things can improve for families, and I reckon some of those responding here could do with reading a few of them. But they wouldn’t ‘cos they still think they know what they don’t know.
So what was ASIC’s job with a decade of at least 60 complaints against Dixons ?
What was ASIC’s job when they supposedly did a closer look at Dixons in 2016 – but did nothing ?
Massive conflicts of interest, in house MIS pushed from management through Advisers.
Blind Freddy could see the problems but not ASIC ?
Even when the crooks were right in front of them they did NOTHING.
Yet you defend them.