The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has revealed it has spent $386,479.23 on its unmet advice needs project and does not intent to publish submissions to its consultation paper.
In answering a question on notice by Liberal senator Gerard Rennick, ASIC said the costs went to staffing at $236,975, and three pieces of commissioned research at $149,504.23.
ASIC noted that it received 466 submissions to its ‘Consultation Paper 332 Promoting access to affordable advice for consumers’ but had no plans to publish the submissions.
ASIC said this was because:
- ASIC would shortly publish a document which provided a high-level summary of key issues raised in the submissions and provides public transparency of the issues raised in response to CP 322;
- Some of the submissions to CP 332 were provided to ASIC in-confidence, and must be treated consistently with ASIC’s obligations under section 127 of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act, which sets out ASIC’s confidentially obligations; and
- Many of the submissions were made by individuals, namely individual financial advisers. These individuals may not welcome publication of their submissions and review of their comments by their employers and others.
Comments
I don't think that's correct, if you made a submission you had an election to not allow it to be publicly available, I'm sure not all chose that
They won't publish the results because it will reveal what we all know - ASIC IS the problem.
....and you can be certain that will be overlooked in ASIC's "soon to be published document". :P
Great load of BS yet again from ASIC.
ASIC kill advisers at every opportunity with massively over paternalistic REGS that are their own interpretation of laws.
ASIC massively increase the red tape costs of Advice and now Advisers have to pay to tell ASIC yet again of their massive over Regulation.
Circular bloody reference all at the Advisers expense time and again.
Plus $150,000 on more BS paid for comment research.
Advisers pay $150,000 for this biased paid for comment research to protect ASIC and continue to kill Advisers with more over regulation and Advisers don’t even get the research Advisers paid for.
What a disgusting, corrupt, conflicted over regulator is ASIC.
Give us the bloody research we paid for ASIC, so we can all clearly see who ASIC paid to screw Advisers this time.
What's the bet that the three pieces of commissioned research were a way to siphon off money to fellow traveller organisations guaranteed to confirm ASIC's bias. And advisers will end up paying for it via the "ASIC levy" extortion scam.
just redact the adviser's name, but all submissions need to be made public.
I'm not sure why you post as "anonymous", but your point is more than valid.
At the very least, ASIC should publish the comments they received, after redacting the information (if redaction is requested) that would identify the person who made the submission.
my post makes sense. your response to my post doesn't make any sense.
mind your own business. if you want to use your name that's up to you, don't tell me what to do.
I have a few more degrees than you have chump and know better. much much better.
given that I was agreeing with you, I'm not at all sure why we need to compare the number of degrees and awards we can each hang off our respective reproduction organs.
PMSL
What an utter load of BS. They can publish submissions with the names redacted.
More lies, corruption and nonsensical drivel from a truly pathetic and useless organisation in ASIC.
Ben Dover wants Frydenburg gone, if I could vote only once, ASIC as option 1, 2 and 3. Should be disbanded, the culture in that organisation reeks and can't be fixed.
Bunch of useless morons that are doing decades of damage to ordinary Australians whilst pummeling good and decent advisers into the dust. My their mums must be proud of their achievements!!
Hi Wildcat, pretty sure we are on the same side and want to help Real Adviser from utter BS REGS and Red Tape strangulation.
You do know that Frydenberg has been driving this Adviser persecution for the last 8 years.
Frydenberg has control over ASIC and has encouraged the Adviser killing.
So yeh Mr I hate Advisers Frydenberg has to go.
Ms It's Above My Pay Grade Press definitely has to go too.
The political pressure on both these clowns and their pursuit of killing Advisers is growing.
Advisers and our clients must continue to apply pressure.
Out with Frydenberg and a clean out of ASIC.
We are in full agreement on almost all posts I think Ben. Your first line is the first and the last of the issue that concerns me the most. Cheers
Totally makes sense to me. By not releasing the submissions, they can say that whatever new BS they roll out this time was based on our feedback, because you will not be able to challenge them as it is all kept secret! Truly a masterstroke yet again by ASIC. What clever cookies they are! Look advisers we are implementing new BS that you asked for and suggested in your submissions to us....yes we listen!
....and look! We, (ASIC) don't really stink. We have 3 submissions that we paid $150,000 for which prove that all the problems are your fault once again!!
BTW... thanks for each of you (20,000) for forking out $7.50 each in support of that!!!
so what was the point of spending $400,000 if it was not to understand the causes. smells to me.
financial advice is dying.
financial advice is finished.
these assholes at asic are doing anything but making advice more affordable.
The Liberals allow bureaucrats to treat the public with contempt and hence are the problem.
There is no reason for the submissions to be confidential.
Kenneth Hayne refused to shake Josh Frydenberg’s hand….I don’t think there would be an adviser in the country that would spit on him at the moment.
Frydenberg had been a disaster for financial services and he doesn’t care at all.
Scott Morrison wouldn’t even know what a Financial Adviser was….he probably gets his advice from Hillsong’s Brian Houston.
Liberals have been the enemy of financial advice for years…they are careless, heartless and negligent.
ASIC has a conflict of interest reporting on this. A huge part of them wants to retain as much funding as possible (probably want more funding) so they will report anything that supports this. The submissions need to be made public and ideally any reporting be removed from ASIC.
all of us need to call our Local MPs and put pressure on them to release all submissions. they are in the public interest. let's see all the feedback.
YES! let's penetrate them.
I am sick to death of this ongoing tirade against advisers and the outrageous costs incurred on our profession
If we want this to be given the attention it needs then for god sake “ who knows the producer of 60 minutes”
No ! Not as outrageous as it may seem ? Maybe a front chair in the people’s chair might help to disclose the unwarranted and ongoing attack on advisers just like you and I who have done nothing wrong ! Looked after our clients’ protect there families amd assets and get called “ dodgy”
FFS
Let’s stop this ongoing “wingsthon” every week and make us heard
Outrageous is not a hearse enough word for what has happened to us
Sorry for the rant but I felt like expressing everything I and I am sure others feel about this war on advisers
It would appear the principle of "disclosure" does not apply to the very regulator of that principle in financial services.
A disgrace!!
Add new comment