Check against delivery

Acknowledgements

Well, good afternoon, everyone. Let me begin by also acknowledging the Gadigal people of the Eora nation as the Traditional Owners of the lands on which we are meeting today. And I pay my respects to elders past and present and extend that respect to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people that are here with us today.

I also want to acknowledge the ASIC Commissioners that are in the room and our fantastic executive team. I’m so glad that you are here. And I also thank Christine [Bartlett] and CEDA and Doug [Nixon] and Clayton Utz for hosting us today.

Introduction

It is an honour to be speaking with you here today as the new Chair of ASIC – still relatively new.

And somebody said to me recently, in fact a few people have said to me recently, that this is one of the toughest appointments in government. I perhaps should have thought about that a little bit more before I took on the job. But regardless, I stand here ready to lead and, as importantly though, to listen.

And over the past few months, I’ve been doing a lot of listening about the kind of regulator that ASIC needs to be in the coming years. And what has become clear is that we have an exciting opportunity to be part of building the future Australia needs.

We are in one of the most disrupted decades that our country and the world has experienced. A decade shaped by crisis and uncertainty. By a pandemic that has contributed to inflation shock. By wars in both Europe and the Middle East that have strained energy markets and global supply chains. And at home, with housing affordability pressures and cost-of-living challenges. Climate change and artificial intelligence are also likely to bring further economic disruption, at a time when many people are already feeling left behind.

Less than a quarter [22%] of Australians now believe that the next generation will be better off.^[1] And for the first time in two decades, more Australians are pessimistic about the future of our economy.^[2] Australia is also now in the longest period of weak growth since the recession of the early 1990s.^[3]

And in uncertain times like these – and when the economy is under pressure – the debate inevitably turns to the role of regulation.

We hear that complying with federal regulation alone is said to cost Australian businesses $160 billion a year.^[4] To put that in perspective that’s more than four times the cost of Medicare^[5] - and almost three times the annual cost of the NDIS [National Disability Insurance Scheme].^[6]

So the clarion call becomes that it’s regulation that’s preventing business from innovating and improving productivity; regulation that is amplifying the drift from public to private markets^[7]; and that ‘the urge to regulate every risk away has tied our economy up in red tape knots’.^[8]

Now these kinds of observations can be challenging for a regulator, but I have some sympathy with them. 

Indeed, in my many years as a regulator I have observed regulations where it’s difficult to conclude that their impact does have a material benefit sufficient to outweigh the regulatory cost. 

It’s tempting to conclude that the answer is to reverse all of this, to simply have less regulation.But that’s not my primary response. 

From ASIC’s perspective, I would argue that these increased pressures only serve to highlight the importance of our role in both regulation and in enforcement.

And today I want to make the case that the answer is not one of more or less regulation, but rather one of a regulator that acts at the right time and addresses the right risks. 

A regulator that can provide confidence to those who are doing, or trying to do, the right thing, while providing consequences to those who are not. A regulator in other words who is easier to deal with, and harder to avoid. 

Now that is the kind of regulator that ASIC needs to be to help build a more productive economy in what is a more uncertain world.

Market confidence, regulatory complexity and the productivity challenge

Before I turn to this, though, I want to outline what role ASIC can play in addressing Australia’s longstanding productivity challenge.

ASIC doesn’t make the law. That’s a job for the parliament. But we do have a responsibility for how the law is enforced, and how it may be strengthened to improve economic as well as regulatory outcomes. The systems we regulate shape how businesses are formed, funded, governed, restructured and, where necessary, wound up. And so from entry, through expansion, to exit, ASIC is present across the entire lifecycle of a business. That means that how we regulate can have a profound impact on business dynamism, innovation, and opportunity.

And it’s this understanding that sits at the heart of ASIC’s new Statement of Expectations. With it, we have a clear mandate from government to support growth and productivity, through proportionate, risk-based regulation. And we have a responsibility to ensure that our actions strengthen the economy, and don’t unnecessarily slow it.

But that doesn’t necessarily mean less regulation, or a change in ASIC’s enforcement posture. Both are central to our credibility and our remit.

Strong enforcement sets expectations, it deters misconduct and it protects both market confidence and market participants.

And timely, effective enforcement matters the most, particularly when it comes to the issue of regulatory burden. Our sector is still grappling, for example, with fall-out from what many saw as a lack of enforcement that contributed to calls for the Financial Services Royal Commission. Every failure leads to calls for new rules. Every new rule adds a new layer of complexity. And correction without calibration can become an overcorrection. And that is how regulatory burden creeps into the system, with all the flow-on effects to productivity.

So what that means is that the most effective way to reduce regulatory burden may be to reduce the harm that creates the demand for more regulation in the first place. If misconduct is addressed promptly, visibly and at the right level, it can prevent harm from spreading or repeating.

And while we won’t ever be able to predict the future or mitigate all risk, we can build a system that recognises risk early and responds before it becomes systemic. It's not about having perfect foresight but it is about shortening the distance between risk and regulatory response.

In practice, that means resolving low-risk issues quickly and proportionately and escalating high-risk conduct rapidly. It also means detecting emerging risks before they become systemic failures, and using timely, visible enforcement to avoid the need for broader regulatory intervention. 

That must be the future we want from regulation: reducing unnecessary friction for those who are seeking to comply, while making it harder for those engaging in misconduct to avoid scrutiny and accountability. In other words, being both easier to deal with and harder to avoid.

So how do we do this?

I believe it comes down to three pillars:

• being a more responsive regulator

• investing in earlier detection and prevention

• and, setting clearer expectations, taking more rapid and targeted interventions, with stronger consequences.

Being a more responsive regulator

So I’ll begin with the first pillar: being a more responsive regulator.

Currently, many of our interactions at ASIC are shaped by process. And we have heard from businesses, advisers, directors and market participants that some of our processes are too slow, too legalistic and too difficult. We’ve heard that our systems are built for the 20 big law firms to navigate, rather than for the 20 million-plus Australians that we are here to support and protect.

So we are simplifying wherever we can to make interacting with us easier and more efficient. 

For example, together with APRA we are leading work through the Council of Financial Regulators to improve how we coordinate, collect and share data across regulators. 

But this is going to require a material shift in the way that we work. For example, before we request data, we need to stop and ask: are we asking for data that’s been provided elsewhere? Can we get it from another regulator? Is the request sufficiently targeted? Or is there activity that’s planned by another regulator that would be duplicative? 

We’re holding ourselves accountable for this change with a commitment to cut our notices for thematic reviews – which are our regular supervisory reviews across a range of industry sectors and issues. We’re going to cut those notices by 15%. 

Now, being easier to deal with also means helping good ideas get to market sooner, but safely, so we are restructuring our market access mechanisms.

Our modernised Australian Financial Services Licensing framework will mean that 80% of routine licence applications will be approved faster. That means most applicants will spend less time dealing with us and more time delivering services for Australians. But those changes do not lower the bar for businesses coming to market – rather, they streamline and simplify the requirements for getting to that bar.

We’re also looking at how we make it easier for companies looking to commit capital in Australia in response to intense global competition for capital for everything from AI technology to the climate transition.

For instance, we have commenced a pilot to fast-track and expedite the IPO process and over a dozen companies have already taken advantage of that process.

And we’re currently consulting on a proposal to provide companies listing on Australia’s public market greater flexibility to publicise their upcoming IPOs, aligning with private market requirements.^[9] There is much more for us to do in this area and in the months ahead we’ll be socialising more of our thinking.

We’ve also sought to make engagement with ASIC easier for the digital assets sector by setting out a clear roadmap for implementation of new digital assets laws.

This includes our expected timeline and approach to consulting on new standards and guidance, and giving early indications of the kind of content that they will cover.^[10]

Now finally, being easier to deal with goes beyond regulation – it’s also about having systems and processes that, quite frankly, are easier for people to deal with.

We’re making a significant investment in our systems and technology, and in 2027, we expect to launch a fully digitised company registry system.

Now, this will be a significant improvement in how our business registers function. These registers are important. They underpin millions of everyday decisions. Before credit is extended, loans are made or leases are signed, they enable people to answer the simple question: who am I really dealing with? This enables a contractor to decide whether to take on work, a creditor to locate a company, or indeed a regulator to identify patterns when directors move between entities.

Our current system is a legacy from a previous era when systems were paper-based and siloed. We know people now expect government services to be digitised and connected, and this program, that we call RegistryConnect, starts to respond to that. It will simplify how about three and half million companies, most of them small businesses, interact with the registry.

And turning to small business, we have consulted extensively to understand how we can better support and protect that sector. And we’ve heard loud and clear that we need to improve how we provide them guidance – and, through our new small business directors essentials hub, we have brought everything together for them in the one place. 

But all of this is just the beginning. There is of course much more that we must do to ensure that ASIC is easier to deal with for those wanting to do the right thing. But I hope you will agree that these are some important steps in the right direction.

Investing in early warning systems and prevention

Next, I want to turn to the second pillar: the need to invest in early warning systems and prevention. Because this is how ASIC becomes harder to avoid for those who are causing harm.

Earlier detection allows ASIC to uncover harms hiding in plain sight and allows us to act before harm spreads with more timely, targeted and effective enforcement action. That means asking: what are we seeing, what are we missing, and how do we act sooner?

And data must be a big part of answering these questions. ASIC already holds a significant amount of information – so we need to ask ourselves: how do we use it better? How do we identify risks earlier? And how do we respond before harm becomes widespread?

I can announce today that we are investing in ASIC’s intelligence strategy to become more proactive and predictive in how we monitor and we disrupt threats. We’re modernising the way we triage and manage our reports of misconduct, and by combining them with other intelligence sources we aim to strengthen our ability to identify patterns and emerging issues earlier, to help us get high-priority matters to our regulatory and enforcement teams quicker. 

We continue to see large numbers of failures with catastrophic investor impact in managed investment schemes, and we are seeking to use the data we have in a much more strategic and analytic way so we can detect red flags much earlier than we currently can. We will shortly commence an annual, risk-based managed investment scheme surveillance program which will select and review schemes based on a range of key risk indicators – including financial through to governance and distribution risk.

And we have also been strongly advocating for enhanced data collection powers in this sector, and we’re pleased that the government has committed to reviewing this. While more data will not necessarily be a silver bullet, it can help us identify risks earlier and intervene before significant harm occurs. 

Now active prevention of harm must extend to ensuring Australians can benefit from new innovations while remaining protected, and ensuring that they’re well-equipped to make informed financial decisions in what is an increasingly digital information environment. And we welcome the opportunity to work with the government in making sure artificial intelligence works in Australians’ interests. 

Clear expectations with stronger consequences 

Finally, I want to turn to the third pillar: setting clearer expectations, with more targeted interventions, and stronger consequences.

As I said earlier, strong markets and strong enforcement are complementary, not competing ideas. Productive and efficient markets require clear rules and visible consequences for misconduct. 

The best deterrence for misconduct is not only what happens in court, but what the market thinks will happen if rules are broken. The last year has seen record penalties and longer jail times for breaches of the laws we administer. When firms and individuals see that serious failures lead to serious consequences, it changes sector-wide behaviour and helps make markets stronger. 

We’re going to continue our focus on poor conduct and ensuring entities are getting the basics right. Basics like delivering on promises to customers, getting interest rates and premiums right, and paying death benefits on time and without delay. And as we improve our data analytics and our intelligence function, we will increasingly turn our early attention to those who are flouting the rules, particularly when it comes to managed investment schemes.

We’ve also seen a failure of core responsibilities in relation to the auditing profession, most recently through what has occurred at KPMG. Entities are required to open their books fully and in good faith to their auditors, and the misuse of that information undermines confidence in the integrity of the system. That’s why we have commenced a surveillance into audit conduct complaints across the big four audit firms. And it’s also why we need to consider closing the regulatory gaps in ASIC’s jurisdiction so we can provide meaningful oversight of audit firms and their leadership, as opposed to individual auditors alone. This will help ensure there are clear expectations for behaviour and clear consequences for failure.

Where to next?

So where to next? In short, becoming easier to deal with and harder to avoid comes down to three pillars: being more responsive, investing in earlier detection and prevention, and setting clear expectations, with targeted interventions and stronger consequences.

Our strategy for achieving this is reflected in our Corporate Plan that we released today, and that includes our five strategic priorities for the year. 

• We’re setting clear expectations to improve outcomes for consumers and small businesses.

• We’re delivering stronger consequences for breaches of professional conduct and better access to reliable financial and business information.

• We’re looking out for risks to retirement savings earlier and supporting better retirement outcomes and superannuation member services.

• We’re supporting effective, resilient, and innovative operations across financial services and markets.

• And we are strengthening integrity, transparency, and confidence across Australia’s public and private markets to make sure that Australia remains an attractive place to invest and do business.

So in short, we’re creating the conditions that make strong growth possible, where capital and customers can participate, on a level playing field.

Conclusion

So to conclude: in our view, the answer to Australia’s productivity challenge is not one of more or less regulation, but rather for regulatory action at the right time, addressing the right risks, and which by doing so creates the right conditions for the economy and Australians to thrive.

Productivity and protection are not opposing goals – they can work in tandem to create an environment where our markets are open and trusted, innovation is both encouraged and accountable, and consumers are better protected.

For us at ASIC, that means being easier to deal with for those who are complying, while being harder to avoid for those causing harm.

Thank you.

^[1]Edelman. (2026). Edelman Trust Barometer. 2026 Edelman Trust Barometer | Edelman

^[2]The Lowy Institute. (2026). 2026 Lowy Institute Poll. Economic optimism: Pessimism about the economy hits record highs | Lowy Institute

^[3] Deloitte Access Economics Business Outlook, 7 July 2026, Deloitte Access Economics Business Outlook: Oil price retreats, domestic pressures persist | Deloitte Australia

^[4] Australian Institute of Company Directors. The cost of regulatory complexity, November 2025, $160 billion and counting: The cost of Commonwealth regulatory complexity

^[5] Medical benefits provided through Medicare estimated to cost $37.6 billion in 2026-27. Budget Paper No. 1 Budget 2026-27, pg. 231

^[6] National Disability Insurance Scheme estimated to cost $56.1 billion in 2026-27. Budget Paper No. 1 Budget 2026-27, pg. 234

^[7] REP 823 Advancing Australia’s evolving capital markets: Discussion paper response report | ASIC

^[8]Wood, Danielle. The Red Tape Impulse, Inflection Points, 9 June 2026, The Red Tape Impulse | Inflection Points

^[9] ASIC proposes improved pre-IPO advertising flexibility and global alignment | ASIC

^[10]ASIC's roadmap for digital assets law reform implementation | ASIC