Bank lending to households on credit cards just experienced its biggest drop since records started, according to official figures, and the number of credit cards fell below 16 million, now at their lowest level in four years.

The banking royal commission’s interim report revealed credit card debt declined over the past 10 years. In financial year terms, total balances have reduced from a peak of 3.6 per cent of nominal GDP in 2007-08 to 3 per cent of GDP in 2016-17. Let’s hope that decline continues.

Why?

It could mean we are seizing control in our toxic relationship with financial institutions (although it would be good to know how much credit card debt is just ending up in our mortgages through consolidation). There are new laws just introduced that include banks finding out whether we can repay those debts in a timely fashion and that’s a great change.

We have a lot going on with those institutions – some of it by "choice" and some of it mandated – yet our ability to control our relationships with them is pretty limited. We individually try to have sensible discussions with our bankers and fail – in over eight years, 34,000 consumers received an average of just over $320 because the entities they were dealing with breached responsible lending obligations.

It’s not much – and it’s only the people who know they have the right to ask questions for themselves and others who can benefit from this (although I will acknowledge that in some instances, banks go looking for systemic problems – and then take years to repay). While some of us were getting that $320 a head, ASIC also oversaw payment of $1.5 million in civic penalties for three credit card providers that breached responsible lending obligations.

Thing is, it’s very hard for us to know whether our super funds are doing the wrong thing. I’ve got my fingers crossed that when the banking royal commission delivers its final report, there will be further and better protections for all consumers of all financial products. Which means we may have to rely on the federal government to legislate to protect us. I hope we don’t have to hold our breath while that happens considering it wasn’t too keen on a royal commission in the first place.

Fiona Guthrie, the CEO of Financial Counselling Australia, describes credit cards as a “dangerous product”. Within seconds of talking to her, I reveal I decided to cancel my credit card about 15 years ago because I struggled to keep on top of the payments. I’ve never had one since.

First, she congratulates me on making the break but we both recognise that’s not possible for everyone. It also turns out that some companies won’t let you make payment for goods using a debit card. Guthrie mentions a media company that won’t accept a debit card for a subscription; and on a recent holiday, I had to pay for the bill before we even checked in to the hotel for this reason. It was so infuriating I doubt I’ll ever use them again. That’s at least one flaw in the system that could be fixed through regulation.

Guthrie makes the point that the language around credit cards is so benign.

“Instead, they should be called a debt-trap card,” she says.

Which would put us off having one altogether.

But there’s one financial product we can’t avoid, and that’s superannuation.

I’ll be honest, I had trouble loving super. Couldn’t see the point and would have preferred, in my forties, to have the money to spend on the mortgage and the kids. Now I see that my super means I will be reasonably well provided for in my old age and of course, thanks to Paul Keating, I’ve had super for nearly all my working life.

Now the Productivity Commission has released its report into superannuation and provided 31 recommendations on what should happen to our super. Some of the findings we already know – industry funds (the ones that are not for profit) slay the retail funds. The Productivity Commission isn’t sure why although it says it’s “likely due to differences in asset selection (within asset classes) between the segments”. I think that’s code for the not-for-profit managers made better choices. Guess that’s what happens when you are not influenced by the commercial arrangements of your employer.

It also has a couple of genius recommendations. You get to pick a default fund once, which would stop those starting to work enrolling in multiple funds because they have no idea how it works. It also recommends getting rid of those funds that have underperformed over a period of years.

The Productivity Commission already knows which ones those are – but fears publishing the list will cause a run on those funds (and that will hurt those consumers in those funds even more). So once again, it’s up to us individually to try to protect ourselves against financial institutions that don’t have our best interests at heart – instead they have theirs.

Jenna Price is an academic at the University of Technology Sydney.