After a bit of discussion I believe there is actually a $SU(2)\times SU(2)$ symmetry in a sense.
So in principle there is a $U(2)$ symmetry if $\phi=(\phi_1,\phi_2)^T$, $\phi^\dagger=(\phi_1^*,\phi_2^*)$ and the lagrangian $$\mathscr{L}=\partial_\mu \phi^\dagger\partial^\mu \phi-m\phi^\dagger\phi-\lambda(\phi^\dagger\phi)^2,$$ simply sent $\phi\to U\phi$, for any unitary matrix $U$.
But what we can try do is to write the complex scalar fields $\phi_i=\Re(\phi_i)+i\Im(\phi_i)$ in terms of real scalar fields.
Lets say to tidy up notation $\phi_1=\eta_1+i\eta_2$ and $\phi_2=\eta_3+i\eta_4$, where the $\eta_i$ are real scalar fields.
Then $$\phi^\dagger\phi=\eta_1^2+\eta_2^2+\eta_3^2+\eta_4^2$$ and
$$\partial_\mu \phi^\dagger\partial^\mu\phi=\partial_\mu\phi_1^*\partial^\mu \phi_1+\partial_\mu\phi_2^*\partial^\mu \phi_2= \sum_i\partial_\mu\eta_i\partial^\mu\eta_i$$
So in fact the lagrangian becomes
$$\mathscr{L}=\sum_i\partial_\mu\eta_i\partial^\mu\eta_i-m(\eta_1^2+\eta_2^2+\eta_3^2+\eta_4^2)-\lambda(\eta_1^2+\eta_2^2+\eta_3^2+\eta_4^2)^2$$
Or if we collect $\eta=(\eta_1,\eta_2,\eta_3,\eta_4)^T$ then we have:
$$\mathscr{L}=\partial_\mu \eta^T\partial^\mu \eta-m\eta^T\eta-\lambda(\eta^T\eta)^2$$
This lagrangian of real scalar fields is $SO(4)$ or ($O(4)$) invariant, of which I believe the universal cover is $SU(2)\times SU(2)$. I don't know all the details of representation theory, but I am led to believe, after reading in Weinberg's book anyway, that one can replace a group of symmetries by it's universal cover, in a similar way $SO(3)$ is replaced by $SU(2)$ in quantum mechanics.
There's link here on mathstackexchange about $SO(4)$ and it's relation to $SU(2)\times SU(2)$ and also there's a link in the comments, whereby I think as matrix groups, not lie groups $SO(4)\cong SU(2)\otimes SU(2)$.
Physically though I think the extra symmetry comes about because initially we said that $\phi_1=\eta_1+i\eta_2$ and $\phi_2=\eta_3+i\eta_4$, but equally well we could define $\phi_1=\eta_1 +i\eta_4$ and $\phi_2=\eta_2 +i\eta_3$, or any other variant, and the lagrangian will look the exact same.
Again if you check that link on mathstack that kennytm linked, or for convenience here, the relation of the above groups seems to appear in studies of entanglement in quantum computing.
Maybe another answer or comments could fill in some gaps that I have left.