Appendix 2: Details of the non-standard audit reports issued in 2007

Central government: Results of the 2006/07 audits.

Except-for opinions for schools

Coastal Taranaki School Financial statements years ended: 31 December 2005 and 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some expenses due to limited control over those expenses.
Glenfield Primary School Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2005 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some expenses due to limited control over those expenses.
Hamilton Boys’ High School Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 We disagreed with the Board of Trustees recognising the land the school occupies as an asset in the Statement of Financial Position, despite the fact that the Board has been advised that it does not own the land.
Henderson Intermediate School Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited control over that revenue.
Henderson North School Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue and expenses due to limited control over those amounts.
Kohia Terrace School Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue.
Kopane School Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify the provision for cyclical maintenance that the Board of Trustees recognised in its financial statements (there was insufficient evidence available to accurately measure the obligation).
Mangorei School Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 We disagreed with the Board of Trustees not reporting budget figures in the Statement of Financial Position. This is a departure from statutory reporting requirements.
Mansell Senior School Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue and expenses due to some source documentation being manipulated or destroyed by a former employee of the school.
Marist School (Herne Bay) Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 We disagreed with the Board of Trustees transferring public funds to a third party without appropriate authority.
Mornington School Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 We disagreed with the Board of Trustees not preparing group financial statements. This is a departure from Financial Reporting Standard No. 37: Consolidating Investments in Subsidiaries, which requires the Board to present consolidated financial statements including its subsidiary, the Mornington School Community Trust.
Orauta School Financial statements period ended: 28 January 2005 We disagreed with the Board of Trustees not reporting budget figures in the Statement of Financial Position. This is a departure from statutory reporting requirements. In addition, our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some expenses due to a lack of appropriate documentation to support the expenses. Our audit was limited because we were unable to review the board minutes, which were not available.
Orewa Primary School Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue and expenses due to a lack of appropriate documentation to support the revenue and expenses.
Sacred Heart College (Auckland) Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue. In addition, our audit was limited because we were unable to obtain sufficient evidence to support the validity of funds transferred by the Board of Trustees to other entities.
St Dominic’s College (Henderson) Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 We disagreed with the Board of Trustees transferring public funds to a third party without appropriate authority.
St John’s College (Hillcrest) Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 We disagreed with the Board of Trustees not recognising some of its buildings and land improvements in the financial statements, which has the effect of understating the total assets and the depreciation expenses of the school.
St Matthew’s School (Marton) Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify the provision for cyclical maintenance that the Board of Trustees recognised in its financial statements (there was insufficient evidence available to accurately measure the obligation).
St Michael’s School (Remuera) Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 We disagreed with the Board of Trustees transferring public funds to a third party without appropriate authority.
Stanhope Road School Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue and expenses due to limited control over those amounts.
Stanmore Bay School Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2005 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue and expenses due to limited control over those amounts.
Taumarunui High School and Community Trust Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue.
Te Kura Kaupapa Māori O Te Rito Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some expenses due to a lack of appropriate documentation to support the expenses.
Te Kura Kaupapa Māori O Wairarapa Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2005 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue. In addition, our audit was limited because we were unable to obtain adequate assurance to verify the quantities and condition of inventory. Our audit was also limited because we were unable to obtain sufficient evidence to support the amounts owing to and from third parties.
Te Kura Kaupapa Māori O Wairarapa Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some expenses because the Board of Trustees did not keep sufficient records. In addition, our audit was limited because we were unable to verify the closing balances of inventory and the income and expenses associated with the sale of inventory because there were insufficient records. We also disagreed with the Board setting off some revenue against expenses, thereby understating both.
Te Kura O Te Whakarewarewa Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify the provision for cyclical maintenance that the Board of Trustees recognised in its financial statements (there was insufficient evidence available to accurately measure the obligation).
Te Tino O Pourangi* Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2004 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some expenses due to limited control over those expenses. In addition, our audit was limited because no inventory count information was available to verify the value of inventory on hand. We noted that the going concern assumption had not been used in preparing the financial statements because the Board of Trustees was wound up at 31 March 2007.
Wakaaranga School Financial statements years ended: 31 December 2004 and 31 December 2005 Our audits were limited because we were unable to verify some revenue and expenses due to some source documentation being manipulated or destroyed by a former employee of the school.
Wanganui City College Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 We disagreed with the Board of Trustees for not preparing group financial statements. This is a departure from Financial Reporting Standard No. 37: Consolidating Investments in Subsidiaries, which requires the Board to present consolidated financial statements including its subsidiary, the College House Hostel Trust.
Wellington East Girls’ College Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 We disagreed with the Board of Trustees’ decision to increase the amount owing to trusts for bequests received to help restore the capital value of the bequests. This is a departure from Financial Reporting Standard No. 15: Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets, which requires provisions to be valued at their present obligation.
Wellington Girls’ College Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 We disagreed with the Board of Trustees not preparing group financial statements. This is a departure from Financial Reporting Standard No. 37: Consolidating Investments in Subsidiaries, which requires the Board to present consolidated financial statements including its subsidiary, the Wellington Girls’ College Charitable Foundation.
Whanganui Awa School Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify the provision for cyclical maintenance that the Board of Trustees recognised in its financial statements (there was insufficient evidence available to accurately measure the obligation).
Woodford House Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify the provision for cyclical maintenance that the Board of Trustees recognised in its financial statements (there was insufficient evidence available to accurately measure the obligation).

* The Board of Trustees comprising activities at Te Kura Kaupapa Māori O Wairipo, Te Kura Kaupapa Māori O Te Waiu O Ngati Porou, and Te Kura Kaupapa Māori O Mangatuana.

Explanatory paragraphs for schools

Breaches of law by type and number

Not reporting by 31 May 2007 (79 schools) Boards have a statutory obligation to issue their audited financial statements by 31 May. We noted that 79 schools had breached the law by failing to meet this statutory reporting deadline, and had not chosen to disclose the breach in their financial statements.
Variation statements (3 schools) Schools are obliged by the Education Act 1989 to include, in their annual reports, statements comparing their performance against their objectives. We noted that 3 schools had breached the law by not including such statements in their annual reports.
Expenditure by integrated schools on capital works (22 schools) Integrated schools are not permitted to incur expenditure on capital works owned by proprietors without the approval of the Ministry of Education and the proprietor’s written recognition of the board’s financial interest. We noted that 22 schools had breached the law by using their funds to pay for improvements to buildings on land owned by the schools’ proprietors. A large number of schools made voluntary disclosure of this inadvertent breach of the law in their financial statements. Our 2007 report Central government: Results of the 2005/06 audits provided detailed comments on the issues involved (see Part 7 - Unlawful expenditure by schools).
Borrowing without approval (14 schools) Boards are not permitted to borrow above a prescribed limit without the approval of the Ministers of Education and Finance. We noted that 14 schools had breached the law by not seeking authority from the joint Ministers for borrowing above the limit. One school also did not fulfil the conditions of its borrowing.
Investing in non-approved institutions (8 schools) In order to safeguard public money, schools may invest their surplus funds only in approved banking and other institutions. We noted that 8 schools had breached the law by investing in non-approved banking institutions without the authority of the Ministers of Education and Finance.
Payment in advance to staff (16 schools) Schools are not permitted to pay their staff in advance without the approval of the Ministry of Education. We noted that 16 schools had paid some of their staff in advance, to make use of government grants that would otherwise have been lost. This was in anticipation of the staff working without pay in the future.
Code of Practice for Pastoral Care for International Students (2 schools) We noted that 2 schools had enrolled overseas students without being a signatory to the relevant Code of Practice. One school also did not calculate fees for international students in accordance with the provisions of section 4B of the Education Act 1989.

Emphasis of matter by type and number

Closures (6 schools) Accounting standards require schools that have been or are being closed to prepare their financial statements on the basis that they are not a “going concern”. We noted that 6 closed schools had prepared their financial statements correctly.
Serious financial difficulties (17 schools) Some schools are in serious financial difficulty, mainly because of large working capital deficits. We noted that 17 schools had included disclosures in their financial statements that outlined their financial difficulties and the actions they are taking to address the factors that had resulted in those difficulties.
Integration Agreement (6 schools) Integrated schools are required to have an Integration Agreement between the Minister of Education and the proprietors. We noted 6 instances where there had been a change in the proprietor and there was no Integration Agreement in place between the Minister of Education and the new proprietor.
Other reasons (12 schools) Our audit reports included explanatory paragraphs for other reasons: One school was using a bank account that was not under its direct control and authority. One school acquired an interest in land without the approval of the Minister of Education. One school had made payments of additional remuneration to teachers without the approval of the Secretary for Education. Two schools had made payments to staff outside the Ministry of Education payroll service. One school did not exclude a board member having a pecuniary or other interest in a matter from attending that part of the board meeting when the matter was considered. One school did not exclude proprietor representatives from meetings in which financial arrangements were made between the school and the proprietor. One school did not meet the minimum of three parent representatives on the Board. One school did not have a policy for managing conflicts of interests relating to the school’s international student programme and did not review the procedures for the programme. One school made an inappropriate transfer of public funds to a trust, which was subsequently returned. One school that had previously received money by way of loan from the proprietor wrote off the balance of the amount owing and recognised it as donation revenue because the loan from the proprietor was unlawful. One school with irregularities over expenses had referred the matter to the Police.

Adverse opinions for other public entities

Queen Elizabeth II Army Memorial Museum Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2007 We disagreed with the Trustees not recognising the museum collection assets of the Museum nor the associated depreciation expense, in the Museum’s financial statements. These are departures from Financial Reporting Standard No. 3: Accounting for Property, Plant and Equipment, which requires museum collection assets not previously recognised to be recognised at fair value and depreciated where appropriate.
RNZAF Museum Trust Board Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2007 We disagreed with the Trustees not recognising the museum collection assets of the Museum nor the associated depreciation expense, in the Board’s financial statements. These are departures from Financial Reporting Standard No. 3: Accounting for Property, Plant and Equipment, which requires museum collection assets not previously recognised to be recognised at fair value and depreciated where appropriate.
Royal New Zealand Navy Museum Trust Incorporated Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2006 We disagreed with the Trustees not recognising the museum collection assets of the Museum Trust nor the associated depreciation expense, in the Trust’s financial statements. These are departures from Financial Reporting Standard No. 3: Accounting for Property, Plant and Equipment, which requires museum collection assets not previously recognised to be recognised at fair value and depreciated where appropriate. In addition, we were unable to verify some cash sales and donations due to limited control over those revenues.

Disclaimers of opinion for other public entities

Pacific Islands Polynesian Education Foundation Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2001 We were unable to form an opinion on the statement of financial performance and statement of cash flows because the Board did not keep sufficient accounting records, including source documents. However, the financial statements fairly reflected the Foundation’s financial position.

Except-for opinions for other public entities

Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology and Group Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 We disagreed with the CPIT Council not preparing consolidated financial statements for the Group. This is a departure from Financial Reporting Standard No.37: Consolidating Investments in Subsidiaries (FRS-37). As the Council did not prepare group financial statements in accordance with FRS-37 for the year ended 31 December 2005, there is no comparative information for the Group in the 2006 financial statements.
Christchurch College of Education Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 We disagreed with the accounting treatment to recognise a convertible suspensory loan (to assist with the costs of the merger between the College of Education and the University of Canterbury) as income. In our opinion, the amount of the loan should have been recognised as a capital contribution from the Crown in the College’s Statement of Movements in Equity. We noted the disclosures in the financial statements that referred to the going concern assumption appropriately not being used in preparing the financial statements because the College was merged with the University of Canterbury on 1 January 2007.
New Zealand Centre for Reproductive Medicine Limited (a company jointly controlled by the University of Otago and Canterbury District Health Board) Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2007 We disagreed with the Board of Directors not preparing a Statement of Intent for the year beginning 1 July 2006 as required by the Crown Entities Act 2004, and therefore not preparing a statement of service performance that fairly reflects its service achievements. However, the financial statements of the company gave a true and fair view of the financial position, results of its operations, and cash flows. We noted that the company adequately disclosed in the financial statements the shareholders’ intentions to dispose of their interests in the company by the end of 2007, and for prospective purchasers of the company to have the option of either bidding for the shares or for the business. We also noted that the company did not prepare a statement of intent for the period beginning 1 July 2007.
Delta S Technologies Limited (an indirect subsidiary of the University of Otago) Financial statements year ended: 31 March 2005 Our audit was limited because the financial statements of the company had not previously been audited. Therefore, we did not form an opinion about the comparative information and noted that any misstatement of the comparative figures would affect the results for the year ended 31 March 2005.
Delta S Technologies Limited (an indirect subsidiary of the University of Otago) Financial statements year ended: 31 March 2006 Our audit was limited (in respect of comparative information only) because the financial statements of the company were first independently audited for the year ended 31 March 2005. Therefore, we did not form an opinion about the comparative information on the opening balances in the financial position of the company as at 1 April 2004. Any misstatement of these opening balances would affect the results for the year ended 31 March 2005. In our opinion, the financial statements gave a true and fair view of the company’s financial position, the results of its operations, and cash flows for the year ended 31 March 2006.
Ngati Whakaue Education Endowment Trust Board Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to confirm the value of the Trust Board’s land that was classified as investment property. The land had not been revalued but instead was recognised at its rating value. This is a departure from Statement of Standard Accounting Practice No. 17: Accounting for Investment Properties and Properties Intended for Sale, which requires the investment property to be revalued annually to net current value.
Te Wānanga O Aotearoa Te Kuratini O Nga Waka Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2004 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify that related party transactions were properly recorded and disclosed in the financial statements in accordance with Financial Reporting Standard No. 9: Information to be Disclosed in Financial Statements and Statement of Standard Accounting Practice No. 22: Related Party Disclosures due to limited controls over related party transactions. We also noted the uncertainties surrounding the going concern assumption. The validity of the going concern assumption depended on the number of equivalent full-time students for the years ending 31 December 2007 and 31 December 2008, and the Council’s negotiations for a $20 million Crown suspensory loan to settle an outstanding Treaty of Waitangi claim.
Te Wānanga O Aotearoa Te Kuratini O Nga Waka Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2005 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify that related party transactions were properly recorded and disclosed in the financial statements in accordance with Financial Reporting Standard No. 9: Information to be Disclosed in Financial Statements and Statement of Standard Accounting Practice No. 22: Related Party Disclosures, due to limited controls over related party transactions for a limited period of time before the appointment of a Crown Manager. The scope of the audit on the comparative information was limited because the Wānanga and group did not maintain adequate systems and controls during the year ended 30 June 2004 to identify all related party transactions. We also noted the uncertainties surrounding the going concern assumption. The validity of the going concern assumption depended on the number of equivalent full-time students for the years ending 31 December 2007 and 31 December 2008, and the Council’s negotiations for a $20 million Crown suspensory loan to settle an outstanding Treaty of Waitangi claim.
MO1 Limited (a subsidiary of Te Wānanga O Aotearoa Te Kuratini O Nga Waka) Financial statements years ended: 31 December 2003, 31 December 2004, and 31 December 2005 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify that related party transactions were properly recorded and disclosed in the financial statements in accordance with Financial Reporting Standard No. 9: Information to be Disclosed in Financial Statements and Statement of Standard Accounting Practice No. 22: Related Party Disclosures, due to limited controls over related party transactions. The scope of the audit on the comparative information for the years ended 31 December 2004 and 31 December 2005 was limited because the company did not maintain adequate systems and controls during the years ended 31 December 2003 and 31 December 2004 to identify all related party transactions.
Victoria University of Wellington and Group Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 We disagreed in the previous accounting period with the accounting treatment to incorporate the net assets of the Wellington College of Education into the University as an unusual item in the University’s Statement of Financial Performance. In our opinion, the net assets should have been treated as a contribution from the Crown in the University’s Statement of Movements in Equity. Because we had previously disagreed with the accounting treatment, we disagreed with the comparative information disclosed in the 31 December 2006 financial statements that related to transactions in the previous accounting period.
Ivey Hall and Memorial Hall 125th Anniversary Appeal Gifting Trust (a trust controlled by Lincoln University) Financial statements years ended: 31 December 2004, 31 December 2005, and 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue.
Ivey Hall and Memorial Hall 125th Anniversary Appeal Taxable Activity Trust (a trust controlled by Lincoln University) Financial statements years ended: 31 December 2004, 31 December 2005, and 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue.
Creative Campus Enterprises Limited (a subsidiary of Massey University) Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue.
Three Harbours Health Foundation (a trust controlled by Waitemata District Health Board) Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue.
Wilson Home Trust (a trust controlled by Waitemata District Health Board) Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2006 Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue.

Explanatory paragraphs (emphasis of matter) for other public entities

Northland Polytechnic and Group Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 We noted that the Council did not prepare consolidated financial statements as required by section 154(2) of the Crown Entities Acts 2004.*
Counties Manukau District Health Board and Group Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2007 We noted that the Board did not prepare consolidated financial statements as required by section 154(2) of the Crown Entities Act 2004.*
New Zealand Institute for Crop and Food Research Limited Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2007 We noted the disclosures in the financial statements that referred to the uncertainty over the plan of raising capital to finance the development of products by the wholly-owned subsidiary, GraceLinc Limited.
GraceLinc Limited (a subsidiary of New Zealand Institute for Crop and Food Research Limited) Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2006 and 30 June 2007 We noted the disclosures in the financial statements that referred to the uncertainty over the outcome of the company’s plans to raise new capital to finance the development of its products in the future. The viability of the company depended on the success of the company’s plans in generating the necessary capital, and thereafter on the commercial success of the company’s products. The validity of the going concern assumption depended on the continued financial support of the parent company and the provision of working capital from an improvement in trading performance.
NIWA Natural Solutions Limited (a subsidiary of National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Limited) Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2006 We noted the disclosures in the financial statements that referred to the uncertainty over the continuing financial support of the parent company.
Air New Zealand Associated Companies (Australia) Limited (a subsidiary of Air New Zealand Limited) Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2006 We noted that the financial statements were appropriately prepared on the going concern basis because the parent company had confirmed that it would provide adequate support to ensure that the company would meet its debts as they fall due.
Ansett Australia and Air New Zealand Engineering Services Limited (a subsidiary of Air New Zealand Limited) Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2006 We noted that the financial statements were appropriately prepared on the going concern basis because the parent company had confirmed that it would provide adequate support to ensure that the company would meet its debts as they fall due.
Air New Zealand Travel Business Limited (a subsidiary of Air New Zealand Limited) Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2006 We noted that the financial statements were appropriately prepared on the going concern basis because the parent company had confirmed that it would provide adequate support to ensure that the company would meet its debts as they fall due.
Eagle Air Maintenance Limited (a subsidiary of Air New Zealand Limited) Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2006 We noted that the financial statements were appropriately prepared on the going concern basis because the parent company had confirmed that it would provide adequate support to ensure that the company would meet its debts as they fall due.
Enzedair Tours Limited (a subsidiary of Air New Zealand Limited) Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2006 We noted that the financial statements were appropriately prepared on the going concern basis because the parent company had confirmed that it would provide adequate support to ensure that the company would meet its debts as they fall due.
Jetaffair Holidays Limited (a subsidiary of Air New Zealand Limited) Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2006 We noted that the financial statements were appropriately prepared on the going concern basis because the parent company had confirmed that it would provide adequate support to ensure that the company would meet its debts as they fall due.
Tasman Empire Airways (1965) Limited (a subsidiary of Air New Zealand Limited) Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2006 We noted that the financial statements were appropriately prepared on the going concern basis because the parent company had confirmed that it would provide adequate support to ensure that the company would meet its debts as they fall due.
Travelseekers International Limited (a subsidiary of Air New Zealand Limited) Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2006 We noted that the financial statements were appropriately prepared on the going concern basis because the parent company had confirmed that it would provide adequate support to ensure the company would meet its debts as they fall due.
Zeal 320 Limited (a subsidiary of Air New Zealand Limited) Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2006 We noted that the financial statements were appropriately prepared on the going concern basis because the parent company had confirmed that it would provide adequate support to ensure that the company would meet its debts as they fall due.
Carter Observatory Board Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2006 We noted that the financial statements were appropriately prepared on the going concern basis because the Board negotiated for continued financial support from external government agencies.
Association of Colleges of Education in New Zealand Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2005 We noted the disclosures in the financial statements that referred to the going concern assumption appropriately not being used in preparing the financial statements because the Association ceased trading on 31 December 2005.
Te Arawa Maori Trust Board Financial statements year ended 30 June 2006 and period ended 25 September 2006 We noted the disclosures in the financial statements that referred to the going concern assumption appropriately not being used in preparing the financial statements because the Board was disestablished on 25 September 2006.
Southland Provincial Patriotic Council Financial statements year ended: 30 September 2006 We noted the disclosures in the financial statements that referred to the going concern assumption appropriately not being used in preparing the financial statements because the Council resolved to disestablish once a decision was made on where the assets and liabilities would vest.
Open Mind Journals Limited (a subsidiary of The Open Polytechnic of New Zealand) Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2005 We noted the disclosures in the financial statements that referred to the going concern assumption appropriately not being used in preparing the financial statements because the company had ceased trading.
East City Community Education Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2005 We noted the disclosures in the financial statements that referred to the going concern assumption appropriately not being used in preparing the financial statements because the entity was closed on 9 December 2005.
Manukau Health Trust Limited (a subsidiary of Counties Manukau District Health Board) Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2003 We noted the disclosures in the financial statements that referred to the going concern assumption appropriately not being used in preparing the financial statements because the company was wound up on 14 May 2004.

* There is a subsidiary that is not material to the group for financial reporting purposes. However, the Crown Entities Act 2004 requirement does not have regard to materiality.

page top