Appendix: Details of the non-standard audit reports issued in 2009
Central government: Results of the 2008/09 audits.
Adverse opinions
| Royal New Zealand Navy Museum Trust Incorporated |
|---|
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| We disagreed with the Board not recognising the museum collection assets of the 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 material revenues because of limited controls over those revenues. |
| RNZAF Museum Trust Board |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| We disagreed with the Trustees not recognising the museum collection assets of the 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. |
Disclaimers of opinion
| Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Ruamata |
|---|
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2005 |
We were unable to form an opinion on the financial statements because of the following limitations in scope:
|
Except-for opinions for public entities other than schools
| Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology and Group |
|---|
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| We disagreed with the Council not preparing consolidated financial statements for the Group for the year ended 31 December 2008 in accordance with New Zealand Equivalent to International Accounting Standard No. 27 (NZ IAS 27): Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements. Because the Council did not prepare group financial statements in accordance with NZ IAS 27 for the year ended 31 December 2007, there is no comparative information for the Group in the 2008 financial statements. We also reported that, if it were not for the departure from NZ IAS 27, the financial statements would have fairly reflected the Institute and Group's financial position, results of operations, cash flows, and achievements measured against performance targets for the year. |
| Massey University and Group |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because the University did not carry out a revaluation of land and buildings in its 31 December 2007 financial statements – so we were unable to determine whether the carrying value of land and buildings was materially misstated. This was a departure from New Zealand Equivalent to International Accounting Standard No. 16: Property, Plant and Equipment, which requires that entities recognise land and buildings at fair value and carry out revaluations regularly enough to ensure that the revalued land and buildings are not included at a value that is materially different to fair value. |
| Wellington Institute of Technology |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| We disagreed with the accounting treatment to account for quality reinvestment programme funding as revenue and as a net receivable in the financial statements. In our opinion, the quality reinvestment programme funding should have been treated as a contribution from the Crown in the 2008 financial statements. |
| UCOL International Limited (Universal College of Learning) |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because the Company was unable to establish the amount of tax-related liabilities to be recognised in its financial statements, as required by New Zealand Equivalent to International Accounting Standard No. 12: Income Taxes. The Company was also unable to file returns to the Income Tax Department of India for activities carried out in India from 2004 to 2008. |
| Counties Manukau District Health Board and Group |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| We disagreed with the District Health Board recognising some funding from the Ministry of Health as income in advance and not revenue in the year ended 30 June 2009. This amount did not meet the requirements under the New Zealand Framework for the Preparation and Presentation of Financial Statements for recognition as a liability. |
| New Zealand Historic Places Trust |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| Our audit was limited because the Trust did not adjust the value of its land and buildings even though the Trust undertook a revaluation of its land and buildings as at 30 June 2009. The Trust decided that the revalued amounts did not reflect fair value, given the specialist nature of the historic assets involved. This was a departure from the New Zealand Equivalent to International Accounting Standard No.16 Property, Plant and Equipment, which requires entities to recognise land and buildings at fair value and to carry out revaluations regularly enough to ensure that revalued land and buildings are not included at a value that is materiality different to fair value. We noted that the audit report was not issued within the time frame set out in section 156(2) of the Crown Entities Act 2004 because of the complexity of some of the issues with the valuation of land and buildings. |
| Ngati Whakaue Educational Endowment Trust Board |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| 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. |
| Orcon Internet Limited (Kordia Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because the financial statements of the Company had not previously been audited. Therefore, we could not form an opinion about the comparative information. The lack of assurance about the comparative information meant that adjustments may have been necessary for the Statement of Financial Performance to be fairly stated. |
| Tūwharetoa Māori Trust Board |
| Financial statements years ended: 30 June 2003 and 30 June 2004 |
| Our audit was limited because the comparative information was limited – the Trust Board's subsidiary's employee entitlements payroll records were not available to audit. |
| Massey Ventures Limited and Group (Massey University) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify that the unaudited financial information of the Company's associate was properly recorded and disclosed in the financial statements. The associate, which was not a public entity, was not within the Auditor-General's mandate and its shareholders elected not to have an audit carried out. |
| Tauranga Moana Māori Trust Board |
| Financial statements years ended: 30 June 2007 and 30 June 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because the financial statements of the Trust Board for the year ended 30 June 2007 and 30 June 2008 included unaudited figures relating to its interest in a joint venture. There were no satisfactory audit procedures to confirm those figures because the joint venture is not a public entity and as such, the Auditor-General is not its auditor. |
| Ivey Hall and Memorial Hall 125th Anniversary Appeal Gifting Trust (Lincoln University) |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify certain revenue due to limited controls over that revenue. |
| Ivey Hall and Memorial Hall 125th Anniversary Appeal Taxable Activity Trust (Lincoln University) |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify certain revenue due to limited controls over that revenue. |
| Auckland DHB Charitable Trust (Auckland District Health Board) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify certain revenue due to limited controls over that revenue. |
Except-for opinions for schools
| Wellington Girls' College |
|---|
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| We disagreed with the Board of Trustees not preparing group financial statements to consolidate the financial statements of its controlled entity, the Wellington Girls' College Charitable Foundation. This is a departure from New Zealand Equivalent to International Accounting Standard No. 27: Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements, which requires the Board of Trustees to present consolidated financial statements. |
| New Plymouth Girls' High School |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| We disagreed with the Board of Trustees not preparing group financial statements to consolidate the financial statements of its controlled entity, the New Plymouth Girls' High School Centenary Trust Board. This is a departure from New Zealand Equivalent to International Accounting Standard No. 27: Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements, which requires the Board of Trustees to present consolidated financial statements. |
| Te Wharekura o Rakaumangamanga |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| We disagreed with the Board of Trustees not preparing group financial statements to consolidate the financial statements of its controlled entity, Te Wharekura o Rakaumangamanga Foundation Charitable Trust. This is a departure from New Zealand Equivalent to International Accounting Standard No. 27: Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements, which requires the Board of Trustees to present consolidated financial statements. |
| Wanganui City College |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| We disagreed with the Board of Trustees not preparing group financial statements to consolidate the financial statements of its controlled entity, the College House Hostel Trust. This is a departure from New Zealand Equivalent to International Accounting Standard 27: Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements, which requires the Board of Trustees to present consolidated financial statements. |
| Wellington East Girls' College |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| 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 New Zealand Equivalent to International Accounting Standard 37: Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets, which requires provisions to be valued at their present obligation. |
| Allenvale Special School & Res. Centre |
| Financial statements years ended: 31 December 2006, 31 December 2007, and 31 December 2008 |
| Our audits were limited because the results of an investigation into the financial management of the school were not known at the completion of the audits. |
| Mayfield Primary School |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our work was limited because of an unresolved investigation into certain transactions between the school and a related party. There were no practical audit procedures to determine the effect of the investigation until a conclusion has been reached. |
| Excellere College |
| Financial statements for periods: 1 January 2005 to 5 April 2005 and 8 September 2008 to 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue for the period 1 January 2005 to 5 April 2005. The College ceased to be a state school on 5 April 2005. Our audit was also limited because the financial statements of the College for the period 6 April 2005 to 7 September 2008 had not previously been audited. Because the College was not a state school for this period, we were unable to form an opinion about whether the opening balances as at 8 September 2008 relating to fixed assets, inventories, accounts payable, and accounts receivable in the financial statements were fairly stated. |
| Paeroa Central School |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue. |
| Titahi Bay Intermediate |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue. |
| Whareorino School |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue. |
| Piopio Primary School |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue. |
| Rawhitiroa School |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue. |
| Kiwitahi School |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue. |
| Taumarunui High School Community Trust |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue. |
| Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Tamarongo |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue. |
| Upper Hutt School |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue. |
| Hillcrest School (Pahiatua) |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue. |
| Tokoroa East School |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue due to limited controls over that revenue, and we were unable to verify the number of staff employed because some staff information was not available for audit. |
| Ross Intermediate |
| Financial statements years ended: 31 December 2007 and 31 December 2008 |
| Our audits were limited because we were unable to verify certain revenue and expenditure due to limited controls over that revenue and expenditure. |
| Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Waiuku |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2007 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some revenue – there were limited controls over that revenue and certain source accounting records and invoices were missing. |
| Sunset Primary School |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify certain revenue – there were limited controls over the receipt of that revenue and we were unable to verify some transactions made by cheques because there was no supporting documentation for those transactions. |
| Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Manurewa |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to obtain sufficient evidence concerning the lack of controls at Board level over approval processes and other internal procedures during the period March to September 2008. |
| Te Whanau-a-Apanui Area School |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify some local fund revenue and expenditure due to lack of records for that revenue and expenditure. |
| Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Ngati Kahungunu ki Heretaunga |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2006 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify certain expenditure due to limited supporting documentation for those transactions. |
| Whanganui Awa School |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| The Board of Trustees has not included a provision for cyclical maintenance in the annual report. This is a departure from its reporting requirements. |
| Saint Peter's College (Palmerston North) |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| We disagreed with the Board of Trustees in recognising expenditure, incurred in 2008 for capital works on land owned by the School proprietor, as an asset. The use of funding for this purpose is not permitted by law unless the Board of Trustees' financial interest in the capital works has been agreed by the proprietor and approved by the Ministry of Education. The Board of Trustees' financial interest is not the subject of an agreement with the proprietor and the Ministry of Education had not granted the approval. Therefore, the expenditure was unlawful and does not meet the criteria for the Board of Trustees to recognise a fixed asset. As a result, the fixed assets, equity, and surplus of the College were overstated. |
| Saint Joseph's School (Hastings) |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| We disagreed with the Board of Trustees making an unlawful transfer of funds to its proprietor. |
| Te Kura-a-iwi o Whakatupuranga Rua Mano |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2007 |
| Our audit was limited because we were unable to verify the transfer of funds from the Board of Trustees to the Whakatupuranga Rua Mano Charitable Trust. |
Explanatory paragraphs for public entities other than schools
| University of Auckland |
|---|
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| We drew readers' attention to the disclosures in the financial statements about the Partnerships for Excellence funding in 2007, which was provided by the Crown as a capital appropriation for increasing the University's capability. This should have been recognised as equity in nature and not recognised as income in advance. In addition, the relevant research contract funding should have been recognised as a capital contribution from the Crown in 2008 rather than partly as revenue and partly as a liability. |
| Public Trust |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| We drew readers' attention to the disclosures in the financial statements about the value of unlisted mortgage-backed securities of $38 million, for which there was not an active market and for which no quoted price was available. Although the fair value of these investments was based on the best available information, in the absence of an active market and quoted market prices, a high degree of uncertainty existed about that value, which could have a material effect on the Statement of Financial Performance and Statement of Financial Position. |
| MidCentral District Health Board and Group |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| We drew readers' attention to the disclosures in the financial statements about the 5% reduction the Board made to the valuation of buildings carried out by the independent valuer. This is not supported by the New Zealand Equivalent to International Accounting Standard No.16: Property, Plant and Equipment, which requires valuations to be either carried out by or reviewed by an independent valuer. However, the reduction is not material to the financial statements as a whole. |
| New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Limited and Group |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| We drew readers' attention to the uncertainty over the ability of the subsidiary, GraceLinc Limited, to generate positive cash flows from operations. Its viability depended on the continued financial support from New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research, and thereafter on the commercial success of its products. |
| GraceLinc Limited (New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| We drew readers' attention to the uncertainty over the outcome of the Company's plans to generate positive cash flows from its operations in the near future. The viability of the Company depends on the continued financial support of the parent company and the commercial success of its products. |
| Whanganui District Health Board |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| We drew readers' attention to the serious financial difficulties of the Health Board. The Health Board was managing the situation and, subject to deficit support, there would be sufficient cash flows generated from operating activities to meet the investing and financing cash flow requirements as set out in the Health Board's Statement of Intent. The Crown has indicated that it would provide such support where necessary to maintain viability. |
| Manukau Institute of Technology |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| We noted that the current financial statements were reissued to replace previously issued financial statements, to account for funding based on further clarification received from the Tertiary Education Commission. |
| GP No.1 Limited (Genesis Power Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| 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 it will meet its debts as they fall due. |
| GP No.2 Limited (Genesis Power Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| 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 it will meet its debts as they fall due. |
| GP No.4 Limited (Genesis Power Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| 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 it will meet its debts as they fall due. |
| GP No.5 Limited (Genesis Power Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| 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 it will meet its debts as they fall due. |
| Kupe Holdings Limited (Genesis Power Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| 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 it will meet its debts as they fall due. |
| Cardiff Holdings No.1 Limited (Genesis Power Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| 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 it will meet its debts as they fall due. |
| Cardiff Holdings No.2 Limited (Genesis Power Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| 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 it will meet its debts as they fall due. |
| Air New Zealand Associated Companies (Australia) Limited (Air New Zealand Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| 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 (Air New Zealand Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| 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 Consulting Limited (Air New Zealand Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| 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. |
| AgResearch (PPGR Consortia) Limited (AgResearch Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| 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. We noted a breach of the Financial Reporting Act 1993 because the Board of Directors failed to meet their statutory reporting deadline. |
| AgResearch (Pastoral Genomics Consortia) Limited (AgResearch Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| 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. We noted a breach of the Financial Reporting Act 1993 because the Board of Directors failed to meet their statutory reporting deadline. |
| CelcomOne Limited (AgResearch Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| 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. We noted a breach of the Financial Reporting Act 1993 because the Board of Directors failed to meet their statutory reporting deadline. |
| Celcom Three Limited (AgResearch Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| 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. We noted a breach of the Financial Reporting Act 1993 because the Board of Directors failed to meet their statutory reporting deadline. |
| ContainerScan Limited (AgResearch Limited) |
| Financial statements years ended: 30 June 2007 and 30 June 2008 |
| 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. We noted a breach of the Financial Reporting Act 1993 because the Board of Directors failed to meet their statutory reporting deadline. |
| E-Learnz Incorporated (Eastern Institute of Technology Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| 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 decided to wind up the Society in 2009. |
| iPredict Limited (Victoria University of Wellington) |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| 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 has negative equity at the time of the financial statements being approved and no letter of support has been received from shareholders. |
| Predictions Clearing Limited (Victoria University of Wellington) |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 December 2008 |
| We noted the disclosures in the financial statements that referred to the going concern assumption appropriately not being used in preparing the financial statements. The company had no equity at the time of the financial statements being approved, its immediate parent entity had negative equity, and no letter of support has been received from shareholders. |
| Land Transport New Zealand |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| 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 disestablished and merged with Transit New Zealand to form a new entity effective from 1 August 2008. |
| Ngai Tahu Ancillary Claims Trust |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| 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 Trust will cease to operate following the transfer of the remaining claim property. |
| New Zealand Fast Forward Limited (New Zealand Fast Forward Fund Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 May 2009 |
| 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 decided to wind up its operations as of 31 May 2009. |
| Marlborough Provincial Patriotic Council |
| Financial statements year ended: 31 May 2008 |
| 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 was disestablished on 31 May 2008 and the residual funds will be gifted to the Marlborough RSA Welfare Account. This audit report was for a 20-month period. |
| Southland Provincial Patriotic Council |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 September 2008 |
| 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 was disestablished by resolution on 15 December 2005. Assets and liabilities are still held by the Council until a final decision is made about where these assets and liabilities will vest. |
| Southland District Health Board |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| We drew readers' attention to the disclosures that the budget figures in the financial statements were from an updated budget approved by the Board later in the financial year but did not comply with the Crown Entities Act 2004, which requires the Health Board's financial statements to include the forecast financial statements prepared at the start of the financial year. |
| Otago District Health Board |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| We drew readers' attention to the disclosures that the budget figures in the financial statements were from an updated budget approved by the Board later in the financial year but did not comply with the Crown Entities Act 2004, which requires the Health Board's financial statements to include the forecast financial statements prepared at the start of the financial year. |
| Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2009 |
| We noted a breach of the Public Finance Act 1989 because the Ministry did not include performance measures and standards in its statement of forecast performance. Performance measures and standards are required by law. |
| Celentis Limited (AgResearch Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| We noted a breach of the Financial Reporting Act 1993 because the Board of Directors failed to meet their statutory reporting deadline. |
| AgResearch Plant Bio Holding Limited (AgResearch Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| We noted a breach of the Financial Reporting Act 1993 because the Board of Directors failed to meet their statutory reporting deadline. |
| AgResearch (USA) Limited (AgResearch Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| We noted a breach of the Financial Reporting Act 1993 because the Board of Directors failed to meet their statutory reporting deadline. |
| AgResearch (Meat Biologics Consortia) Limited (AgResearch Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| We noted a breach of the Financial Reporting Act 1993 because the Board of Directors failed to meet their statutory reporting deadline. |
| Phytagro New Zealand Limited (AgResearch Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| We noted a breach of the Financial Reporting Act 1993 because the Board of Directors failed to meet their statutory reporting deadline. |
| AgResearch Strategic Investments Limited (AgResearch Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| We noted a breach of the Financial Reporting Act 1993 because the Board of Directors failed to meet their statutory reporting deadline. |
| Grasslanz Technology Limited (AgResearch Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| We noted a breach of the Financial Reporting Act 1993 because the Board of Directors failed to meet their statutory reporting deadline. |
| AgResearch Shelf Four Limited (AgResearch Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| We noted a breach of the Financial Reporting Act 1993 because the Board of Directors failed to meet their statutory reporting deadline. |
| Paraco Technology Limited (AgResearch Limited) |
| Financial statements year ended: 30 June 2008 |
| We noted a breach of the Financial Reporting Act 1993 because the Board of Directors failed to meet their statutory reporting deadline. |
Explanatory paragraphs for schools
Emphasis of matter, by type and number (including those explanatory paragraphs outlined in the qualified audit reports above)
| Closures (five schools, 18 transport networks, and two subsidiaries) |
|---|
| 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 five closed schools, 18 closed transport networks, and two closed school subsidiaries had prepared their financial statements correctly. |
| Serious financial difficulties (17 schools and one subsidiary) |
| Some schools are in serious financial difficulty, mainly because of large working capital deficits. |
| We noted that 17 schools and one school subsidiary had included disclosures in their financial statements that outlined their financial difficulties and the actions they were taking to address the factors that had resulted in those difficulties. |
Breaches of law, by type and number (including those breaches of law outlined in the qualified audit reports above)
| Not reporting by 31 May 2009 (63 schools) |
|---|
| Board of Trustees have a statutory obligation to issue their audited financial statements by 31 May. We noted that 63 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. |
| Borrowing above the permitted limit without approval (14 schools) |
| Board of Trustees are not permitted to borrow above a permitted limit without the approval of the Ministers of Education and Finance. Fourteen schools had breached the law by not seeking authority from the joint Ministers for borrowing above the permitted limit. |
| Not submitting fi nancial statements for audit by 31 March 2009 (11 schools) |
| Board of Trustees have a statutory obligation to submit their financial statements for audit by 31 March. Eleven schools had breached the law by failing to submit their financial statements for audit by 31 March 2009, and had not chosen to disclose the breach in their financial statements. |
| Investing in non-approved institutions (nine schools) |
| In order to safeguard public money, schools may invest their surplus funds only in approved banking and other institutions. Nine schools had breached the law by investing in non-approved banking institutions without the authority of the Ministers of Education and Finance. |
| Variation statements (six schools) |
| Schools are obliged by the Education Act 1989 to include, in their annual reports, statements comparing their performance against their objectives. Six schools had breached the law by not including such statements in their annual reports. |
| 10-Year property plan (five schools) |
| Board of Trustees have a statutory obligation to prepare and review annually, and have professionally reviewed every three years, a property plan that includes all the maintenance requirements of the school for a prospective ten-year period. Five schools had breached the law by failing to update the 10-year property plan annually. |
| Other reasons (21 schools and one school subsidiary) |
Our audit reports included explanatory paragraphs for other reasons:
|