Appendix 3: Summary of non-standard audit reports on the 2012-22 LTPs
Matters arising from the 2012-22 local authority long-term plans.
| Local authority | Draft LTP | Final LTP |
|---|---|---|
| Adverse opinion | ||
| Timaru District Council | Prime financial statements were not reasonable estimates, giving no allowance for inflation. The supplementary information included was incomplete. | Qualification carried forward unchanged. |
| "Except for" qualification | ||
| Wairoa District Council | N/A | Overall opinion – unmodified. "Except for" qualification for non-compliance with the Act – Council did not adopt its LTP before the statutory deadline. |
| Dual – Emphasis of matter paragraph and "except for" qualification | ||
| Kaipara District Council | Emphasis of matter Suitability of the reforecast Statement of Financial Position as at 30 June 2012, risks due to legal issues with targeted rates, and the implications of financial strategy. |
Emphasis of matter Financial strategy could be jeopardised should any of the six risks and uncertainties listed in the audit opinion eventuate. "Except for" qualification Non-compliance with the Act – the Council did not comply with all the consultation principles, and did not adopt its LTP before the statutory deadline. |
| Emphasis of matter paragraph | ||
| Auckland Council | Assumptions and uncertainty – related to the significant forecasting assumptions associated with funding for the City Rail Link project. | Non-standard audit report from the draft LTP carried forward. |
| Chatham Islands Council | Long-term plan assumes ongoing central government support for the delivery of core services, and reliance on unconfirmed central government financial assistance. | Non-standard audit report from the draft LTP carried forward. |
| Dunedin City Council | Financial strategy – drawing attention to the risks in the Council's financial strategy arising from four related matters that have significant implications for affordability. | Non-standard audit report from the draft LTP carried forward. |
| Grey District Council | Financial strategy – The Council does not fully fund depreciation on core infrastructure and port assets and had not included needed projects in the LTP for rural water supply drinking water supply upgrades. | Non-standard audit report from the draft LTP carried forward in respect of core infrastructure and port assets. Rural water supply projects were provided for in the final LTP. |
| Opotiki District Council | Financial strategy – significant forecasting assumptions associated with the Harbour Transformation project. | Non-standard audit report from the draft LTP carried forward. |
| Ruapehu District Council | Financial strategy – highlight the risks associated with delaying renewal of infrastructure and delay of planned capital projects. | Non-standard audit report from the draft LTP carried forward. |
| Waimakariri District Council | Assumptions and uncertainty – related to the uncertainty of impact of any further earthquakes. | Non-standard audit report from the draft LTP carried forward. |