Business Reporting Leaders Forum

October 7, 2010

1. Introductions and meeting objectives2. Recap 21 July 2010 meeting and post-meeting survey3. Discuss and agree;

– Vision,– Mission & objectives – Governance structure/approach

4. Discuss/Explore – Composition of Program Advisory Group– Work Plan– Nature of Program Office– Working groups and resourcing– Critical success factors & key performance indicators– Risks and mitigation– Communications strategy– 2010-2011 calendar and longer term timing

5. Next Steps

Meeting Agenda & Objectives

Recap 21 July 2010 meeting & post-meeting survey

Issues and concerns with Australian reporting framework raised at 21 July meeting Need for an integrated framework to encapsulate sustainability reporting Lack of meaningful information in sustainability reporting (not aligned to strategy) Provide the good news, not the whole news Needs to be comparable, between entities and between periods Current framework focuses on tangible assets Focuses on the past, not timely information Treatment of confidential / commercially sensitive information Statutory information not useful, complex, not relevant, voluminous A lot of effort to produce Information has built up over time Gulf between external and internal reporting Reliability of non-financial information Short term decision horizon Cultural issues Cost of information Need to focus on the user

The way forward Look at international developments and consider Australia’s national interest – have a say / influence Understand stakeholders better Must be driven by the users Needs to be road tested – internally and with stakeholders

Survey – key findings• 100% agreement to continue dialogue and evolve the workplan• 81% agreement to call group BRLF • 95% thought SKE should facilitate the BRLF• 43% prepared to make financial contribution; 86% will provide resources

Comments• Include Australian, and/or Integrated and/or have a direct link to IIRC in Name • Include in BRLF - more CFOs, BCA, AASB, RIAA, ACCA, AICD, IFSA, ACSI, FRC, member of

IIRC, IGCC, other Big 4, more institutional investors, fund managers and analysts• One suggestion for three accounting bodies to drive BRLF; rest said SKE as no perceived

vested interest• Great feedback on desired outcomes from BRLF, and the activities BRLF should focus on,

and the final comments from each survey respondent – we tried to cover them in vision, mission, objectives and workplan.

Recap 21 July 2010 meeting & post-meeting survey (cont)

Discuss and agree vision, mission, objectives and governance structure

Draft Vision• To position Australian organisations as leaders in the provision of

integrated reporting which is strategy-aligned and supports decision making of key stakeholders.

Draft Mission• Co-ordinating relevant Australian stakeholders and working with

relevant global initiatives, to develop and implement a more pragmatic, strategy-aligned and integrated business reporting framework in Australia, which better supports the business decisions of key stakeholders.

I cannot agree to a vision that does not include the simplification of reporting and improved utility for users. Integrated reporting has the danger of more complexity in reporting. J. Stanhope

Should the BRLF also confirm the SKE Values?

• Collaborative and inclusive – (all parties welcome)

• Open and sharing– (our IP is available to all that have interest in it)

• Connected here and internationally– (strong global and local network)

• Our work has practical relevance and application

• Determined to accomplish our vision and mission

Discuss and agree draft governance structure

1. Discussion on the draft Governance Model/ Structure sent out with the invite – is this a workable model?

2. Are there any other models that participants have worked in that might work more effectively? What are they, and what are the benefits?

Discuss and agree draft vision, mission, objectives and governance structure

Objectives of the ABRLF are to:

1.Engage all key Australian stakeholder groups in a collaborative approach to improve business and integrated reporting, drawing together work being done today through a variety of disconnected initiatives.

2. Collaborate with relevant global forums to minimize any ‘reinventing of the wheel’, as well as to promote the Australian position.

3. Develop the required reporting systems, processes and practices for the proposed Australian approach to business and integrated reporting through:Assessing the good practices of international and local organizations through the development of evidence/ case studies (e.g. Microsoft, Novo Nordisk, United Technologies), and the running of pilots to demonstrate commercial/ sustainable value of proposed changes.Aligning the Australian framework with global best practice initiatives i.e. through the development /use of the WICI business reporting framework, KPI libraries and XBRL taxonomies.

4. Promote training to assist both preparers and users in effective development and use of integrated reports.

5. Partner with government/ regulators/ industry bodies to reduce the current reporting burden, and to regulate, as required, core planks of 'the proposed Australian integrated reporting/ business reporting framework.

For this to be a successful group, we need a clearly stated goal/s and agreement amongst other groups that this is the coalition that will progress this task as the primary body. These respective member bodies can hold an independent view but this is about the strength of a coalition to get something done. J. Stanhope

Recap

Let’s recap where we are up to…

- are we all agreed?

Discuss Advisory Group, Program Office, working groups

Potential members of the 12 person Advisory Group Independent Chair – respected business leader with Board, executive and

potentially regulatory or political experience G100 – 2 CFO members Accountants – 2 senior accountants representing ICAA and CPA Federal Government – 1 member Company director – 1 member Sustainability professional – 1 member Investor/ analyst – 1 or 2 members Academic/ expert in business reporting – 1 member NFP – 1 or 2 members (St James Ethics + 1 other) With the Secretary (non member) being the Program Leader (?)

Discuss potential work streams

Proposed work streams Indicative responsibilities and deliverables

Program office Set up and resource program office, develop program plan, issues log and budget Confirm funding and resources Establish regular Advisory Board reporting and stakeholder communications and schedule ABRLF Advisory Board/

stakeholder meetings

International collaboration Establish formal links with leading international organisations (i.e. IIRC, WICI) Implement routine 2-way update and communications protocols Feed in agreed contributions from the ABRLF to influence global debate

Local issues identification and resolution

Undertake research to confirm and prioritise current ‘As Is’ issues raised by ABRLF; refine the ‘To Be’ vision; identify likely barriers and develop the ABRLF roadmap. Actions could include:Case study on remuneration reporting - the impact of ‘1 size fits all’ regulation.Case studies on the approach used by early IR / BR global adopters, together with issues, costs, realised benefits feedback Case studies on implementation of IR under King III in RSA Aligning with government initiatives to improve standard business reporting Supporting WICI in developing standard sector specific KPIs. Documenting a roadmap, principles, good practices to realign the existing framework and implement IR / BR as per ABRLF objectives

Australian IR pilot Establish and support an IR / BR pilot for June 2011 reports (i.e. pilots) Publish pilot results, learnings and case studies

Research briefings Prepare monthly high level briefings on relevant global and local activities, including latest research and guidance for members and stakeholders

Broaden comms strategy Develop a communications strategy to engage and educate more broadly with Australian investors, smaller businesses and other organisations

Lobby Government/ regulators to remove excess reporting burden, regulate key areas omitted in current framework/ seek funding

Discuss nature of the Program Office & working groups

1. What are the key workgroups? a. Program office (incl international collaboration)b. Local issues identification & remediation strategiesc. Pilots & trainingd. Research & briefingse. Communicationsf. Methodology?

2. What is the significance of these projects?a. Build coalition – BRLF members and others (locally and globally)b. Produce deliverables to support regulatory and workplace argument for

changec. Evolve BRLF identity and value propositiond. Influence, communicate, inform events, media and others

Discuss work plans for working groups and resourcing [people and financial]

1. Who should chair each group?

2. Who should be a member of each workgroup?

3. How should the workgroup chair / workgroup interact with the BRLF

chair and the program lead?

Discuss work plans for working groups and resourcing [people and financial]

1. How are we going to fund the BRLF program office, various research

projects, working group requirements, logistics etc?

2. Are there different categories of ‘members’, ie

a. SKE paid up members

b. Commercial members (corporates, institutes, societies)

c. Technical members (NFPs, individuals)

d. Observers (government agencies)

Discuss critical success factors, key performance indicators, risks and mitigants

1. What do participants see as the critical success factors for the BRLF?

2. What should we set as the key KPIs at the BRLF level? (Work group chairs will set their own KPIs aligned to the BRLF ones.)

3. What are the key risks facing the BRLF?

4. How can we mitigate those risks?

Consider communications strategy [ie. Government, media, WICI/IIRC]

1. What ‘actions’ need to be finalised before we promote the BRLF in the media?

2. How should we promote the BRLF in the media?

3. Who do we need to liaise with in Government to both promote the BRLF, and to ensure we are aligned with Government initiatives in this area? Who will action this?

Consider outline 2010-2011 calendar and longer term timing

1. Regular meetings of the BRLF Advisory Group – quarterly?

2. Regular stakeholder forums – bi-annually?

3. Working group meetings – every two months?

4. Working group chairs with Chairperson/ program lead – every two months

5. Other eventsa. Harvard ‘One Report’ seminar (US) – October 2010b. Representation at WICI conference (Japan) – December 2010c. National BRLF Conference - March 2011 ?

Next steps

Identify accountability and timetable for the following actions:1. Finalise

a. Governance Frameworkb. Membership categories, and related funding/resource contributionsc. Vision, Mission, Objectivesd. Workplan, Success Factors, KPIse. BRLF risk mitigation planf. Communications strategyg. 2010-11 budget and timetable

2. Engage a. Potential Chairb. Potential Program Leadc. Potential work group chairs/ members

3. Set up program office