Even more cut & paste lobbying: non-audit work

I've had a look back at responses to the Auditing Practices Board consultation in 2009 on auditors undertaking non-audit work, quite a controversial issue for corporate governance types, as some recent votes demonstrate. Once again, I can see the GC100's influence on PLC submissions.

Here's what a chunk of the GC100 submission:

We do not believe that the provision of non-audit services by accounting firms to their audit clients currently impacts on confidence in the independence of auditors. Provided a company’s audit committee applies, or explains its reason for not applying, the Combined Code and develops and implements a policy on the engagement of the external auditor to supply non-audit services, which follows the FRC’s Guidance on Audit Committees, the provision of non-audit services should not impact on the independence of the auditor employed by that company.
In fact, we believe that there are instances when the use of its auditor for non-audit services is positively advantageous to the company and its shareholders, and does not compromise auditor independence. With the auditor’s detailed knowledge of the company’s business, the non-audit service can be provided more effectively. Further, we believe that in many instances, appointing another accounting firm would be very inefficient and may expose the company to greater risks as the accounting firm lacks the detailed knowledge of the business which the auditor has.
In addition, engaging an auditor who has detailed knowledge of the company’s business is beneficial to management as (depending on the nature of the non-audit work in question) it prevents them from needing to spend time briefing a firm unfamiliar with the business before it can commence the non-audit work, provided there are suitable provisions in place to ensure that the auditor’s independence is maintained. As a consequence of engaging the auditor, the company saves fees and the non-audit work can be undertaken sooner, which is advantageous to both the company and its shareholders.

I've highlighted a few key phrases. You can either whack them into Google yourself, which should result in some individual company submissions coming up, or here are few of my own excerpts.

Severn Trent

“there are instances when the use of its auditor for non-audit services is positively advantageous to the company and its shareholders”

“there are instances where appointing another accounting firm could be inefficient and might expose the company to greater risks…”

Xstrata

“We believe that in many instances, appointing another accounting firm would be very inefficient and may expose the company to greater risks as the accounting firm lacks the detailed knowledge of the business…”  

Standard Life Plc/Standard Life Investments

“We believe there are instances where when engaging its auditor for non-audit services, within the terms of the policy, is advantageous to the company and its shareholders… As a consequence of engaging the auditor, the company may save on fees and the non-audit work can be undertaken sooner.”