The External Reporting Board (XRB) is an independent Crown Entity responsible for the development and issuing of accounting and auditing & assurance standards in New Zealand.

XRBrief 1 is a new initiative of the XRB for your information and education. It is designed to keep people informed of what is happening and changing in the financial reporting, and audit and assurance standards space in a concise manner. We think it is good information especially in an environment such as we have in NZ where there has been a high level of change in the financial reporting space in the past few years....

For more information, please visit www.xrb.govt.nz.

This information was originally sourced from XRB. 

Nearly 200 groundspreaders from across the country will, next week, gather in Nelson for the 60th Annual Conference of long-standing trade organisation – the New Zealand Groundspread Fertilisers’ Association (NZGFA).

Conference attendees – ground spreaders, suppliers, trainers, auditors and testers – will hear from key speakers including Hon. Damien O’Connor (West Coast MP and Labour’s Spokesperson for Primary Industries), Mark Wynne, CEO of Ballance Agri- Nutrients, Mike Whitty, General Manager Marketing of Ravensdown Fertiliser Cooperative and Nelson forestry contractor and health and safety pioneer, Dale Ewers.

“Health and safety and accident prevention are high on our agenda this year,” explains Brent Scully, NZGFA President. “Fertiliser spreading is a demanding job involving heavy plant, complex equipment and often steep terrain. Machine operators and spreader drivers undergo intense training; however, errors do occur and accidents do happen. We want to do everything we can to minimise risk for the men and women in this industry."

Themed “60 Years and Growing”, the conference celebrates the role accurate fertiliser spreading has played in the history of New Zealand’s agricultural success.

It also recognises that fertiliser groundspreading is becoming more technically demanding as it meets the farming industry’s ever-increasing agronomic and environmental standards.

Mr Scully says: “As more fertiliser users understand the importance of using Fertmark fertilisers, spread by Spreadmark accredited professionals, the demand for trained operators is increasing. And as our industry expands, so too does our reputation as being vital to helping farmers achieve the best possible agronomical and environmental results."

The 60th Annual NZGFA Conference will take place between 17 – 19th July 2016 at the Rutherford Hotel, Nelson. Go to http://fertqual.co.nz/nzgfa for full details.

Note to editors:

NZGFA was formed in 1956 as a national association to represent fertiliser bulk spreading operators. The membership has grown over the years from the inaugural 29 North Island members to current membership of over 200 fertiliser spreading and allied companies, across seven national branches.

The NZGFA promotes best practice in fertiliser spreading and established the Spreadmark fertiliser placement quality assurance programme in 1994. The Spreadmark scheme is governed by the Fertiliser Quality Council and operates closely with its sister scheme, Fertmark. The two schemes operate to ensure that high quality fertiliser is manufactured, mixed and spread in a way that precision agriculture is fostered and the environment is protected.

The media release was originally sourced from Scoop.

Urban and rural firefighter representative organisations work together to ensure volunteer firefighters have a single powerful voice

Wellington, Monday 11 July 2016 - Urban and rural volunteer firefighters make up 80 percent of New Zealand’s fire services. Their representative organisations, the United Fire Brigades’ Association (UFBA) and the Forest and Rural Fire Association (FRFANZ), have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to make sure fire brigades and rural fire forces have a single united voice as fire and emergency services transition to a new unified organisation.

Internal Affairs Minister Peter Dunne has introduced legislation to establish Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ). This will provide the legal framework needed to bring together more than 40 separate organisations, over 600 fire brigades and rural fire forces, more than 12,000 volunteers, and approximately 3000 paid staff into the single new organisation.

Mr Dunne said the bill enables the provision of independent advocacy services and support for volunteers, at no charge to them – “the exact role FRFANZ has provided for almost thirty years, and the UFBA for more than a century”.

“FENZ will develop a framework for supporting volunteers, based on modern volunteer principles. Increased support for volunteers recognises their contribution, while not detracting from the support given to the paid workforce,” he said.

UFBA Chairman Rick Braddock said, “Although there have been other reviews of our fire services in the last 40 years, this is the first to result in completely new legislation that will lead to better, more sustainable emergency services for New Zealand communities.

“The aim of the agreement between UFBA and FRFANZ is to unite people, in particular volunteers, who are dedicated to the common cause of protecting lives and property in their communities throughout the country.”

FRFANZ Chairman Kevin Ihaka said, “Volunteers in both organisations share many of the same issues so our aim is to work together to ensure the best outcomes while still recognising differences within our sectors.

“This is an opportunity to manage positive change by unifying the voices of all volunteers no matter where they are from.”

The intention behind combining UFBA and FRFANZ advocacy into a single powerful voice representing collective fire and rescue services personnel closely follows the Government’s rationale in setting up the new unified fire and emergency services organisation.

The agreement will enable UFBA and FRFANZ to facilitate the extensive consultation needed with fire brigades and rural fire forces during the various stages of the Fire and Emergency New Zealand Bill as it translates into policy and regulation.

The media release was originally sourced from Scoop.

NZAC has recently developed supervsion guidelines for School Guidance Counsellors.

NZAC Guidelines for Professional Supervision of School Guidance Counsellors 2016

Why do school counsellors need professional supervision?

• To support safe practice by disclosing current risk profiles of students, particularly those who are suicidal or suffering abuse
  
• To help manage caseloads to support a counsellor’s effective and safe practice
  
• To provide opportunities for reflective learning conversations and ethical practice
  
• To assist in preparation of NZAC, NZCA membership
  
• To support the growth of the counsellor’s professional identity
  

These guidelines are offered to support safe and ethical practice of Counsellors within the specific contexts of schools. They are to be read in conjunction with the NZAC Supervision Policy (www.nzac.org.nz/policy.cfm) and the NZAC Code of Ethics (www.nzac.org.nz/code_of_ethics.cfm)

‘Counsellors shall arrange for regular and ongoing supervision with competent supervisors who should be either NZAC members, or members of another professional body with a Code of Ethics acceptable to the NZAC National Executive’ (NZAC Code of Ethics, 9.1)

From the School Guidance Counsellors Appointment Kit:

(www.nzac.org.nz/school_guidance_counsellor_appointment_kit.cfm updated 2015, NZAC/PPTA)

Supervision

A guidance counsellor should have regular professional supervision with a supervisor who is a member of an appropriate professional association, bound by a Code of Ethics and subject to a complaints procedure.

In supervision, a guidance counsellor will:

• Examine their current practice, including discussion of particular cases
• Evaluate safety assessments and planning and associated professional decisions
• Ensure ethical concerns are explored and clarified
• Explore and address ways that the personal and professional life of the guidance counsellor impact on work with clients

Supervision should be regular, ongoing and in the region of one hour per fortnight. The school must be aware of and supportive of the supervisory needs of the counsellor and make the appropriate budgetary arrangements. Requiring a counsellor to engage in regular supervision is important, not only for the wellbeing of their clients, but also for the wellbeing of the counsellor. Stress from the demands of counselling work could be deemed to be a hazard under health and safety legislation and the employer must take every step to eliminate or minimise such a hazard.

The supervisory relationship is regarded in the same light as the counselling relationship and shares the same ethical principles. The supervisor may be asked, from time to time, to share information with the school principal. Such sharing of information must be done with due regard to the provisions of the Code of Ethics (see Appendix 2) and the wishes of the counsellor. In order for a member’s annual NZAC practising certificate to be renewed, a guidance counsellor’s supervisor must verify the number of hours of supervision that have occurred and the professional development undertaken.

Supervision would usually be provided by a senior, experienced practitioner with specific training in supervision and membership of a professional association such as NZAC (NZ Association of Counsellors); NZAP (NZ Association of Psychotherapists); Register of Psychologists (Psychologists’ Registration Board); ANZASW (Aotearoa NZ Association of Social Workers — if retrained as a counsellor)

To ensure safe practice and accountability professional supervision is an expected, work related activity and expense. This is usually paid for by the school (94.8%, NZAC School Counsellors Survey 2011).

Usual practice would involve fortnightly supervision during the school terms for a full time counsellor, pro rated for part time staff. Other forms of supervision can include facilitated group supervision and peer supervision, which requires a clear contractual agreement about how supervision is provided for each practitioner. Group or Peer Supervision can be an additional form of supervision, but does not usually replace one to one professional supervision particularly for inexperienced counsellors.

Full time counsellors would usually undertake professional supervision within their normal working hours. That is, not outside of 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.

The media release was originally sourced from NZAC. 

Something you may have noticed about the minimum categories in the Performance Report is that there is no category for grants. Don’t panic! It’s deliberate.

The minimum income categories for Tier 3 and 4 reports are as follows:

So where are you supposed to record your grants? Well, it depends what the grants are for. If, for example, the grant was a general administrative grant which was granted for helping the charity to carry on their day to day operations, it would be recorded under “Donations, fundraising and other similar revenue/Receipts”. If, on the other hand, the grant was specifically to purchase food supplies to make lunches for school children and this was a service your charity provided, then it would go under “Revenue/Receipts from providing goods or services”. There may be some instances where you received a grant for both of these things, in which case you would need to split the grant between these two categories.

What is the rationale for this? Well, the main reason that these minimum categories have been set is in order to produce some comparability across the not for profit sector. To do this, it’s useful to know what the money was granted for, not just that a charity received grants. Then the reader is able to distinguish the extent to which the organisation was self-funding, or how much is paid for from external parties.

We have had several questions about the minimum categories with regards to both income and expenses, which are usually “Can I change the names of the categories?” or “Can I break the categories down?”. There is provision in both the Tier 3 and Tier 4 standards for you to be able to do both of these things, however, the standards say “provided that the separate categories are still maintained”. What this means is that you can’t mix donations with interest, or members fees with revenue from providing services, but you can rename or breakdown those categories into something more meaningful for your organisation.

What you cannot do is add a category called “Grants” and lump all of your grant receipts into that category. This is because this removes the transparency that is created by maintaining the minimum categories. We understand that some funders like to see their grants listed individually, or, readers of the Performance Report might like to know exactly how much the organisation received in grants.

Therefore we suggest one of two options:

Include your grants in the minimum categories as listed above (being careful to split the grants based on what the money is intended for). Then add a note to the Performance Report next to the relevant category and split the grants out by funder there.

You could add a sub category of grants to the relevant minimum categories above. An example name might be “Grants received for general administration” which would be a sub-category of “Donations, fundraising and other similar revenue/receipts” or “Grants received for the provision of services” which would be a sub category of “Revenue/receipts from providing goods or services”.

It is important to note that adding or breaking down categories should only be done if it adds value for the readers. Listing every single income or expense item you have does not necessarily improve the reader’s understanding and therefore you should carefully consider whether you need to change the minimum categories.

If you are unsure of where to record particular transactions then please get in touch with us and we will be able to help you. You can call 0800 CHARITIES or e-mail us at nrs.charities@dia.govt.nz.

The Article was originally sourced from Charities Services.

The New Zealand Bankers’ Association (NZBA) today welcomed the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment’s (MBIE) recommendations to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs on changes to the Financial Advisers Act 2008 (FAA) and Financial Services Providers Act 2008 (FSPA).

“Banks support good quality regulation that improves consumer understanding of financial advice and the conduct and competence of financial advisers,” said New Zealand Bankers’ Association chief executive Karen Scott-Howman.

“Banks play an important role in providing reliable and trusted financial advice, so that our customers are able to make confident and informed decisions.”

“The recommendations are comprehensive and align with banks’ priorities in ensuring our financial advice is fit for purpose and puts the customer’s interests first.”

In particular, NZBA supports the forward-looking recommendations that enable robo-advice, which will help promote innovation and consumer accessibility to financial advice into the future.

“The industry has appreciated the opportunity to engage with MBIE throughout the review and looks forward to further collaboration to implement the proposed changes,” Scott-Howman added.

The media release was originally sourced from Scoop.

Tuanz — Telecommunications Users Association New Zealand — wants better consumer protection when the government revisits the Telecommunications Act.

Earlier this week Communications Minister Amy Adams published what she calls an “options paper”. This asks for feedback on the government’s proposed utility-style model for regulating fixed line telecommunications services after 2020.

The paper forms part of the government’s review of the 2001 Telecommunications Act. The Telecommunications Act 2001 review options paper is online at the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment website.

One of the goals of the review is to bring telecommunications regulation more into line with utlities such as electricity lines and gas pipelines. Fresh mobile regulation is possible with potential provisions for infrastructure sharing.

In a press release Tuanz CEO Craig Young says:

“Tuanz has been arguing strongly for significantly stronger consumer disputes processes under the current mandatory code regime. However, the options released today leave this important function with the TCF.

"There may be no choice but to push for the alternative option of an independent dispute and complaint model to ensure that management of disputes is user-friendly, and focused on their rights.

This is important. The recent media stories about poor UFB installations highlight how powerless consumers feel when dealing with large, faceless telecommunications companies.

New Zealand’s access model with separation between network companies and retail service providers is good, but there is a danger of finger-pointing when problems occur. An independent referee would restore confidence.

“It is also disappointing that calls for a properly funded consumer advocacy group, and end-user focused research, have been ignored.

This has worked well in other counties. In the past Tuanz has done a lot of the consumer advocacy work, but that isn’t the organisation’s primary purpose and not what it’s member pay subscriptions for. Likewise the research.

With adequate funding, the organisation could do more work in both departments. Or it could play a role setting up a new separate, consumer-oriented body. It wouldn’t be expensive and would be cost-effective.

As Young goes on to say:

"The successful Australian model proves that contestable funds are an effective way of providing these important services and that leaving it up to the support from corporate entities is unrealistic.”

In the recent past government has looked to an industry levy to fund its rural broadband project and certain services for disabled users. While it would be better to ditch the levy — the telecommunications industry is unfairly targeted in this way — it wouldn’t hurt to set aside a small share of this money to fund an independent consumer-oriented body.

Disclosure: Bill Bennett is working on a writing project for Tuanz.

Tuanz calls for better consumer protections was first posted at billbennett.co.nz

The article was originally sourced from Scoop and was written by Bill Bennett.

The Professional Advisers Association, whose 1,200 members work in the insurance, investment and mortgage industries, is wary of plans to make large firms offering financial advice accountable for the actions of their agents rather placing the onus on the agents themselves.

Commerce Minister Paul Goldsmith this week announced proposals to reform legislation governing financial advisers in an effort to streamline the different types of advisers and advice, which had been confusing clients, and to require customers' interests to put first. The new framework would replace the existing two tiers: advisers, who are individually accountable for meeting their obligations; and agents, whose employer is accountable for their actions.

PAA chief executive Rod Severn says the reforms adopt a number of things his organisation was pushing for, but that the lack of accountability for agents means there's a disconnect with the goal of putting the consumer first.

"If you're giving advice, no matter what that advice is, you've got to be responsible for your own actions," Severn said. "Where you hide behind an advisory firm or the old QFE (qualifying financial entity) model, which is basically ongoing here under a different guise, I think that's disappointing."

In a Cabinet paper, Goldsmith said agents will be limited in practice "to types of advice where the financial advice firm could demonstrate it as appropriate for the firm to hold accountability". This treatment for financial advice firms would be "similar to the current QFE model and makes sense in a large organisation, like a bank, where representatives are required to follow the firm’s processes with limited individual discretion" and would manage risk "through the setting of advice processes and incentives."

QFEs are licensed entities that take responsibility for the sale of less complex financial products by their staff and are typically large organisations such as banks and insurers. More complicated products still needed to be sold by an authorised financial adviser, who can be employed by a QFE.

The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment's regulatory impact statement on the proposed changes said concerns were raised during consultation about the QFE model and the lack of incentives for QFE advisers to meet conduct and client care standards.

"It is unclear whether the problem arises from the different accountability arrangements applying to QFEs (alternatively, it could arise because QFEs are not subject to the consumer first obligation in most situations, in which case this problem would be addressed by extending the consumer first obligation as discussed in the previous section)," MBIE officials said.

The officials recommended against making all advisers accountable for their actions because it could limit the advice provided by QFEs, impose undue costs on the entities' advisers and the Financial Markets Authority supervising the sector. It also didn't reflect the business models of some providers and would put accountability on a party with limited ability to manage the risks. Those detriments were deemed as outweighing the potential benefit of a consistent framework for consumers and stronger incentives for QFEs to put clients first.

Agents are expected to be the dominant provider of advice under the new regime, with MBIE predicting there will be between 20,000 and 25,000 of them compared to 3,000 to 8,000 advisers. The industry is currently made up of 23,000 QFE advisers, 6,400 Registered Financial Advisers, who only need to sign up to register to sell simpler services, and 1,860 Authorised Financial Advisers, who are required to meet certain education and ethical standards to sell more complicated products.

PAA's Severn said the bulk of the reforms are "squarely aimed" at RFAs, who will have to decide whether they want to meet new competency and conduct requirements to be an adviser, or align themselves with a big firm to become an agent.

People&co. is a valued partner of AuSAE and are best known for our success in the Search and Recruitment of Directors, Chief Executives and professional people. We also provide services and advice related to aspects of the Recruitment process and HR services.

We’re in the business of people, and we’re passionate about people being the best that they can be. If you are looking for the right leader or professional for your organisation, contact Michele or Warren at people&co.

If we’re not searching out and recruiting people, we’re helping individuals progress their careers through a range of development opportunities by providing tailored advice. In doing this, individuals thrive, and organisations benefit. We’ve got a long track record in Search, Recruitment and specialist HR solutions. Since 2004 in fact. So we have a very deep knowledge of the Wellington market and we provide our services nationwide. 

The secret, (and it’s no secret) to our success as a leading Search, Recruitment and HR services business is having an interest in people. That means understanding their skills, aspirations and strengths.

We provide preferential pricing for AuSAE members. Please contact Michele or Warren to discuss your needs at www.peopleandco.nz

Air gapped backups, contingency plans for failed internet or mains power and a paper backup of the disaster recovery contact and manual process records are now safely stored, all safety systems are in place and tested. There is nothing more to do. Continuity is guaranteed, business profits certain and a future well assured.

But wait let's consider the viability your business plan. The following "real world business plans" make the point.

In Wisconsin the justice system uses automated software to set the severity of issued prison sentences, for over 10 years. The software controlled decision making processes is not transparent to either its users (judges) or the recipient (prisoners). Thus all sentences issued in that period are being challenged and the software suppliers are in risk of losing their business.

TP-Link, one of the world's biggest sellers of Wi-Fi access points and home routers, "forgot" to renew their Domain Name. Their oversight temporarily allowed "criminals" to take it over, create a fake administration page to get clients to upload bogus Trojan firmware to their router.

Nurses, doctors, and other medical workers so often bypass information security controls in a bid to administer rapid health care that the shortcuts are taught to other staff. Entire hospital units have shared a single login for a medical device and passwords are plainly displayed on sticky notes everywhere.

The US Air Force's Automated Case Tracking System storing investigations from whistle blowers of waste and fraud became corrupted, rendering over 100,000 case files dating back to 2004 unreadable. Although the database was backed up, it did not have a tested recovery function. Investigations are now being done in the "hope" that the data was backed up in another uncorrupted location.

And finally, a car driver has been killed while using the Tesla Autopilot feature. Many Tesla drivers, including the deceased, had filmed themselves playing Jenga, Checkers or simply sleeping while using the feature despite specific Tesla instructions to "keep your hands on the wheel at all times and stay alert".

Who could have foreseen any of the above?

Failures in business are quite often neatly explained by Goodhart’s Law which states clearly: “when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure”. All of the above failures are in this category.

Would you like to discuss this further. Contact IVT at sales@ivt.com.au