Business Reporting Leaders Forum October 7, 2010

1. Business Reporting Leaders ForumOctober 7, 2010

2. Meeting Agenda & Objectives • Introductions and meeting objectives • Recap 21 July 2010 meeting and post-meeting survey • Discuss and agree; • Vision, • Mission & objectives • Governance structure/approach • 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 • Next Steps

3. Recap 21 July 2010 meeting & post-meeting survey • 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 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

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

5. Discuss and agree vision, mission, objectives and governance structure 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 Draft Vision • To position Australian organisations as leaders in the provision of integratedreporting 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.

6. 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

7. Discuss and agree draft governance structure • Discussion on the draft Governance Model/ Structure sent out with the invite – is this a workable model? • Are there any other models that participants have worked in that might work more effectively? What are they, and what are the benefits?

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

9. Recap Let’s recap where we are up to… - are we all agreed?

10. 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 (?)

11. Discuss potential work streams

12. Discuss nature of the Program Office & working groups • What are the key workgroups? • Program office (incl international collaboration) • Local issues identification & remediation strategies • Pilots & training • Research & briefings • Communications • Methodology? • What is the significance of these projects? • Build coalition – BRLF members and others (locally and globally) • Produce deliverables to support regulatory and workplace argument for change • Evolve BRLF identity and value proposition • Influence, communicate, inform events, media and others

13. Discuss work plans for working groups and resourcing [people and financial] • Who should chair each group? • Who should be a member of each workgroup? • How should the workgroup chair / workgroup interact with the BRLF chair and the program lead?

14. Discuss work plans for working groups and resourcing [people and financial] • How are we going to fund the BRLF program office, various research projects, working group requirements, logistics etc? • Are there different categories of ‘members’, ie • SKE paid up members • Commercial members (corporates, institutes, societies) • Technical members (NFPs, individuals) • Observers (government agencies)

15. Discuss critical success factors, key performance indicators, risks and mitigants • What do participants see as the critical success factors for the BRLF? • 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.) • What are the key risks facing the BRLF? • How can we mitigate those risks?

16. Consider communications strategy [ie. Government, media, WICI/IIRC] • What ‘actions’ need to be finalised before we promote the BRLF in the media? • How should we promote the BRLF in the media? • 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?

17. Consider outline 2010-2011 calendar and longer term timing • Regular meetings of the BRLF Advisory Group – quarterly? • Regular stakeholder forums – bi-annually? • Working group meetings – every two months? • Working group chairs with Chairperson/ program lead – every two months • Other events • Harvard ‘One Report’ seminar (US) – October 2010 • Representation at WICI conference (Japan) – December 2010 • National BRLF Conference - March 2011 ?

18. Next steps Identify accountability and timetable for the following actions: • Finalise • Governance Framework • Membership categories, and related funding/resource contributions • Vision, Mission, Objectives • Workplan, Success Factors, KPIs • BRLF risk mitigation plan • Communications strategy • 2010-11 budget and timetable • Engage • Potential Chair • Potential Program Lead • Potential work group chairs/ members • Set up program office