Statement of Service Performance - Statement of Responsibility

In terms of sections 35 and 37 of the Public Finance Act 1989, I am responsible, as Chief Executive of Te Puni Kōkiri, for the preparation of the Te Puni Kōkiri financial statements and the judgements made in the process of producing those statements.

I have the responsibility of establishing and maintaining, and I have established and maintained, a system of internal control procedures that provide reasonable assurance as to the integrity and reliability of financial reporting.

In my opinion, these financial statements fairly reflect the financial position and operations of Te Puni Kōkiri for the year ended 30 June 2007.

Signed

Leith Comer
Chief Executive
27 September 2007

Countersigned

Julie-Anne Morrison
Acting Deputy Secretary Support Services
27 September 2007

Audit Report

To the readers of the financial statements and performance information of Te Puni KōKiri (the Ministry of Māori Devleopment) for the year ended 30 June 2007

The Auditor-General is the auditor of Te Puni Kōkiri (the Ministry of Māori Development). The Auditor-General has appointed me, Stephen Lucy, using the staff and resources of Audit New Zealand, to carry out the audit on his behalf. The audit covers the financial statements and statement of service performance and schedules of non-departmental activities included in the annual report of Te Puni Kōkiri for the year ended 30 June 2007.

Unqualified opinion

In our opinion:

• The financial statements of Te Puni Kōkiri on pages 70 to 91:
  • comply with generally accepted accounting practice in new Zealand; and
  • fairly reflect:
  • of financial position of Te Puni Kōkiri as at 30 June 2007; and
  • the results of its operations and cash flows for the year ended on that date.
• The statement of service performance of Te Puni Kōkiri on pages 21 to 58:
  • complies with generally accepted accounting practice in new Zealand; and
  • fairly reflects for each class of outputs:
    • its standards of delivery performance achieved, as compared with the forecast standards outlined in the statement of forecast service performance adopted at the start of the financial year; and
    • its actual revenue earned and output expenses incurred, as compared with the forecast revenues and output expenses outlined in the statement of forecast service performance adopted at the start of the financial year.
• The schedules of non-departmental activities on pages 92 to 104 fairly reflect the assets, liabilities, revenues, expenses, contingencies and commitments managed by Te Puni Kōkiri on behalf of the Crown for the year ended 30 June 2007.

The audit was completed on 27 September 2007, and is the date at which our opinion is expressed.

The basis of our opinion is explained below. In addition, we outline the responsibilities of the Chief Executive and the Auditor, and explain our independence.

Basis of opinion

We carried out the audit in accordance with the Auditor-General’s Auditing Standards, which incorporate the New Zealand Auditing Standards.

We planned and performed the audit to obtain all the information and explanations we considered necessary in order to obtain reasonable assurance that the financial statements and statement of service performance did not have material misstatements, whether caused by fraud or error.

Material misstatements are differences or omissions of amounts and disclosures that would affect a reader’s overall understanding of the financial statements and the statement of service performance. If we had found material misstatements that were not corrected, we would have referred to them in our opinion.

The audit involved performing procedures to test the information presented in the financial statements and statement of service performance. We assessed the results of those procedures in forming our opinion.

Audit procedures generally include:

• determining whether significant financial and management controls are working and can be relied on to produce complete and accurate data
• verifying samples of transactions and account balances
• performing analyses to identify anomalies in the reported data
• reviewing significant estimates and judgements made by the Chief Executive
• confirming year-end balances
• determining whether accounting policies are appropriate and consistently applied; and
• determining whether all financial statement and statement of service performance disclosures are adequate.

We did not examine every transaction, nor do we guarantee complete accuracy of the financial statements or statement of service performance.

We evaluated the overall adequacy of the presentation of information in the financial statements and statement of service performance. We obtained all the information and explanations we required to support our opinion above.

Responsibilities of the Chief Executive and the Auditor

The Chief Executive is responsible for preparing financial statements and a statement of service performance in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice in New Zealand. The financial statements must fairly reflect the financial position of Te Puni Kōkiri as at 30 June 2007 and the results of its operations and cash flows for the year ended on that date. The statement of service performance must fairly reflect, for each class of outputs, standards of delivery performance achieved by Te Puni Kōkiri and revenue earned and expenses incurred, as compared with the forecast standards, revenue and expenses adopted at the start of the financial year. In addition, the schedules of non-departmental activities must fairly reflect the assets, liabilities, revenues, expenses, contingencies and commitments and trust monies managed by Te Puni Kōkiri on behalf of the Crown for the year ended 30 June 2007. The Chief Executive’s responsibilities arise from sections 45A and 45B and 45(1)(f) of the Public Finance Act 1989.

We are responsible for expressing an independent opinion on the financial statements and statement of service performance and reporting that opinion to you. This responsibility arises from section 15 of the Public Audit Act 2001 and section 45D (2) of the Public Finance Act 1989.

Independence

When carrying out the audit we followed the independence requirements of the Auditor-General, which incorporate the independence requirements of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of New Zealand.

Other than the audit, we have no relationship with or interests in Te Puni Kōkiri.

S B Lucy
Audit New Zealand
On behalf of the Auditor-General
Wellington, New Zealand