Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2021C01259:reg:11:p15
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2021C01259
Segment Type: reg
Provision Reference: reg 11 (pt 15/16)
Character Range: 49668–52788

act in a role equivalent to that of engagement partner with overall responsibility for public sector audits.  In such circumstances, where applicable, the selection of the engagement quality control reviewer includes consideration of the need for independence from the audited entity and the ability of the engagement quality control reviewer to provide an objective evaluation.

A33.         Listed entities as referred to in paragraphs Aus 21.1 and A29 are not common in the public sector.  However, there may be other public sector entities that are significant due to size, complexity or public interest aspects, and which consequently have a wide range of stakeholders.  Examples include state owned corporations and public utilities.  Ongoing transformations within the public sector may also give rise to new types of significant entities.  There are no fixed objective criteria on which the determination of significance is based.  Nonetheless, public sector auditors evaluate which entities may be of sufficient significance to warrant performance of an engagement quality control review.

Monitoring (Ref: Para. 23)

A34.         ASQC 1 requires the firm to establish a monitoring process designed to provide it with reasonable assurance that the policies and procedures relating to the system of quality control are relevant, adequate and operating effectively.[17]

A35.         In considering deficiencies that may affect the audit engagement, the engagement partner may have regard to measures the firm took to rectify the situation that the engagement partner considers are sufficient in the context of that audit.

A36.         A deficiency in the firm's system of quality control does not necessarily indicate that a particular audit engagement was not performed in accordance with Australian Auditing Standards, relevant ethical requirements, and applicable legal and regulatory requirements, or that the auditor's report was not appropriate.

Documentation

Documentation of Consultations (Ref: Para. 24(d))

A37.         Documentation of consultations with other professionals that involve difficult or contentious matters that is sufficiently complete and detailed contributes to an understanding of:

           * The issue on which consultation was sought; and

           * The results of the consultation, including any decisions taken, the basis for those decisions and how they were implemented.
[*]  Early adoption, in conjunction with ASA 315 Identifying and Assessing the Risks of Material Misstatement, permitted.
[1]  See ASQC 1 Quality Control for Firms that Perform Audits and Reviews of Financial Reports and Other Financial Information, and Other Assurance Engagements, paragraph 11.
[2]  [Footnote deleted by the AUASB.  Refer Aus 7.2, Aus 7.3 and Aus 7.4.]
[3]  See ASA 620 Using the Work of an Auditor's Expert, paragraph 6(a).
[*]  See ASA 102 Compliance with Ethical Requirements when Performing Audits, Reviews and Other Assurance Engagements.
[#]  For example, Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand, CPA Australia and the Institute of Public Accountants.
[4]  See ASA