INDEPENDENT ASSURANCE STATEMENT
SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES
Musgrave Group (Musgrave) commissioned csrnetwork
to undertake a limited assurance engagement over the
information and data within the printed version of the
Musgrave 2006 Sustainability Report ('the Report'). The
objectives of the assurance process were to check claims and the systems for collection of data,
and to review the arrangements for the management and reporting of sustainability issues. The
assurance process was conducted in accordance with the AA1000 Assurance Standard, and we
have commented on the report against the principles of materiality, completeness and
responsiveness. A review of Musgrave's performance against the UN Global Compact Principles
was not included in the scope of our work. Any financial information contained within the reports
is excluded from the scope of this assurance process.
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DIRECTORS OF MUSGRAVE AND THE ASSURANCE PROVIDERS
The directors of Musgrave have sole responsibility for the preparation of the Report. In performing
our assurance activities, our responsibility is to the management of Musgrave, however our
statement represents our independent opinion and is intended to inform all Musgrave
stakeholders including the management of Musgrave.We were not involved in the preparation of
any part of the Report.We have no other contract with Musgrave. This is the third time that we
have acted as independent assurance providers for Musgrave.We adopt a balanced approach
towards all Musgrave stakeholders and a Statement of Impartiality relating to our contract with
Musgrave will be made available on request. The opinion expressed in this assurance statement
should not be relied upon as the basis for any financial or investment decisions. The independent
assurance team for this contract with Musgrave comprised Mark Line and Jon Woodhead. Further
information, including a statement of competencies relating to the team can be found at:
www.csrnetwork.com
BASIS OF OUR OPINION
Our work was designed to gather evidence to obtain a limited level of assurance on which to base
our conclusions.We undertook the following activities:
- We conducted interviews with a selection of directors and senior managers responsible for areas of management and stakeholder relationships covered by the Report. The objective of these discussions was to understand Musgrave's governance arrangements and management priorities;
- We discussed Musgrave's approach to stakeholder engagement with relevant managers, although we undertook no direct engagement with stakeholders (other than employees and management) to test the findings from these discussions;
- We conducted a top level review of issues raised by external parties that could be relevant to Musgrave's policies to provide a check on the appropriateness of statements made in the report;
- Subject to the exclusions set out below, we reviewed data collated at the corporate level for accuracy and completeness, and against claims made in the Report. This process included a review of the systems and processes for data collection and analysis. Specific data were checked for consistency against these systems and processes. The scope of our work did not include visits to operational sites. Selected performance data at site and Divisional level were reviewed as part of our review of consolidated corporate data.
- We undertook an assessment of the company's reporting and management processes against the principles of materiality, completeness and responsiveness as described in the AA1000 Assurance Standard.
- We reviewed the Report against the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) 2006 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines (Draft), including application of the principles and use of indicators.
OBSERVATIONS:
Materiality - has Musgrave provided information on material issues to enable stakeholders to make informed judgements?
- With the exception of the issues noted below, the Report includes information on Musgrave's main sustainability performance issues and should enable stakeholders to make informed judgements. For the first time this year, the results of stakeholder engagement have been systematically analysed to assist in determining the contents or focus for reporting.
- The report includes useful examples of the role of Musgrave in supporting local community sustainability.We recommend that this issue should be explored further in future reports.
- In our statement for the last Report, we recommended that future reports should discuss the results of employee satisfaction surveys. In our opinion, although there is evidence to suggest that work on employee satisfaction is being undertaken, reporting in this area has not developed substantively.
Completeness - does Musgrave have systems in place to understand changes to stakeholder expectations and to provide complete and accurate information against the issues identified as material for inclusion in the Report?
On the basis of the method and scope of work undertaken and the information provided to us by Musgrave:
- For health and safety data, nothing came to our attention to suggest that these data have not been properly collated from information reported at divisional level. Business divisions collect and report health and safety data using differing systems and procedures. Our recommendation is that a consistent approach to internal collation of these data should be developed and applied, to support corporate reporting of comparable data.
- For data on energy used in buildings, nothing came to our attention to suggest that these data have not been properly collated from information reported at divisional and site level. Monitoring of energy consumption at site level has increased, which should further improve the quality of reported data in the future.
- For waste data, nothing came to our attention to suggest that these data have not been properly collated and reported from information at divisional and site level.
- For data on distance travelled by Musgrave fleet, systems are in place to gather data. Nothing came to attention to suggest any systematic issues with the collection of these performance data.
- For employment data and other social issues, nothing came to our attention to suggest that
data related to human resources have not been properly collated from the business divisions.
The following issues relating to other aspects of the social area should be noted:
1.Musgrave does not currently have systems in place that enable it to systematically monitor and report against the implementation of the new Ethical Trading Policy, including Musgrave's commitment to the UN Global Compact.
2.For data on indirect employment, no assurance is provided over these data at a consolidated corporate level. - For data on number of cases sold, systems are in place at Divisional level to provide these data. Due to different measurement methods between these systems, no assurance is provided over these data at a consolidated corporate level.We recommend that a consistent approach to gathering these data should be introduced and aligned with financial accounting systems, to ensure accurate analysis of normalised environmental performance data between reporting years.
Responsiveness - how does Musgrave demonstrate that it has responded to stakeholder concerns?
The work undertaken to engage with stakeholders on the issues of greatest relevance to the Group and the focus for reporting, provides a detailed basis for demonstrating how Musgrave has responded to stakeholder concerns.
Musgrave has developed policies for Environment and Social Accountability, Energy and Natural Resources, and Ethical Trading. Development of appropriate systems for monitoring implementation of these policies should now be undertaken.We recommend that Musgrave's actions to assess and address impacts in the supply chain should receive greater coverage in future Reports.
Energy targeting projects have been rolled out across some areas of the Group.We now recommend that Musgrave should consider setting further quantitative performance improvement targets at a Group level for aspects of energy and waste management.
csr network ltd
August 2006
