! THIS IS AN ARCHIVED REPORT  Please click here to view the current report

Independent assurance statement

undefinedIndependent Limited Assurance Report to the Directors of Wesfarmers Limited

Our Conclusion:
Ernst & Young (‘EY’, ‘we’) were engaged by Wesfarmers Limited (‘Wesfarmers’) to undertake ‘limited assurance’ as defined by Australian Auditing Standards, here after referred to as a ‘review’, over selected information disclosed in Wesfarmers’ Sustainability Report 2017 for the year ended 30 June 2017. Based on our review, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the Wesfarmers’ Sustainability Report 2017 has not been prepared and presented fairly, in all material respects, in accordance with the criteria defined below.

What our review covered
EY reviewed:

  • Selected information disclosed in Wesfarmers Sustainability Report 2017 as presented on Wesfarmers’ website under www.sustainability.wesfarmers.com.au as at 13 October 2017
  • Wesfarmers’ reported alignment to the self declared ‘core’ level of ‘in accordance’ requirements of the Global Reporting Initiative’s Sustainability Reporting Standards 2016 (‘GRI Standards’). 
  • A selection of performance metrics, as shown in the table below:
Performance data
Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions in tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2-e)
Waste disposed and recycled (tonnes)
Water consumption (megalitres)
Energy consumption (petajoules)
Workplace health and safety data (including number of workers’ compensation claims, lost time injury frequency rate [LTIFR], employee hours worked, and total recordable injury frequency rate [TRIFR])
Community contributions (AUD)
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employee numbers
Ethical sourcing audit program data

Criteria applied by Wesfarmers

In preparing the Wesfarmers Sustainability Report 2017, Wesfarmers applied the following criteria:

  • AA1000 AccountAbility Principles Standard (2008) (Inclusivity, Materiality, Responsiveness) 
  • GRI Standards, including the Reporting Principles for defining report quality (Accuracy, Balance, Clarity, Comparability, Reliability, and Timeliness)
  • Other selected Criteria, as determined by Wesfarmers, and as set out in its Report

Key responsibilities
EY’s responsibility and independence
Our responsibility was to express a conclusion on the Wesfarmers’ Sustainability Report 2017 based on our review.

We were also responsible for maintaining our independence and confirm that we have met the requirements of the APES 110 Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants, including independence, and have the required competencies and experience to conduct this assurance engagement.

Wesfarmers’ responsibility
Wesfarmers management (“management”) was responsible for selecting the Criteria, and preparing and fairly presenting the Wesfarmers Sustainability Report 2017 in accordance with that Criteria. This responsibility includes establishing and maintaining internal controls, adequate records and making estimates that are reasonable in the circumstances.

Our approach to conducting the review
We conducted this review in accordance with the Australian Auditing and Assurance Standards Board Australian Standard on Assurance Engagements Other Than Audits or Reviews of Historical Financial Information (‘ASAE 3000’), Assurance Engagements on Greenhouse Gas Statements (‘ASAE 3410’), and the terms of reference for this engagement as agreed with Wesfarmers on 21 February 2017.

Summary of review procedures performed
A review consists of making enquiries, primarily of persons responsible for preparing the Wesfarmers Sustainability Report 2017 and related information, and applying analytical and other review procedures.

Our procedures included:

  • Assessing Wesfarmers’ adherence to the AA1000 Principles and the GRI Standards’ Reporting Principles for defining report quality, including the processes involved at a Divisional and Corporate level
  • Determining whether material topics and performance issues identified during our procedures had been adequately disclosed
  • Performing site visits to corporate and divisional offices and sites and interviewing selected personnel to understand the key sustainability issues related to the subject matter and processes for collecting, collating and reporting the Performance Data during the reporting period
  • Where relevant, gaining an understanding of systems and processes for data aggregation and
  • Performing analytical tests and detailed substantive testing to source documentation for material qualitative and quantitative information
  • Checking the accuracy of calculations performed
  • Obtaining and reviewing evidence to support key assumptions in calculations and other data
  • Reviewing selected management information and documentation supporting assertions made in the subject matter
  • Checking that data and statements had been correctly transcribed from corporate systems and/or supporting evidence into the Report
  • Reviewing the presentation of claims, case studies and data against the relevant GRI principles contained in the criteria

We believe that the evidence obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our limited assurance conclusions.

Limited Assurance
Procedures performed in a limited assurance engagement vary in nature and timing from, and are less in extent than for a reasonable assurance engagement. Consequently the level of assurance obtained in a limited assurance engagement is substantially lower than the assurance that would have been obtained had a reasonable assurance engagement been performed. Our procedures were designed to obtain a limited level of assurance on which to base our conclusion and do not provide all the evidence that would be required to provide a reasonable level of assurance.

While we considered the effectiveness of management’s internal controls when determining the nature and extent of our procedures, our assurance engagement was not designed to provide assurance on internal controls. Our procedures did not include testing controls or performing procedures relating to checking aggregation or calculation of data within IT systems.

Use of our Assurance Statement
We disclaim any assumption of responsibility for any reliance on this assurance report to any persons other than management and the Directors of Wesfarmers, or for any purpose other than that for which it was prepared.

Our review included web-based information that was available via web links as of the date of this statement. We provide no assurance over changes to the content of this web-based information after the date of this assurance statement.


Ernst & Young


Dr Matthew Bell
Perth, Australia
13 October 2017

GRI Reference: 102-56