To the reader:
Independent auditor’s report on Dunedin City Council’s 2025-34 long-term plan
I am the Auditor-General’s appointed auditor for Dunedin City Council (the Council). The Local Government Act 2002 (the Act) requires the Council’s long-term plan (the plan) to include the information in Part 1 of Schedule 10 of the Act. Section 94 of the Act requires an audit report on the Council’s plan. Section 259C of the Act requires a report on disclosures made under certain regulations. I have carried out this work using the staff and resources of Audit New Zealand. We completed our report on 30 June 2025.
Opinion
In our opinion:
- the plan provides a reasonable basis for:
- long-term, integrated decision-making and co-ordination of the Council’s resources; and
- accountability of the Council to the community; and
- the information and assumptions underlying the forecast information in the plan are reasonable; and
- the disclosures on pages 212 to 213 represent a complete list of the disclosures required by Part 2 of the Local Government (Financial Reporting and Prudence) Regulations 2014 (the Regulations) and accurately reflect the information drawn from the plan.
This opinion does not provide assurance that the forecasts in the plan will be achieved, because events do not always occur as expected and variations may be material. Nor does it guarantee the accuracy of the information in the plan.
Emphasis of matters
Without modifying our opinion, we draw attention to the following matters.
Future of water delivery
Pages 39 and 40 outline that the Council has consulted on the future delivery model for water services and is planning to maintain the status quo, delivering water services in-house. The plan reflects these decisions.
There is some uncertainty as the proposal is yet to be accepted by the Secretary for Local Government.
Uncertainty over three waters infrastructure assets forecast
Page 42 outlines that the Council is faced with a significant backlog in renewals for its three waters assets. The Council has adopted a phased approach that, whilst prioritising critical renewals, aims to eliminate this backlog over a 30-year period. Planning on this basis increases the risk of disruption in services.
Basis of opinion
We carried out our work in accordance with the International Standard on Assurance Engagements (New Zealand) 3000 (Revised) Assurance Engagements Other Than Audits or Reviews of Historical Financial Information. In meeting the requirements of this standard, we took into account particular elements of the Auditor-General’s Auditing Standards and the International Standard on Assurance Engagements 3400 The Examination of Prospective Financial Information that were consistent with those requirements.
We assessed the evidence the Council has to support the information and disclosures in the plan and the application of its policies and strategies to the forecast information in the plan. To select appropriate procedures, we assessed the risk of material misstatement and the Council’s systems and processes applying to the preparation of the plan.
Our procedures included assessing whether:
- the Council’s financial strategy, and the associated financial policies, support prudent financial management by the Council;
- the Council’s infrastructure strategy identifies the significant infrastructure issues that the Council is likely to face during the next 30 years;
- the Council’s forecasts to replace existing assets are consistent with its approach to replace its assets, and reasonably take into account the Council’s knowledge of the assets’ condition and performance;
- the information in the plan is based on materially complete and reliable information;
- the Council’s key plans and policies are reflected consistently and appropriately in the development of the forecast information;
- the assumptions set out in the plan are based on the best information currently available to the Council and provide a reasonable and supportable basis for the preparation of the forecast information;
- the forecast financial information has been properly prepared on the basis of the underlying information and the assumptions adopted, and complies with generally accepted accounting practice in New Zealand;
- the rationale for the Council’s activities is clearly presented and agreed levels of service are reflected throughout the plan;
- the levels of service and performance measures are reasonable estimates and reflect the main aspects of the Council’s intended service delivery and performance; and
- the relationship between the levels of service, performance measures, and forecast financial information has been adequately explained in the plan.
We did not evaluate the security and controls over the electronic publication of the plan.
Responsibilities of the Council and auditor
The Council is responsible for:
- meeting all legal requirements affecting its procedures, decisions, consultation, disclosures, and other actions relating to the preparation of the plan;
- presenting forecast financial information in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice in New Zealand; and
- having systems and processes in place to enable the preparation of a plan that is free from material misstatement.
We are responsible for expressing an independent opinion on the plan and the disclosures required by the Regulations, as required by sections 94 and 259C of the Act. We do not express an opinion on the merits of the plan’s policy content.
Independence and quality management
We have complied with the Auditor-General’s independence and other ethical requirements, which incorporate the requirements of Professional and Ethical Standard 1 International Code of Ethics for Assurance Practitioners (including International Independence Standards) (New Zealand) (PES 1) issued by the New Zealand Auditing and Assurance Standards Board. PES 1 is founded on the fundamental principles of integrity, objectivity, professional competence and due care, confidentiality and professional behaviour.
We have also complied with the Auditor-General’s quality management requirements, which incorporate the requirements of Professional and Ethical Standard 3 Quality Management for Firms that Perform Audits or Reviews of Financial Statements, or Other Assurance or Related Services Engagements (PES 3) issued by the New Zealand Auditing and Assurance Standards Board. PES 3 requires our firm to design, implement and operate a system of quality management including policies or procedures regarding compliance with ethical requirements, professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements.
The independent Chair of the Council’s Audit and Risk Committee is the Chair of the Auditor- General’s Audit and Risk Committee. The Auditor-General’s Audit and Risk Committee is regulated by a Charter that specifies that it provides independent advice to the Auditor-General and does not assume any management functions. There are appropriate safeguards to reduce any threat to auditor independence, as a member of the Auditor-General’s Audit and Risk Committee (when acting in this capacity) has no involvement in, or influence over, the audit of the Council.
Other than our work in carrying out all legally required external audits, a limited assurance engagement in respect of the Council’s Debenture Trust Deed, and the relationship with the Auditor- General’s Audit and Risk Committee, we have no relationship with or interests in the Council or any of its subsidiaries.
Other than our work in carrying out all legally required external audits and assurance engagements and the relationship with the Auditor-General’s Audit and Risk Committee, we have no relationship with or interests in the Council or any of its subsidiaries.
Rudie Tomlinson
Audit New Zealand
On behalf of the Auditor General, Dunedin, New Zealand