But there are two errors. It says that ‘under the new standards, an outsourced IA function must be headed by the CAE, this must be an employee of the company’. As you know the CAE can be in-sourced or out-sourced. And, I was also misquoted as saying that the ‘draft ASX corporate governance principles and guidelines suggest that best practice would be for MinRes to appoint an in-house chief audit executive….’.
What I said was… ‘…common practice for an organisation the size of MinRes, following the new Global Internal Audit Standards (as suggested in the draft ASX principles and guidelines) would more likely be, to have the Chief Audit Executive in-house reporting directly to the audit and risk committee with a functional reporting line to management – this allows for ease of access across the organisation and objectivity and independence in the flow of information. The in-house CAE would likely have a team, but importantly it is common practice to strengthen the team’s capacity and knowledge by co-sourcing with one or more external providers’.
While making light of the situation by quoting Oscar Wilde, I am conscious that IIA serves members who work in-house and outsourced, and the new Global Internal Audit Standards embrace the CAE being able to be either. This was our briefing, and it is regrettable that it was misunderstood. I have written to the journalist and the online version will be updated.
Looking at the glass half full, I agree with Oscar. While there is an inaccuracy regarding the in-sourcing or outsourcing of the CAE role, it is better to have directors and C-suite talking about internal audit in their organisations.