• Register
Return to: Home > News > Financial Results > KPMG and Deloitte give lacklustre evidence to UK Committee hearing on Carillion’s fall

KPMG and Deloitte give lacklustre evidence to UK Committee hearing on Carillion’s fall

The role of KPMG and Deloitte as external and internal auditor respectively of failed giant construction company Carillion came under heavy scrutiny by UK MPs during a Committee hearing.

Deloitte internal audit partner Michael Jones and KPMG audit partners Peter Meehan and Michelle Hinchliffe were asked why their firms did not detect or act on warning signs of the company’s demise.

It was, at times, a frustrating session for the select committee, who often highlighted the auditors’ inaction, but failed in getting any convincing answers from the professionals who managed, for most part, to remain off the hook.

Some of the exchanges did provide for good sound bites with Peter Kyle, MP for Hove saying that he wouldn’t trust KPMG to conduct an audit of the contents of his fridge.

Deloitte’s Jones defended the role of the internal auditor by putting the decision making ball back on the company’s management court: “We call out control issues we don’t take out those management decisions.”

Jones admitted that he had not been present at some of the auditor committee meetings and therefore could not answer on some of the potential warning signs of failure. While Jones assured the committee that this wasn’t an unusual practice, Rachel Reeves, co-chair of the committee said: “It might not be unusual but I find it quite surprising.”

KPMG’s Meehan had a hard job trying to account for certain of the discrepancies in figures on how much was owed to Carillion from their Qatar contract, the failure to receive payment from this contract has been cited as one of the main reasons for Carillion’s collapse.

Meehan reported that it was in the region of £70m as opposed to the £190m Carillion claimed in 2016.  Whereas the Qatari company has said that it is Carillion that owe them money. The select committee suggested Meehan did not do enough to fact check this amount. Meehan referred to the confusion of who owed who what money as a difference of opinion of which there was no right answer.

Asked if he would conduct the audit any differently if given a second chance, Meehan said he would not.

As the hearing was coming to a close The Work and Pensions Committee chair Frank Field compared the Big Four to a gang competing for audit contracts and asked the three professionals present whether the committee should recommend to the government to break up the Big Four.

But the question missed the bull’s eye as it was easily brushed aside by the respondents. Hinchliffe highlighted that to deliver on those audits with the required quality one needs scale and specialist knowledge.

Jones added that in his 30 years career when pitching against each other for work it never felt like a “cosy club”.

The hearing left both external and internal auditor’s unscratched, although their arguments looked feeble at times, and many of the questions that lay in that grey area between the auditor’s duty and the public expectations remain unanswered.

Top Content

    Blockchain and the Big Four: does it deserve all the hype?

    Although still in its infancy, blockchain is one of the most talked-about technologies of 2018. Will the blockchain bubble burst, or will it live up to its reputation as the ‘new internet’? Eleanor Jerome investigates

    read more

    Malaysia: Ready to show its strength

    Recent changes have enhanced the quality of audit reports in Malaysia, giving the profession a welcome opportunity to demonstrate its value to clients. Paul Golden reports

    read more

    China: Regulating the Chinese dragon

    Harsh regulatory actions and looming US trade wars have been dampening expectations in a Chinese market still full of potential, finds Jonathan Minter

    read more

    Indigenous Australians: New checks and balances

    With fewer than 40 known qualified Indigenous Australian accountants, Jonathan Minter speaks to Shelley Cable from PwC Australia about how increasing this number is an important part of improving the financial literacy of Indigenous communities

    read more
Privacy Policy

We have updated our privacy policy. In the latest update it explains what cookies are and how we use them on our site. To learn more about cookies and their benefits, please view our privacy policy. Please be aware that parts of this site will not function correctly if you disable cookies. By continuing to use this site, you consent to our use of cookies in accordance with our privacy policy unless you have disabled them.