Requirement (bii), for 4 marks, was a discussion on the difficulties in measuring and reporting on environmental and social performance. Candidates often struggled to write more than a few bullet points here, and sometimes wrote from the point of view of the auditor trying to obtain evidence on key performance indicators. However, most answers did identify difficulties in defining performance measures on what can be quite intangible matters, and many also discussed the problems in quantifying socio-environmental issues.

Requirement (b) also contained 4 professional marks in relation to the briefing notes requested by the audit partner. Most candidates attempted a correct format and structure for the briefing notes, and the use of paragraphs, headings and an introduction meant that many candidates scored well here. Candidates are reminded that from this sitting onwards, professional marks are awarded in only one of the Section A questions.

Requirement (bii) was for 9 marks, and asked candidates to evaluate the options available to the directors in terms of the future of the company. There were many sound answers here, with candidates discussing the options in respect of administration and insolvency, usually leading to a comparison of the implications of them and leading to a recommendation.

Weaker answers tended to suggest selling the underperforming part of the business, despite the fact that the significant problem with its product would make a sale extremely unlikely, and others suggested just raising more finance, without realising that it would be very difficult for the company to raise any form of finance given its financial position and damaged brand name.

If candidates attempt the UK or IRL adapted papers they should carefully study the insolvency part of the syllabus. It was clear that a minority of candidates had no real knowledge of this part of the syllabus.

This 15 mark question focussed on money laundering and fraud. Two short scenarios relating to two audit clients were presented.