No. The G100 considers that mandating change is unnecessary in view of the current Corporations Law and other requirements. In many of these areas, as evidenced in the Business Council of Australia findings, the imperative is to remove regulatory duplication and contradictions rather than to impose another layer of requirements which may inhibit progressive behaviour on the part of companies and directors. The best encouragement for entities is to create an environment in which experimentation with reporting in this evolving area is able to flourish. In a competitive environment the priorities and reporting of leading companies will induce improved reporting by other companies in response to changes in community expectations. This is unlikely to occur under a mandatory regime.

This approach is consistent with the view of Samuel A.Di Piazza, the co-chair of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development 'Beyond Reporting' project that 'leading companies build sustainable businesses by embedding strong governance and corporate responsibility into their strategies and culture. By earning the trust of their employees, communities, trading partners and the capital markets, companies with a culture of corporate responsibility are able to generate value where others cannot'.
 

No. The G100 considers that directors are required to consider broader interests in addition to those of shareholders under their current obligations. Directors have a first duty to the interests of the company and would be derelict in their duty if they did not seek to ensure the long-term financial performance and health of the company. It is only by doing so that a company will continue to grow and add value to the community in which it operates. In order to do so directors must ensure that the company continues to give appropriate recognition to the concerns and expectations of the community. In the normal course of events this includes consideration of the impact of the company's activities on the communities in which it operates.
 

Yes. While there may be instances where directors have abrogated their responsibility the G100 believes that, in the vast majority of cases, directors take account of a broad group of stakeholders including shareholders, credit providers, employees, regulators, government and the community in discharging their obligations. This is also emphasised in Principle 10 of the ASX Corporate Governance Council recommendations. An awareness of the expectations of the community will engender appropriate behaviour in the general course of events.
 

No. At present there are no formal reporting requirements other then requirements in respect of matters to be dealt with in the directors' report. The G100 considers that the current position is appropriate at this stage of development in respect of corporate sound responsibility reporting. Specifying requirements and imposing a 'one size fits all' approach is likely to impede promising and innovative developments. In addition, in respect of listed companies, good reporting practice should lead to discussion of corporate performance on these matters in compliance with requirements for a review of operations and financial condition.