The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision has updated its guidance for Supervisors for assessing the adequacy of the internal audit function in banks. Earlier this year, I commented on the draft, and the IIA providedcomments in a letter to the Committee. 

E&Y’s latest survey (their 12^th) is an excellent and essential read for all concerned with the risk of fraud. I especially like the separate sections for different regions.

Most risk practitioners seem to use some form of visualization, such as a heat map or dashboard, to communicate risk levels. But I have my doubts as to whether these reports are as valuable as they seem. 

When I reviewed the updated corporate governance code from Singapore (see my earlier post on this site), I was struck by the guideline that one third of the board members should be independent. Is that enough?

The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) released an updated version of the Singapore Code of Corporate Governance in May. It includes a number of principles, each of which has a number of Guidelines. You may have seen my earlier review of their excellent guide to risk oversight.

This is a continuation of the post on the updated Singapore Code of Corporate Governance issued in May by The Monetary Authority of Singapore. 

I have been a strong advocate for:

• Building the audit plan so that it focuses on the more significant risks to the organization.
• Providing a formal opinion on management's processes and controls to manage those risks within organizational criteria.