Ernst & Young's statement

Independent Assurance Statement to British American Tobacco Management

We have performed a limited assurance engagement on selected Environment, Health & Safety (“EHS”) data presented in the British American Tobacco p.l.c. (“BAT”) 2016 Sustainability Report (“the Report”)1.

Respective responsibilities

BAT management is responsible for the collection and presentation of the information within the Report. BAT management are also responsible for the design implementation and maintenance of internal controls relevant to the preparation of the Report, so that it is free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

Our responsibility, in accordance with our engagement terms with BAT management, is to carry out a ‘limited level’ assurance engagement on selected data in the Report (“the subject matter information”). We do not accept or assume any responsibility for any other purpose or to any other person or organisation. Any reliance any such third party may place on the Report is entirely at its own risk.

Our assurance engagement has been planned and performed in accordance with the International Standard for Assurance Engagements (ISAE) 3000 Revised, Assurance Engagements Other Than Audits or Reviews of Historical Financial Information. The criteria we have used to evaluate the Report (“the Criteria”) include BAT’s own criteria as set out in the Report, and supplementary internal guidance documents.

Summary of work performed

The procedures we performed were based on our professional judgement and included the steps outlined below:

  1. Conducted interviews with management to understand EHS priorities and performance during the reporting period.
  2. Reviewed selected documents relating to EHS management, to understand progress made across the organisation.
  3. Assessed performance data through the following work-steps:
  • Interviewed data owners and reviewed guidance documents to understand reporting processes and controls;
  • Reviewed disaggregated data and tested source documentation for a sample of data points;
  • Performed analytical procedures and made enquiries of management in relation to year-on-year performance; and
  • Assessed whether the data has been collected, consolidated and reported appropriately at Group-level in line with the reporting scope set out at on the reporting scope page.
  1. Reviewed the presentation of the EHS data in the Report, including descriptions of performance, limitations and assumptions.

Our review of the EHS data was limited to the following metrics for the 2016 reporting period:

Metric Units
Total scope 1, 2 & 3 greenhouse gas emissions Tonnes CO2e
Tonnes CO2e per million cigarettes equivalent (MCOE)
Total energy consumption Gigajoules per MCOE
Total water consumption Cubic metres per MCOE
Waste to landfill Tonnes per MCOE
Waste recycled Tonnes per MCOE
Percentage of total waste recycled
Fatalities to employees, contractors and members of public Number of incidents
Serious injuries to employees and contractors Number of incidents
Lost Work Cases (LWCs) to employees resulting in at least one shift off work
Lost Workday Case Incident Rate (LWCIR)
Number of incidents
Number of incidents per 200,000 hours worked

Limitations of our review

We conducted our work to express a limited assurance conclusion. The procedures performed in a limited assurance engagement vary in nature and timing from, and are less in extent than for a reasonable assurance engagement. Consequently, the level of assurance obtained in a limited assurance engagement is substantially lower than the assurance that would have been obtained had we performed a reasonable assurance engagement and we do not therefore express a reasonable assurance opinion.

The scope of our engagement was limited to the reporting period, and therefore 2016 performance only. We only reviewed data and descriptions of performance in relation to the metrics identified in the summary of work performed above.

Our work was limited to headquarters activities. We did not visit any local companies.

We have not provided assurance over claims made by BAT that are statements of belief or forward looking in nature.

The responsibility for the prevention and detection of fraud, error and non-compliance with laws or regulations rests with BAT management. Our work should not be relied upon to disclose all such material misstatements, frauds, errors or instances of non-compliance that may exist.

Our conclusions

Based on the scope of our review, our conclusions are outlined below:

Completeness and accuracy of performance information

How complete and accurate is the EHS data presented in the Report?

  • With the exception of the limitations identified in the Report, we are not aware of any material reporting units (as defined by BAT) that have been excluded from the Group level data relating to the topics above.
  • Nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that the data relating to the above topics has not been collated properly at Group-level.
  • We are not aware of any errors that would materially affect the data as presented in the Report.
Our independence and competence

With the exception of this work, we have provided no other services relating to BAT’s approach to sustainability reporting throughout 2016.

We have implemented measures to ensure that we follow the applicable independence and professional competence rules as articulated by the IFAC Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants and ISQC12. Our assurance team has been drawn from our UK Climate Change and Sustainability Services team, which undertakes engagements like this with a number of significant UK and international businesses.

Ernst & Young LLP
13 March 2017

EY Logo

  1. The 2016 Sustainability Report includes the print Sustainability Report , as well as selected data contained within this online performance centre, indicated by the Ernst & Young stamp at the bottom of the page.
  2. Parts A and B of the IESBA Code; and the International Standard on Quality Control 1 (ISQC1).