Westpac’s audit committee chair, a former KPMG chair with 25 years at the firm and a 2011-2017 leadership stint, attended pitch meetings by KPMG, EY and Deloitte for the bank’s statutory audit worth about $32 million annually.
Competing firms reportedly objected to the ex-KPMG leader’s presence but did not raise concerns formally during the process, wary of jeopardising their bids.
Insiders say he actively questioned pitch teams during the sessions rather than merely observing.
Assurances given to a parliamentary committee indicated the director would not be involved in the tender due to potential or perceived conflicts linked to his former KPMG role.
Westpac previously maintained that he had no vote on the audit selection and was excluded from the board subcommittee overseeing the tender process.
That formal line is now at odds with his direct participation in bid meetings, which are a core part of how audit mandates are contested.
KPMG declined to comment on the situation, and Westpac also did not respond to questions.
Large banks are struggling to balance governance optics with access to experienced audit leaders who often come from the big four firms.
Governance specialists say managing perceived conflicts is difficult in highly concentrated audit markets where senior directors routinely have deep ties to incumbent or bidding firms.
Parliamentary scrutiny of audit independence is likely to intensify as regulators probe how far boards must go to separate conflicted directors from lucrative tender processes.
