The following are some of the highlights of the matters discussed at the meeting:

• IASB Update. One of the concerns of the GPF members was the interaction of IFRS 9 and the forthcoming standards on insurance. The Technical Director described the solutions available through the existing IFRS 4 and the potential solutions available through the overlay and deferral approaches the IASB proposed in December 2015.
• IFRS Interpretations Committee Update. The meeting discussed:
  • IFRS 9/IAS 28 — Is measurement of long-term interests in associates and joint ventures, including impairment, in accordance with IFRS 9, IAS 28, or both?
  • IAS 16: Accounting for proceeds and costs of testing of PPE
  • Activities of the Interpretations Committee in general
• Concepual Framework. The GPF discussed some of the proposals in the exposure draft, especially around (a) the definitions of assets and liabilities, (b) concepts for recognition of assets and liabilities, and (c) concepts for derecognition of assets and liabilities.
• IFRS Advisory Council: Role and recent activities. GPF members discussed the Council’s recent advice to the IFRS Foundation, and agreed that consistency of implementation and relevance of IFRS are some of the key areas to consider.
• IASB Agenda Consultation and Trustees’ Review of Structure and Effectiveness of the IFRS Foundation. The GPF members were asked about the priorities they would ascribe projects on the IASB’s research agenda, whether the IASB provided the right mix of implementation support, and whether the IASB’s work plan delivered change at the right pace. Members discussed whether the IASB had issued too many narrow-scope amendments to IFRS since the last agenda consultation and some thought that change in general had been too rapid and that preparers wanted a period of calm. In the context of the Trustees' review the GPF discussed the relevance of IFRS, consistent application of IFRS, and governance and funding issues.
• Fair Value Measurement: Unit of Account. GPF members were asked to provide their views on the relevance of the measurement proposal included in the exposure draft (that the fair value measurement of quoted investments should be based on the product of the quoted price and the quantity of financial instruments (P × Q)). Many GPF members thought that P × Q was not a relevant measure for quoted investments.
• Disclosure Initiative: Materiality Practice Statement. GPF members supported the explanatory nature of the draft practice statement, however, they were were not sure whether it would discourage treating the specific disclosures requirements in standards as a checklist, disclosure of immaterial information or the omission of material information not captured by a specific requirement.

The full report is available on the IASB website.