The Board was asked whether the forthcoming exposure draft on Phase A of the reporting financial performance project should require all non-owner changes in equity to be included in the financial statements but allow preparers the choice of one statement (a statement of recognised income and expenses) or two statements (an income statement and a statement of total recognised gains and losses - or similarly labelled statements).

A majority of Board members stated a preference for one statement, but said that, as political compromise, they were prepared to accept a two-statement approach as an interim step. The staff was asked to explain this in as candid a manner as possible in the exposure draft.

The Board agreed to issue the exposure draft permitting the alternative of presenting two statements.

Mr Cope and Mr Garnett signalled their intention to dissent from the ED, for the reason that they wish to require a single statement now. Mr Leisenring may dissent on the same basis, but he wants to see the proposed Basis for Conclusions first. Mr Engstrom might dissent if the Basis for Conclusions appears to prejudge the issue of moving to one statement in the near term.