Assurance Report

To the readers of the Royal KPN Sustainability Report 2007.

We were engaged by the Board of Directors of Royal KPN N.V. (further KPN) to provide assurance on the information in the Sustainability Report 2007 (further referred to as The Report). The Report, including the identification of material issues, is the responsibility of the company's management. Our responsibility is to issue an assurance report on The Report.

What was included in the scope of our assurance engagement?

Our engagement was designed to provide the readers of The Report with limited assurance on whether the information in The Report is fairly stated.

Procedures performed to obtain a limited level of assurance are aimed at determining the plausibility of information and are less extensive than those for a reasonable level of assurance. To obtain a thorough understanding of the financial results and financial position of KPN the reader should consult the KPN audited financial statements in the 'Annual Report and Form 20-F' for the year ended 31 December 2007. We do not provide any assurance on the achievability of the targets, expectations and ambitions of KPN.

Which reporting criteria did KPN use?

There are no generally accepted standards for reporting sustainability performance. KPN applies its own sustainability performance reporting criteria, derived from the G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines of the Global Reporting Initiative as detailed on page 51 of The Report. We believe that these criteria are suitable in view of the purpose of our assurance engagement.

Which assurance standard did we use?

We carried out our engagement in accordance with Standard 3410N 'Assurance engagements relating to sustainability reports' of the Royal Netherlands Institute of Register Accountants. This Standard requires, amongst others, that the assurance team possesses the specific knowledge, skills and professional competencies needed to understand and review the information in The Report, and that they comply with the requirements of the IFAC Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants to ensure their independence.

What did we do to reach our conclusions?

We carried out the following work:

  1. A media analysis and internet search to obtain information on relevant environmental, safety and social issues for KPN in the reporting period.
  2. Interviews with relevant staff at corporate level responsible for the information in The Report.
  3. A review of the systems and processes for information collection and processing, including the aggregation of the data.
  4. A review of internal and external documentation to determine whether the information in the Report is supported by sufficient evidence;
  5. Checking the consistency of the reported information with external information such as the Annual Report 2007.

During the assurance process we proposed changes in the various drafts of The Report to KPN and reviewed the final version of The Report to ensure that it reflected our findings.

What is our conclusion?

Based on the above work we conclude that the information in The Report does not appear to be unfairly stated.

What else did we observe?

Without affecting the conclusions presented above, we would like to draw readers' attention
to the following:

In 2007 KPN made progress by formalising its corporate social responsibility (CSR) policy.
We recommend KPN to build on this in 2008 through:

  1. further development of the process for identifying the material sustainability issues for KPN (and The Report), including consideration of the results of dialogue with key stakeholder groups, and to report on this process next year;
  2. implementation of the new CSR policy in the organisation in the context of the company strategy 2008-2010 "Back to growth" including expansion of the CSR policy to the whole KPN Group, translation of the goals into concrete actions and measurable targets, and to report on this in the next Sustainability Report.

Amsterdam, 12 March 2008

KPMG Sustainability B.V.

Drs W.J. Bartels RA (director)