3 questions asked at 2024 Wesfarmers hybrid AGM
October 31, 2024
Below is the text of the 3 written questions submitted at the 2024 Wesfarmers hybrid AGM held on October 31, plus a summary of the answers and some video grabs via Twitter. No early disclosure of the proxies with these formal addresses and no extra voting data in these poll results.
Q1. Did any of the 5 main proxy advisers - ACSI, Ownership Matters, Glass Lewis, ISS and ASA - recommend a vote against any of today's resolutions, including the re-election of Alison Watkins? If so, what reasons did they give and will you disclose the proxy votes before the debate on each resolution so shareholders can ask questions about the reasons if there have been any protest votes? Finally on the proxies votes lodged 48 hours before the meeting, why not disclose them with the formal addresses like many other companies such as Dexus, Brambles, NAB, JB Hi Fi, Carsales and Origin Energy do, in order to make more timely disclosure to the market and avoid AGM questions such as this one.
Answer: The chair Michael Chaney said all the proxy advisers supported all resolutions, hence there were no protest votes. He tried to claim I was asking for proxy disclosure 48 hours before the meeting, when the question was to do it with these formal addresses lodged with the ASX at 8.04am ahead of the 4pm meeting start. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.
Q2. Could new director Kate Munnings and the chair comment on the recruitment process that led to her appointment to the board. Which head hunting firm supported the process and did the full board interview any unsuccessful applicants for the role. Also, did Kate know any of our directors before engaging with the recruitment process?
Answer: The chair Michael Chaney gave a lengthy response saying they global recruitment firm to find a director, but gave them Kate's name at the start of the process and she came out on top. Watch video of exchange via Twitter, plus these extra comments about Tom von Oertzen's appointment to fill a casual vacancy on October 1, which didn't involve any external recruiter.
Q2. I've voted in favour of this resolution but I suspect there will probably more than 1000 retail shareholders who voted against. However, under your current disclosure practices, you won't reveal this.The annual report says that we have 490,000 shareholders but less than 2% of them will have bothered to vote today. Will you voluntarily follow the lead of Qantas, Suncorp, Tabcorp and ASX over the past week and disclose the voting results like at a scheme meeting, where you also reveal how many shareholders voted for and against each item. This will make public Wesfarmers retail shareholder sentiment on issues like remuneration and board fees, rather than having the voting results dominated by US-based index funds. Such disclosure will also stimulate future retail shareholder participation. You have the data so please let the sun shine in on Australia's chronically low retail shareholder voting rates.
Answer: The chair Michael Chaney waffled on for a bit, stating what we all know the law currently is and then claimed no one had ever suggested this extra disclosure be done, so it wasn't. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.
Copyright © 2024 The Mayne Report. All rights reserved
