WHEN I attended Berrigan Irrigators Council last Monday night I was incredibly annoyed to hear one of the new Murray Irrigation Ltd directors claim the board has been dysfunctional for years.
For a start he has only just joined the board, so has no way to substantiate this claim. Also, it is simply incorrect. During the entire five years I was on the board, from 2018 to 2023, we had a good functioning board.
We had a good spread of member directors from all geographic parts of the footprint with different skills and varying farming industries including rice, cotton, corn, dairy, winter cereals and livestock. This is what makes a good board and leads to decisions that suit the majority.
Many good and sometimes tough decisions have been made. In 2023, the board had to make some tough calls as part of the business review.
This included options presented by management, as they are expected to do, that we knew would not sit well with shareholders. These were rejected by the board, and a well balanced position that financially stabilised the company while maintaining shareholder financial viability was selected in the best interest of everyone. This is the result of a diverse and well-functioning board.
The fact of the matter is the board became dysfunctional from November 30, 2023, when the two new directors joined the board.
They have now called a general meeting to remove two independent directors who they hardly know or have had anything to do with. One scheduled board meeting is not enough to form a view and call a general meeting.
I have over the last six weeks tried to get clear answers on what they want to achieve that the current board members would not support and who they will add to the board to get back to the required minimum of six directors.
When asked this question at BIC the answer was, “it’s not fair on the shareholders to disclose who they plan to add as casual vacancies”. So much for better governance, communication and transparency.
They have stated they will put in an interim independent chair until the AGM, but which of the three requisitioning directors will be chair after the AGM?
All this should be made public so shareholders know what they are voting on.
Apart from my concerns around the board structure, there is also a major concern around the company’s ability to get a new CEO. All the disruption will make it near impossible to recruit a quality CEO to the company.
It has been hard enough to get someone to relocate to Deniliquin and battle the tough water space and it will be even harder if the “yes” vote gets up.
I urge shareholders to vote “no” to put an end to the dysfunction and keep stability through what is arguably the most challenging time in the company’s history, with more buybacks around the corner.
Noel Baxter
Berrigan
