A topic for the AGM

Below, correspondence Quadrant readers might care to keep in mind when deciding if to patronise Bunnings, Kmart, Target or any other of Wesfarmers’ many brands:

TO: Michael Chaney AO, Chairman Wesfarmers

Dear Mr Chaney,
…I note that the Board authorised a donation of $2 million by Wesfarmers to the “Yes” campaign. I know that it is the directors, not the shareholders, who are responsible for the management of the company. However, this donation was not necessary for the management of the company being, as a matter of fact, outside the purposes for which the directors were put in place to manage the company’s business.

Further, this donation cannot be justified as a charitable donation as the Voice campaign is a political campaign and not a charity. Nothing should prevent you and your fellow directors from advocating a “Yes” vote and making donations towards the campaign as individuals but, in authorising Wesfarmers’ donation, members of the Board were not acting as individuals but were using shareholders’ money, not their own, to support a cause they happen to agree with.

In short, by authorising this donation in support of the Voice, it may be argued that you and your fellow directors breached your fiduciary duties to shareholders and should reimburse the company for the donation made.

In the light of this, I intend to vote against both the re-election of directors and the remuneration report at the upcoming AGM.

Yours faithfully,
Antony Carr