However, dairy section chairman Willy Leferink says this should not be interpreted as a signal that Federated Farmers is against TAF proceeding.
Rather, it is an acknowledgement of the growing concern among Fonterra shareholders and Feds dairy members about possible consequences of TAF, and that Fonterra needs to address those concerns and give its shareholders a final say.
But the Feds’ proposal has been knocked back by Fonterra Shareholders Council chairman Simon Couper. He says a group of farmers have been asking a second vote all along.
“We’ll never know until we talk to all the Fonterra farmers. The proposal for another vote from Federated Farmers is from their dairy section executives. The executives should find out what their members think,” he told Dairy News.
Couper says the council is yet to receive the final TAF structure from the co-op board therefore he cannot support a call for another vote.
A Fonterra spokesman says it will meet the Feds dairy leaders soon to discuss their concerns.
“We are keen to resolve the TAF issue within the Fonterra family,” he says.
In a letter to Fonterra following Feds Dairy Council meeting in Palmerston North earlier this month, Leferink details concerns, and relays a remit passed by the dairy council strongly recommending Fonterra’s board put TAF, once finalised, to an all shareholder ballot.
Leferink told Dairy News the remit was “endorsed by the full council” which “represents members from all districts”, an indication concerns with TAF are widespread, he acknowledged.
However, he says the council is only worried about certain aspects of the shareholders fund and he is “pretty confident they [Fonterra] can resolve that”.
“We do not want to judge Fonterra or its directors, but we are raising these concerns and awaiting answers. We just want our concerns nullified.”
Leferink refused to go into detail about the points put to Fonterra, despite the letter to Fonterra being leaked to media and partially relayed last week.
A media statement following the council meeting hadn’t mentioned those concerns, or even the remit, because he felt it appropriate to talk to Fonterra’s board and chairman about its content first.
“It is sad that somebody betrayed our trust [in leaking the letter] and made our relationship with Fonterra more difficult. I hope the board will still
