Green Light for Fonterra's $3.2b Capital Return Scheme
Fonterra farmer shareholders have approved the mechanism for a $2/share capital return expected from the sale of its global consumer and associated businesses.
The report also finds that the Ministry of Primary Industries did not have a coherent crisis plan for a food incident. Both MPI and Fonterra have acknowledged the findings.
The inquiry team was headed by Miriam Dean QC and assisted by Tony Nowell and Dr Anne Astin; Professor Alan Reilly was an independent peer reviewer.
Fonterra chief executive Theo Spierings says food safety and quality are its number one priority.
"At the time of the recall, we did what was right based on the evidence we had. It was subsequently confirmed that the recalled WPC80 did not present a health risk," says Spierings.
But the report notes that having notified MPI, Fonterra had "no well-prepared (or reviewed or rehearsed) group crisis plan to implement, including crisis communications (particularly in social media)".
Fonterra took until 18 August to trace all the affected products, "a seriously deficient effort", it says.
"Fonterra did not effectively co-ordinate its actions with those of the ministry, Danone, and the Government during the crisis.
"Fonterra's communications were neither well conceived nor co-ordinated and lacked a tone that encouraged consumer trust and loyalty."
It says MPI had no single, coherent crisis plan for a food incident that it could implement straight away after receiving notification of C. botulinum.
It notes that the ministry's response was hampered by Fonterra's late notification overstating the certainty of C. botulinum and by Fonterra's drawn-out and deficient tracing.
The report gives MPI credit for many aspects of its response, "but it should have had better-documented decision-making processes, used more rigorous science-based risk assessment, and co-ordinated better with the industry to avoid unnecessary confusion among consumers and others".
Primary Industries Minister Nathan Guy says the report is a "very robust piece of analysis."
"The rigour and conclusions of the report, as well as the actions of key players since the incident, should further strengthen confidence in New Zealand's world class food safety system," says Guy.
