I have the opportunity to include an Election Address (PDF version) of no more than 500 words in support of my candidacy under Rule 22 of Nationwide’s memorandum and rules (see: Process to nominate and elect a Director of Nationwide). The Society Secretary has therefore asked me to deliver this to him at the Society’s headquarters, accompanied by the nominations I have collated, and a deposit for £500. The deadline to submit all of this is the Society’s financial year end (which was the 4 April in 2024, and is now the 31 March in 2025 – see LSE notice, FCA Mutual Register).

As the deadline approaches, there are a few uncertainties at this point:

Have I been successfully nominated? (The nominations I have received and have submitted are subject to validation by the Society to ensure that I have received correct nominations from at least “250 qualified two year members.” Over 600 people have sent me their details wishing to nominate me, and I have submitted all of these for the Society to validate.)
Will I be a Board recommended candidate or not? (This influences member voting, particularly when the Quick Vote mechanism is used.)
Will the Society use the controversial Quick Vote mechanism at this year’s AGM? (The Society has used this for the last few years, but none of these elections were competitive.)
Will the Society increase the number of board seats available i.e. to what degree is this a competitive election? (Note that there were two instances in living memory when a member-nominated candidate beat / unseated a board-appointed candidate.)

The election statement is distributed with the ballot pack (see last year’s “Who are you voting for?“), sent by post and available electronically, depending on members’ communication preferences. Providing a statement as a candidate is optional, but I think necessary, so that members can assess the candidates, what they stand for etc. Given the uncertainties above, however, it is hard to write the optimal, catch-all statement..

My election result likely rests heavily on the board’s recommendation, and the use of the “Quick Vote” mechanism, a controversial tool used by some organisations, not just Nationwide. The other dimension to this is how many board seats are being competed for out of the available candidates.

	Board Recommended	Not Board Recommended
Quick Vote	Very Positive for me	Very Negative for me
No Quick Vote	Positive for me	Negative for me

The Building Society Members Association (BSMA) is opposed to the use of the Quick Vote. It effectively encourages members to appoint the chair as their proxy, who votes on their behalf, following the board’s recommendations. Most members appear to use this mechanism: last year’s votes carried at a 95%+ approval rate. See the past history of election results I compiled here: Why I believe access to the Nationwide member register is needed.

There was significant concern raised regarding the use of the Quick Vote by the National Trust, as recently at last year, e.g.:

National Trust blocks referendum on voting system which ‘stifles debate’ (The Telegraph, October 2024)
National Distrust: The end of democracy in The National Trust (Prosperity Institute, March 2024)
Quick Vote is a ‘North Korean approach’ to democracy, claims Lord Sumption (Restore Trust)

However, as this is potentially the first competitive election for Nationwide building society, since the Quick Vote mechanism was introduced (the last time a member-supported candidate stood for election was Alan Debenham, 20 years ago, in 2005), it is not clear to me how the society will manage this year’s ballot. It’s entirely possible that I – or another member nominated candidate – will be competing against the board-appointed candidates, noting the convention that board directors need to be re-elected every year, and that three directors, who were co-opted during the year, need to be elected for the first time.

As a result, I am submitting different versions of my election statement to cover whether there is, or is not, a Quick Vote in place. I’m suggesting the red text in the below is removed if the Quick Vote is suspended.

James Sherwin-Smith

Independent non-executive director

A member-nominated candidate seeking election as a Member Representative

Skills and experience

James Sherwin-Smith is an experienced financial services and payments executive, and a director of several UK companies. James currently advises and invests in early-stage UK businesses in the financial technology and payments sectors.

He was previously CEO of Growth Street, a FCA regulated company that lent to small businesses in the UK. More recently, he was General Manager of Vocalink International, a UK company that builds and operates central payment systems for national economies across the world. He was a member of the executive team responsible for the successful integration of this business, following the acquisition of Vocalink by Mastercard.

Election statement

I am standing as a Member Representative for election to the Board of Directors. I believe representation by members and for members is a necessary ingredient for any mutual society. If you agree and want me elected to the board to represent your interests as a member, it is important that you vote only FOR me, and AGAINST all other candidates. Selecting other candidates may prevent me from being elected due to the “Quick Vote” mechanism.

Nationwide is owned by its members, and yet none has any influence on decisions made, as demonstrated by events surrounding the recent acquisition of Virgin Money, and the “Fairer Share” & “Big Thank You” payments awarded to only a subset of the membership.

Members of a mutual society must be able to hold the management and board to account, and their collective actions should deliver value for current members. Accumulating larger and larger profits, behaving like a bank, and building a bigger, more complex business for the future is of small benefit to existing and loyal members.

Nationwide should focus on making home ownership more achievable and affordable – the very purpose for which building societies were originally created. Nationwide must remain competitive, not only with high street banks but also with other building societies, and new, challenger brands.

I questioned the recent announcement of a 50% increase[1] to Nationwide members’ credit card interest rates when the Bank of England base rate was falling. Subsequently, the BBC disclosed[2] that members could choose to remain on their current rate for their existing credit card debt. New cards are now priced at the highest margin over base rate for over 15 years[3].

The Society has not held a competitive election of board directors since 2005, and not since the introduction of the “Quick Vote” mechanism. I believe this is not conducive to the way a mutual society should operate.

Please vote FOR me only. To learn more, please visit:

https://James4Nationwide.co.uk

[1] Nationwide hikes credit card rates by up to 50%, Daily Mail, 6 March 2025

[2] Watchdog on The One Show, BBC, 19 March 2025

[3] Is Nationwide becoming more like a bank? A case study of credit card pricing, James4Nationwide.co.uk, 5 March 2025