Nationwide ballot row ‘disturbing’, says former board candidate
Alan Debenham, who ran as a member-nominated candidate from 1999-2005, has criticised the mutual’s treatment of the first customer to follow in his footsteps
Ben Martin, Financial Editor
Friday June 26 2026, 3:10pm, The Times
The last member of Nationwide Building Society to vie for a seat on its board has said he is “shocked and deeply disappointed” by the mutual’s treatment of the customer who is following in his footsteps.
Alan Debenham, who unsuccessfully stood seven times as a member-nominated candidate to become a Nationwide director between 1999 and 2005, said that the way the customer-owned mutual was handling this year’s candidacy of James Sherwin-Smith was “a disturbing development”
He said: “Whatever members think of James’s campaign, they should be concerned if the rules of engagement appear to change when an independent candidate seeks to challenge the status quo.”
It is the latest twist in Sherwin-Smith’s attempt to join the board of Britain’s biggest building society. He tried to make it onto the ballot for election last year but failed after the mutual disqualified some of the nominations he received from members, meaning he fell below the 250 threshold.
While he secured the requisite backing from the membership this year, making him the first member-nominated candidate on the Nationwide ballot since Debenham’s last attempt 21 years ago, a row has erupted between Sherwin-Smith and the mutual, which has recommended that its members oppose his candidacy at its annual meeting in July 15.
Sherwin-Smith, 45, has two main complaints. The first concerns the society’s “quick vote” mechanism, which Sherwin-Smith argues creates an “unfair fight” that is stacked against him. The quick vote was introduced in 2006 and allows members to tick a single box to vote in line with the board’s recommendations on all the different resolutions, including director elections, being considered at the meeting. Because Nationwide opposes Sherwin-Smith’s candidacy, any member who uses this time-saving mechanism will automatically vote against him, which Sherwin-Smith says “heavily advantages board-backed candidates”.
His other complaint is over Nationwide’s decision to edit his election address to members to remove references to his campaign website, which the mutual told him it had deleted because it could not control where its customers would be sent if they followed the links.
Debenham, 85, said that when he ran for the board, Nationwide had allowed him to include in his election address his phone number, email address and the details of the Building Societies Members Association, where he is acting secretary.
“Restricting the information available to members is a disturbing development and another blow to mutuality and democratic member governance,” Debenham said in a statement on Sherwin-Smith’s website.
“Members should be trusted to hear different viewpoints and make up their own minds. That is the essence of a mutual organisation.”
Nationwide did not comment on Debenham’s criticisms. It has recommended that its members vote against Sherwin-Smith because it believes he lacks the skills and experience to be one of its board directors.
Nationwide is one of Britain’s biggest lenders, which serves about 19 million members and has assets of more than £382 billion on its balance sheet. Sherwin-Smith has previously worked as a management consultant and in the payments industry.
The society said last month that he “does not have any relevant or practical experience of board-level governance or decision making at a building society or mutual, or in any regulated financial services firm of comparable scale and complexity as Nationwide”.