4 questions lodged at 2026 Tower Ltd (TWR) hybrid AGM
February 18, 2026
Below is the text of the 4 written questions submitted at the 90 minute 2026 Tower Ltd (TWR) hybrid AGM held at 10am Auckland time on February 18 at Tote on Ascot in Auckland and via Computershare. See notice of meeting. No rem report vote. Market cap $532m on AGM day. Only protest last year was 12.7% against director Marcus Nagle. The proxies were not disclosed early in these formal addresses and there were no protest votes this year. They played an over the top tribute video to out-going chair Mike Stiassly which concluded as follows.
Q1. How many full time equivalent staff do we currently have and is this likely to fall over the coming 12 months with the rapid roll out of AI? Which parts of our business and operations are the most prospective for AI productivity gains and how energetically are we embracing those opportunities?
Answer: CEO Paul Johnston said Tower currently had 900 FTE. There was lots of talk at the AGM about leaning in on AI but no comment on whether the FTE number would be lower by next year's AGM. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.
Q2. Which recruitment firm did we use to assist in the recruitment of Naomi Ballantyne to the board, how competitive was the process and did Naomi know any of our directors before engaging with the recruitment process?
Answer: The long serving out-going chair Mike Stiassny said they were looking for a director with insurance and customer experience and "Naomi was the best person on the list by a country mile". Bizarrely, they refused to say at the AGM who would be succeeding Stiassly as chair but then announced it was Naomi who got the gig a couple of hours after the meeting. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.
Q3. If Xero and Fletcher Building can voluntarily put up a remuneration report for approval as the law requires in Australia, will the remaining directors under a new chair agree to do the same next year given that we are dual listed in Australia and many of our Australian shareholders would like to see such a move? New Zealand looks like a governance backwater by rejecting a say on pay, so why don't get with the program and do it voluntarily? It certainly wouldn't cost as much as the $500,000 climate report.
Answer: A typically dismissive response from a Kiwi chair when asked to embrace Australian-style remuneration report voting. Tower has a market cap of $532m but this precious petal chair Mike Stiassny complains that it would cost 50-100k to prepare such a report. Pathetic. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.
Q4. If the government can take the time to change the market cap threshold for climate reporting, why can't they get on with abolishing this pointless requirement to approve auditor pay each year? Does the straight-talking out-going chair agree this is ridiculous and it would be better to have an annual vote on the overall pay practices of the company, not just a resolution on auditor pay.
Answer: The chair rejected anything which would add regulatory burden that took away from profit. Apologies for the low volume if you watch this video of the exchange via Twitter.
Copyright © 2026 The Mayne Report. All rights reserved
