I have asked all candidates for the Australian Wool Innovation board elections the same basic questions, these are Laurence Modiano's complete, unedited answers.
Current employment/positions:
Director, G. Modiano Ltd.
Q: What specific skills do you add to the board?
M: I am an international wool trader and processor, close to the downstream wool industry and the important wool consumer markets. Based in Europe I am near the main centres of fashion, which influence to a great degree what the rest of the planet is wearing. I speak fluent French and Italian, which are very important in the fashion world. I would have firsthand experience regarding the success or failure of AWI policy at consumer level.
Q: Why should growers trust you on your corporate track record?
M: Since I joined Modiano in 1989 our sales have more than doubled in spite of a 60pc contraction in the European market. As the director responsible for selling I have a proven track record for increasing wool sales. Like the majority of woolgrowers I work in a family business. My livelihood and that of my company depend on hard work and common sense. That we are still in business after fifty years, in this most difficult of industries, speaks for our corporate track record.
Q: What is your assessment of AWI and what would you change (if anything)?
M: The current chairman has been on the board since 2002. Since then AWI has received at least $300 million of grower money and returned virtually nothing. That is a staggering destruction of shareholder value. Before Mr McLachlan stepped down he added more cost by bringing in three new directors, which Mr van Rooyen clearly supported. AWI has to reduce costs, re-assess the effectiveness of many R&D projects and, above all, bring in the best international marketing talent it can afford, and which it currently lacks, so that it can attract more consumers to this most undervalued of natural fibres.
Some argue that Australia should follow NZ down the pipeline partnership route. That may work for niche brands and products sourced from a limited supply but is much more complicated when supplying large international retailers. The Australian clip, although smaller than it once was, is large enough to require marketing of the fibre as well as the product. I would therefore like to make clear that I do not believe the NZ model is appropriate for a wool industry the size of Australia's.
Q: What is your definition of conflict of interest at board level?
M: The current AWI board track record does not inspire confidence that they know how to achieve growth. Directors need to act on behalf of shareholders, declare their interests, and absent themselves from decisions if they are at risk of a conflict of interest. It is essential to have board and management transparency, and explain how grower money is invested and the results and returns arising therefrom.
Q: What is your stance on mulesing?
M: Mulesing is a highly emotive issue because the wellbeing of an animal is at stake. For me the solution is a matter of common sense. Many growers have no option but to mules in order to save their sheep from a slow and painful death. As long as there is a clear effort to phase out mulesing, however, either through breeding or other scientific solutions which become available, I believe the only realistic immediate remedy is a properly accredited anaesthetic. I am confident that retailers would find this acceptable once facts rather than spin have been made available
Email a friend