Irish Nationwide Building Society's (INBS) 128th annual general meeting on April 24th promises to be more interesting than usual.

This year, members will have an opportunity to express confidence in managing director Mr Michael Fingleton, the controversial figure who has been a dominant force at the small building society for more than 30 years.

A group of campaigners, who are seeking reforms at the INBS, are urging members to vote against it. INBS chairman, Mr Michael Walsh and the other directors are urging a yes vote.

There are also other significant motions that, if passed, will bring welcome changes in the way the society applies interest rates to loans.

They include a move towards demutualising the INBS, which could trigger windfall payments of up to €7,000 to eligible members.

It took a fair bit of wrangling, and the intervention of the new financial regulatory authority, for the group to get its motions onto the agenda of the society, which is run for the benefit of its members.

The INBS board dismissed the five motions when they were presented last December and rejects the campaigners' claims that it was forced to put them before members at the forthcoming meeting.

In information circulated to members yesterday, the campaigners, Mr Brendan Burgess and Mr Shane Hogan, said this was not a personal issue against Mr Fingleton.

"Mr Fingleton has been managing director of the Irish Nationwide for many years and has publicly taken credit for its strong financial performance and low-cost base.

"Therefore, he must also accept responsibility for the issues that have brought the society into disrepute," they said.

They mention its aggressive attitude to borrowers and its frequent recourse to the courts to repossess properties, Mr Fingleton's "cavalier" attitude to the Flood Tribunal and the high salary he is paid.

The mutually owned society has never told its members how much Mr Fingleton is actually paid.

Last year, Mr Walsh, told those attending the a.g.m. that the society would provide greater details of the packages paid to the executive directors this year but this has not happened.

The 2002 annual report once again lumps together the total remuneration packages paid during the year to Mr Fingleton, INBS secretary Mr Stan Purcell and Mr Maurice Harte, who left in January after less than one year with the society.

These payments are listed as other emoluments and total €1.3 million, compared with €854,000 in the previous year.

In addition, a further €263,000 was paid to Mr Harte when he left the society.

He also received part of the €409,000 paid in pensions to the three executives, the spokesman confirmed. In 2001, pension payments to Mr Fingleton and Mr Purcell amounted to €258,000.

Despite media reports of Mr Walsh's comments, a spokesman for INBS said yesterday that the society had never given a commitment to disclose the executive's individual packages.

The INBS is the only financial institution that does not provide this type of information in its annual report.

The Irish Financial Services Regulatory Authority (IFSRA), which was instrumental in ensuring that members' views could be viewed on April 24th, would not comment on this issue of information disclosure yesterday but does have the power to influence greater transparency in this regard.

In its correspondence with members, the board of directors has expresed utmost confidence in the INBS managing director, paying tribute to his contribution to the growth and development of the society.

"Irish Nationwide has been, and continues to be, a real success story under the management and leadership of Mr Fingleton," it told members.

The campaigners are asking members to abstain from voting on the issue of demutualisation as a mark of protest against the "vague and meaningless nature" of the proposed resolution which does not specify a timescale for such a transition.

The board has told members to support this resolution so as not to tie their hands in terms of the options for the future.

It is not surprising that the society is coming under seige from disgruntled members.

INBS has never fostered a culture of openness and transparency, and has had more than its fair share of negative publicity with regards to its treatment of customers over the years.

However, members should be heartened by the intervention of the IFSRA at this juncture and should continue to exert pressure on its consumer director, Ms Mary O'Dea, to ensure the flow of information to members improves.

The key challenge now for the society is to find a buyer.

With the stock markets in turmoil, a flotation is out of the question and Mr Fingleton favours a trade sale.

The society produced an impressive headline figure for 2002, reporting a 26 per cent rise in pre-tax profits to €96.6 million.

Much of this increase was due to one-off gains from sales of development property interests and Government bonds.

Together, these items contributed €17.8 million of the €20.3 million increase in the building society's profits last year.

If this is stripped out, the INBS produced a 4 per cent increase in profits from its core lending and savings operations to €79.1 million.

Mr Fingleton was unavailable to discuss INBS's performance but issued a statement that described the performance as particularly satisfying.

He indicted that he intended to continue to focus on building the society's commercial property portfolio and to shy away from retail banking activities, which he says generate a minimal return relative to the executive time commitment required.

Mr Fingleton has total confidence in his abilities to continue to run the INBS. In a couple of weeks, he will know whether the society's members share this confidence.