Next week's Nisa-Today's agm looks set to be 'a bit tasty', to say the least.

While all the candidates are talking positively about their visions for the future, the issues that proved so divisive last year keep reappearing.

Nineteen individuals are vying for nine places. Never before have so many members been keen to get on the board.

Last month, however, it emerged that four leading lights within the seemingly defunct NMA had worked together to develop manifestos for election to the board. Mark Proudfoot, Ian Hunt, Anjum Khan and Karnal Sekhon had also commissioned a telephone poll of Nisa members, canvassing opinion on issues within the group. The pollsters were given express permission to use the NMA name.

This move has drawn an angry response from some retailers within Nisa, who worry that if the NMA has not disbanded, there could be trouble ahead for the board. So what's going on?

It could be viewed as a testament to the group that so many members are keen to take an active role. However, the interest is the latest sign of just how politicised the running of Nisa has become since the proposed merger with Costcutter was first revealed by The Grocer last May.

After months of claim and counterclaim, The Nisa Members Association - formed to retain the mutuality of the group at all costs - saw off the merger last October by actually reporting their own company to the OFT over alleged but subsequently dismissed allegations of cartel behaviour.

Scars remained this year but it seemed peace had broken out when, in June, the NMA disbanded, claiming their objectives had been met and it was time to support the board.

Despite some confusing statements, Proudfoot and Hunt insist the NMA has been disbanded and continue to make conciliatory noises to the current board and their fellow members. "If the board feels it necessary for the NMA to step back even further then that would be no problem," says Hunt. "The important point is that we are all standing for the benefit of Nisa-Today's."

Should the four get elected they would join their former NMA colleagues Krishan Joshi and Rowan Black, who campaigned openly on an NMA ticket last year, on the board. However they insist the official work of the NMA is done and they are standing as individuals, albeit individuals who happen to share similar opinions on the future direction of the group. "The issues that prompted the NMA have passed and new matters such as low prices and profitability are now top of the agenda," says Hunt. "These are not issues for the NMA, either now or in the future."

Hunt and Proudfoot have even called for a joint public statement with the board "to allay any fears of a return to the level of their previous relationship and to underline its inactive status".

So far the Nisa board has refused to respond to the overtures, partly because it never officially recognised the group in the first place. Why is the spectre of the group still causing so much debate in the rank and file?

It all stems back to the OFT complaint. While it certainly achieved its goal of blocking the merger, it was a high-risk strategy to say the least. A company found guilty of cartel behaviour faces punitive fines of up to a third of its annual turnover. In light of such uncertainty, Kaupthing, the private equity backer behind the deal, understandably got cold feet.

While many members were either against or at least not supportive of the merger, there was considerable opposition to the tactic of reporting their own company to the authorities. Others felt cheated they did not get to vote themselves on the merger.

This ill-feeling was summed up by a Nisa member earlier this month who sent out a bitter email to Nisa members - entitled concerned-i-am@hotmail.co.uk - attacking the NMA. "Without doubt the problems these individuals have caused over the past 18 months have cost Nisa members dearly," it claimed (see right).

The unidentified member also attacks the NMA for using monies donated by members to create actions against the company. "None of this would seem to be the good governance model they continually harp on about," it adds. This email has sparked another anonymous communication - entitled truetransparencywantedatnisa@hotmail.co.uk - in support of the NMA. This praises the rebels for saving his company while accusing Nisa-Today's of "wasting more than £5m on the aborted project".

Nisa-Today's current board declined to comment on the arguments raging among its membership but chief executive Neil Turton says: "The passion that members have for Nisa-Today's is one of the important assets that makes the group so successful [but] Nisa-Today's works best when members are united behind trading goals. The company is getting on with business, sales are up and new members are joining. We look forward to working with the directors elected and continuing the excellent progress of 2007."

Whether or not Turton will see the different factions successfully come together remains to be seen. On top of the four candidates with NMA connections, Proudfoot claims a further seven of the 19 board hopefuls also attended NMA meetings called to oppose the merger. Two more, Kishor Patel and Jim Amabile, formed the short-lived True Nisa Members group to stand in direct opposition to the NMA.

"I was led to believe the NMA disbanded earlier this year," says one candidate. "I just hope the members get elected for the right reasons, that they have the right calibre, knowledge of the sector and vision to take Nisa-Today's forward."

He adds that since last year the company culture and governance have changed, with members having more say in the running of the company and greater access to the board.

One board loyalist was even more blunt: "I don't want this to sound like sour grapes, but these NMA guys have to make up their minds."

Hunt says there will be an NMA meeting in December to give its members the opportunity to officially dissolve the association. "There doesn't seem to be anything else that can be done to dispel rumours of an NMA comeback. If there is, please tell us," he says.

Perhaps, for some members, they may have been better off holding this meeting before the agm. With the issues far from resolved in the run up to the election, the sparks are certainly going to be flying in Scunthrope next week.Claims and counterclaims

These are the two emails

that reignited the row:

Email name: concerned-i-am@hotmail.co.uk

Why have the NMA commissioned telephone research? Is it because they [think] they can manipulate the voting procedure? Will the problems these individuals have caused continue?

The majority of the significant costs on legal matters were spent defending the company against actions by those opposed to the company.

What information has the NMA made available on their own finances and how has this been spent?

Email name: truetransparency

wantedatnisa@hotmail.co.uk

The Nisa Executive made serious mistakes in the 'product vision' rollout of the new warehouse, resulting in Nisa members footing the bill with out-of-stocks in stores.

The Nisa Executive made a very large contribution to certain individuals, lawyers and accounts trying to allow Costcutter to swallow Nisa.

The costs relating to the merger discussion [were] £2.185m. Why?

Nisa members are out of pocket by at least £5m. The contribution I made to the NMA was well spent. They have not plundered my company for £5m. They have saved me my company.

Topics