Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Sainsbury of Turville (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 1 March 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Company Law Reform Bill [HL].


Company Law Reform Bill [HL]

I shall deal with that last point first: it gives him the right to attend if he has been appointed before the meeting. Obviously, if he is appointed afterwards, that is a right which he cannot exercise. But there is no reason not to give him the right to do so if he is appointed before the meeting. To put the new requirements around the independent report on polls into context, this was a key recommendation of the Company Law Review, which had in mind the need to improve confidence in the integrity and effectiveness of the voting processes in quoted companies. The key issue is whether there is a problem. Yes, there has been a problem, although in time it may disappear. If investors lose confidence in the voting process—


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
679 c133GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Disclosure of information Audit Accountancy Company law Companies Directors Absent voting Liability Donors Expenditure Members Political parties Public companies Public records Meetings Voting methods Shareholders Rules of procedure
Legislation
Company Law Reform Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk