Tesco's naughy behaviour
Extraordinary news reaches me about Tesco’s behaviour. Celebrity chef Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall submitted a resolution for debate at Tesco plc’s AGM was submitted with the support of 102 shareholders (representing something like 3.7 million ordinary shares). It is a resolution that challenges what Tesco says about its poultry welfare and urges them to set new minimum standards like lower stock densities and more environmental stimuli for the birds.
Unbelievably – Tesco have said that they will only take the resolution to the AGM if the person submitting the motion meets the cost of distributing the relevant papers to their shareholders. They are entitled to waive this fee, and the backers of the motion have requested that they do so, in the interest of shareholder democracy, but they have declined.
In other words, the resolution is dead in the water unless the proposers pay them £86,888 to print and post the papers out to all 269,000 Tesco shareholders.
So Tesco – as far as I can see you treat your shareholders just about as well as you treat your poultry!
More information – and the option to donate to help cover the costs – on Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall’s website.
Related posts:
- Obscene behaviour by supermarkets Pleased today that the Guardian – who called me yesterday...
- Bus driver behaviour I led deputation of representatives from older peoples’ organisations to...
- Exercising people power: my response to bank behaviour I joined in the economic debate in Parliament yesterday: Lynne...
- LIB DEMS DEMAND URGENT ACTION TO TACKLE ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR AT ALEXANDRA PARK LIBRARY Wayne Hoban, Alexandra ward councillor, has asked Haringey Council to...
- LIB DEMS CALL FOR PRESSURE ON GOVERNMENT OVER EDUCATION FUNDING Haringey Liberal Democrats will today call for the Leader of...
Comments
Add a comment
Published and promoted by and on behalf of Liberal Democrats, 62 High Street, Hornsey, N8 7NX.
Site produced by Puffbox in association with Harrisment.
This work is licenced under a Creative Commons Licence.
Wasn’t his motion submitted too late to go out with the ordinary papers though?
Part of the problem, I believe, is the new Companies Act, which I am told changed (by stealth) the close off date by which resolutions have to be submitted. It used to be a cetain amount of days before a company’s annual general meeting, now it is before the end of the company’s fiscal year!
Having submitted resolutions at FirstGroup’s AGM I think that MP’s let big business force this change
“the new Companies Act, which I am told changed (by stealth)”
There were around 300 sections of the Companies Act (which runs to over 1000 sections) that received no scrutiny in Parliament. In fairness there were large amounts of consolidation of legislation but I wonder if your correct whether it was one of those sections.