| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:This weekend in parliament & beyond | |
| Posted by: | Robert Fish | |
| Date/Time: | 20/10/19 18:51:00 |
| Your analogy's interesting, but also misleading. Yes, a tiny majority would be sufficient to authorise a change in direction of a business, but not in its constitution. In the UK a company's Articles of Association can only be amended by a special resolution, i.e. one which requires a majority of at least 75% of the votes cast by shareholders. There is a similar requirement in most other jurisdictions. If a 75% vote is thought a necessary precaution in the case of a company, isn't it a nonsense to make such a fundamental change in the constitution of a country on the basis of a mere 52%? |