For almost thirty years protesters have used single shares to attend, influence and often dominate Annual General Meetings of "disreputable companies". Campaigners can raise important issues, inform other shareholders of less publicised information and attract media attention.
Over the last year this exercise of democracy has flourished. The Lloyds Bank EGM (27/11/95) was organised to facilitate their merger with TSB. Campaigners from Lloyds and Midlands Boycon (LAMB) quizzed the chairman, Sir Robin Ibbs, on Lloyds' relationship with Shell. After an hour of sharp questions, security moved in and chaos erupted with alarms and stinkbombs. A pink panther entertained the meeting while other protesters stripped off to reveal the naked truth about Lloyds ethical responsibility.
LAMB wanted "to raise the consciousness of the shareholders" and at the Midland Bank AGM (31/5/96) they demonstrated the farcical nature of such AGMs. A pantomime dame questioned the directors while other campaigners organised a multiple choice quiz on Midland financing arms to Iraq, Turkey and other harsh regimes. Again the meeting fell apart with security chasing protesters to calls of "he's behind you!" and "oh no he isn't".
At the British Aerospace AGM (1/5/96) George Galloway MP accused the chief executive, Dick Evans, of complicity in plans to kidnap or murder Saudi dissident Al Massari, asking what was meant by the term "stifled personally". Outside over a hundred protesters gathered outside with a dozen dieins.
RTZ - CRA were bombarded at their AGM (8/9/96) by questions and criticism from Partizans, The World Development Movement and representatives of indigenous people from across the world.
The Shell AGM ( 15/5/96) s,aw the introduction of a new tactic by the company - keeping single share-holders at the back of the hall. Nevertheless campaigners got involved and managed to persuade the chairman to allow a minute's silence to remember the deaths of nine Ogoni including Ken SaroWiwa. Outside the meeting hundreds gathered in support witnessed a mock-hanging by representatives of the Ogoni.
GEC's AGM (6/9/96) was anended by members of Campaign Against Arms Trade, who organised a protest vigil and asked questions such as why GEC was expanding mto the global arms market which the chair himself described es ''difficult and declining". Strangely enough, the director in charge of exports seemed not to know whether or not there was an embargo on Nigeria.
The long-awaited Costain AGM (6/9/96) proved to be a classic example of a well disorganised AGM. The QEII centre filled with over 250 protesters with just the first two rows seating the long-term investors. On seeing a camera pointed at the crowd, one protesting shareholder told the chairman, Sir Christopher Benson, "It's against the law to film us without consent." Smiling, the chairman asked,"Are you a lawyer?" and the response came: "Yes."
Eventually, the discussion of the environment was moved up the agenda from No. 11 to No. I and the questions and criticisms flowed (Why did Costain take the Newbury contract? Did they expect to make a profit? Could they elaborate on their single sentence environmental policy? etc.) whereas answers came less readily.
An elderly gentleman in the expensive front row seats stated, " I do believe that your macho anitude to Newbury is a grave mistake and that by taking this contentious contract you will attract terrible opprobrium from the general public, which will not reflect well on your future." While the chairman could only apologise for the company's increased losses (£140 million in 1995), the Chief Executive, Alan Lovell, clung to notonously dubious statistics about popular support for the bypass.
The AGM ended with a ridiculous vote while protesters climbed the walls and dismantled the stage.
Paul Vernon