30-12-2011, 07:00 PM
Alex McFarlane Wrote:I think that Ken was trying to show that you could have a situation where everyone at the meeting agreed that an amendment made sense but the number of proxies cast for the original motion meant that it was carried even though the amended version was better. Or alternatively the motion was defeated because of proxy votes but that the proposed amendment would have been an acceptable compromise that virtually everyone would have been happy with.
The way round this is that the orginal proposal is passed, then an amendment is proposed, discussed and voted on. In effect it means that the proxies do not have a vote on the amendment since they cannot instruct on items raised at the AGM.
Proxies can, and should, only be allowed to vote on published agenda items prior to the AGM. Proxy cannot be a carte blanche authorisation to vote however the nominee wishes, only as instructed on the proxy voting form - this should list all relevant voting items and a check box for/against the motion which is the vote to be cast.