[pud99]

I still don't get it. 40% control (isn't it actually 47% currently?) isn't two thirds of anything and isn't a controlling stake. Their (our) 40% (47%) can be included in the two thirds but they (we) can't call the shots unilaterally.

So what's the real deal?

Ford can't fire anyone because the province doesn't in fact have control of the board?
I don't know anything about the share structure of Hydro One so I might be missing something, but it's a private company now.

It is 47%. There is only one class of voting shares of Hydro One - common shares, which carry one vote per share.

For the limited number of things that require an extraordinary shareholder resolution (66-2/3% or more of the votes actually cast needed), 47% is a veto. A shareholder with 47% of the votes cannot force through such a resolution if at least half of the remaining 53% cast votes to oppose it, but that would equally be the case for a shareholder with 50% + 1 of the votes (which is the legal definition of "control").

Most things require only an ordinary shareholder resolution (50% + 1 or more of the votes actually cast needed). As a practical matter, a shareholder with 47% of the votes can force through such a resolution. For 100% of the voting shares of a widely held publicly-traded company (e.g., Hydro One) to be cast would be nothing short of a full-blown miracle. Indeed, even in an extremely high profile matters such as proxy contests (where people are paid to try to persuade shareholders to vote for one side or the other), having 90% of the votes cast is a minor miracle. And even in the wholly unlikely event of 94% of the votes available in Hydro One actually being cast, it would take just one of the other 47% of votes to be in agreement with the 47% shareholder for the resolution to pass.

So, barring a voter turnout the likes of which is never seen, the 47% held by Ontario is quite sufficient for it to remove the board of directors of Hydro One and replace them with a board of directors who are willing to fire the CEO, because that requires only an ordinary resolution (50% + 1 or more of the votes actually cast needed). (None of this necessarily means that it would be a sensible or inexpensive thing to do so.)

 

[sixrings]

A man of the people. I can't wait for my party invite

 

[narduch]

Maybe we'll find out in court who supplied CTV with those ugly rumours...

Patrick Brown files $8M defamation lawsuit against CTV.

https://www.cp24.com/news/patrick-brown-files-8m-defamation-lawsuit-against-ctv-1.3897886

Wasn't one of the accusers a friend of a CTV reporter/producer?

It looks like they went ahead with a story with flimsy evidence. I heard other news agencies were shopped this story and didn't feel they could report on it.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Doug Ford pro-automobile and climate change denier stances revealed. See link.

Doug Ford Will Fight a Carbon Tax and Scrap Kathleen Wynne’s ‘Cap and Trade’ Slush Fund

Doug Ford today visited a local gas station to announce that as Premier he will both scrap Kathleen Wynne’s cap and trade slush fund and fight Justin Trudeau’s plan to impose a carbon tax on Ontario.

“There is a whole industry of special interests and lobbyists coming up with new names, and schemes to try to fool people into paying this new tax,” said Ford. “But the people will not be fooled, they see right through the carbon tax. They know it is just another Liberal scheme to put the government’s hand in your pocket.”
Ford drew attention to the price of gas in British Columbia which was the first Canadian Province to introduce a carbon tax. In the ensuing years, the carbon tax along with a series of other taxes and levies have increased the price of gas in Vancouver to over $1.50 per litre.

“In BC it’s now open season on drivers and Kathleen Wynne wants to follow suit,” said Ford. “If you need to drive a car to get to work, to school or to pick up your kids from daycare, Kathleen Wynne will have her hand in your pocket every time you fill up your car.”

By eliminating Kathleen Wynne’s cap and trade slush fund, an Ontario PC Government will reduce gas prices by 4.3 cents per litre at the pump. Ford also announced that an Ontario PC Government will use every tool at its disposal, including going to the Supreme Court, to stop the Justin Trudeau Liberals from imposing a federal carbon tax on Ontario families.

“I guarantee you that the only thing we’re going to cap is taxes and the only thing we’re going to trade is Kathleen Wynne,” said Ford. “We’re going to scrap the carbon tax. We’re going to put more money in your pocket. Change is coming. And help is on the way.”

 

[AlbertHWagstaff]

All the election rhetoric is so unimportant and trivial today.

 

[adma]

Isn't it amazing how Dougie is appointing candidates instead of going to the grassroots voters, I'm sure glad he is not for "Elitists" running the Business of Ontario.

I momentarily read that as "Elliotists".

 

[Videodrome]

https://twitter.com/robtrench/status/988601842971037697

Not sold on Damian Lewis as Rob Ford. Chris Farley would have fit the role better.

 

[SunriseChampion]

It is 47%. There is only one class of voting shares of Hydro One - common shares, which carry one vote per share.

For the limited number of things that require an extraordinary shareholder resolution (66-2/3% or more of the votes actually cast needed), 47% is a veto. A shareholder with 47% of the votes cannot force through such a resolution if at least half of the remaining 53% cast votes to oppose it, but that would equally be the case for a shareholder with 50% + 1 of the votes (which is the legal definition of "control").

Most things require only an ordinary shareholder resolution (50% + 1 or more of the votes actually cast needed). As a practical matter, a shareholder with 47% of the votes can force through such a resolution. For 100% of the voting shares of a widely held publicly-traded company (e.g., Hydro One) to be cast would be nothing short of a full-blown miracle. Indeed, even in an extremely high profile matters such as proxy contests (where people are paid to try to persuade shareholders to vote for one side or the other), having 90% of the votes cast is a minor miracle. And even in the wholly unlikely event of 94% of the votes available in Hydro One actually being cast, it would take just one of the other 47% of votes to be in agreement with the 47% shareholder for the resolution to pass.

So, barring a voter turnout the likes of which is never seen, the 47% held by Ontario is quite sufficient for it to remove the board of directors of Hydro One and replace them with a board of directors who are willing to fire the CEO, because that requires only an ordinary resolution (50% + 1 or more of the votes actually cast needed). (None of this necessarily means that it would be a sensible or inexpensive thing to do so.)

Cheers for the informative response. Makes complete sense.

 

[SunriseChampion]

All the election rhetoric is so unimportant and trivial today.

This is true of all todays if one stops and thinks about what is truly beautiful about and important in life, as you have.

 

[PinkLucy]

From Steve Paikin: https://tvo.org/blog/current-affairs/spurned-tories-cry-foul-over-doug-fords-brazen-abuse-of-power

 

[John_Dee]

Well, I'm glad somebody in the media has made note of Ford's anti-democratic actions here. I was beginning to wonder if anyone had even noticed.

Paikin's article gave me a couple of cynical laughs: Ford actually accused Patrick Brown of doing exactly what Ford himself is doing now (because naturally he did), and at one point, Dofo even has the nerve to whine at reporters, "There's no one who hates appointing people more than I do!" Jesus! Is this asshole shameless, or what?

 

[JWBF]

He employs Judish people, including his wife, and sees it as a shield when his bigotries are questioned.

 

[PinkLucy]

Is this asshole shameless, or what?

That was rhetorical, wasn't it?

 

[pud99]

http://pressprogress.ca/doug-ford-a...media-host-to-run-as-an-ontario-pc-candidate/

 

[steveintoronto]

^ I'm just...err...ummm...*so shocked*...