David Cameron has given informal private assurance to BP that any move to take over the company will be resisted. It is, however, unclear what the government would do if faced with a takeover. The Government could erect a few obstacles in hurry and hope for the bidder to go away as it did in the Pfizer Inc. (NYSE:PFE) bid for AstraZeneca plc (ADR)(NYSE:AZN).
There are two options for the government when faced with major takeover from overseas. The first is an open doors policy in which the shareholders decide. Such laissez faire approach is currently Britain’s current policy. The two notable exceptions are defence and media. The other policy is that of public interest test for major takeover bids.
In the abortive takeover bid by Pfizer, it was noted that the US bidder had a history of making deep cuts in research and development budgets. It was therefore felt that it would not be in the interest of the public to have AstraZeneca be taken over by Pfizer.
It should, however, be noted that the Government has no “golden share” in BP that could protect BP from a takeover through conventional means. The rights of shareholders do matter, but another view is that other factors should be taken into consideration. These considerations like the quality of UK’s long-term science base in case of AstraZeneca also play a role.
There are voices in Britain who feel that the Government instead of bargaining with overseas bidder straight away says no. The Government seems to want a power of veto over the deal but does not seem prepared to say so.
The view from FT on the other hand is that of a hands-off approach. FT believes that the Government should steer away from the functioning of the company and let shareholders decide company’s future. According to this school of thought. The Government has not bought shares to determine the company’s future.
