Where does this come from? It comes from the argument made time and again at the tribunals, where directors said they did not know what was going on. There is a requirement for people to ensure they try to find out. Senator Maurice Hayes put his finger on how this should be done – the directors should satisfy themselves, not by going to every corner of the company, but by asking about the compliance procedures in place in their company and whether there is an internal checklist to see if those procedures work. The directors can be required to do no more than this. They should have the responsibility of ensuring this is done and should be accountable if it is not. However, if it is done but there are still breaches of the law, the directors should not be held responsible, and could not be if they had discharged their functions under the existing terms. Terms such as "materially affect" and others are an attempt to do this.