There is a different case to make in the other instance. It is now regarded as common practice – and admirable – to have a non-executive chairman. He or she acts on behalf of the shareholders and keeps an eye on the executives, particularly the chief executive, of the company. These people are being increasingly brought in to chair companies – particularly larger concerns – and it is they who should be appointed to audit committees. If such a chairperson is an executive, he or she should not be on the audit committee because he or she is part of the circle. However, a non-executive chairman who is brought in purposely to act as a balance against conflicting interests and provide an outside view is precisely the kind of person who should be on the audit committee. They do not have to be on the audit committee – the board may well decide not to have them on it – but that is the kind of person one wants. My amendment suggests that an executive chairman should not be on the audit committee but a non-executive chairman should be permitted to be on it and is worthy of consideration.