Nobody could object to paragraphs (a), (b) and (c), which are very reasonable, and everybody should accept that the policies referred to should exist but the sting in the tail comes in subsection (4)(a) which states that the directors shall include in the report a statement acknowledging that they "are responsible for securing the company's compliance with its relevant obligations". I am concerned about this. It will scare any non-executive director who has been invited to join a company. The small print suggests that he or she has to make sure that the company's policies respect compliance, that internal financial and other procedures for securing compliance with its relevant obligations exist with the arrangements for implementing such policies. This is acceptable and what everybody would say he or she should do but the acknowledgement that he or she is individually responsible puts him or her under an obligation that he or she would find very difficult to accept. The high cost of putting his or her mind at rest must be considered. How would a non-executive director in this position handle the matter? He or she would state that the legislation refers to many areas and that it involves an unrealistic new workload and extra responsibilities for a company's directors.