Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I have two questions.
The first one is on section 280 of CEPA, on the issue of due diligence This is one of the issues that were raised, and it's one that's troubling me.
The argument is made that they're not unduly prejudiced with the strict liability because they can raise, potentially, the defence of due diligence. Yet as I understand it, the new wording being provided by the government for section 280 is saying that if either the master or the chief engineer is found guilty, both may be convicted. I'm finding that troubling, and I would appreciate somebody explaining that. If it was that either the master or the chief engineer may be found guilty and either the master or the chief engineer may raise the defence of due diligence so they can be absolved of liability, then that would tell me that either one of the them can raise due diligence.
I would appreciate having explained to me how exactly that provision is to be applied.