—whereas, tying it to the expulsion....
We can't help it—this is going to be tied to some degree to the instant case and the matter that's before us. It's unfortunate, to some degree, because we were trying to do this in the absence of exactly that, but we are where we are.
I'm not sure that the instant case would be captured, and yet if we go with the proposal we've made under Mr. Scott's name, we would capture it, because it would tie directly to the one penalty right now that takes away the pension—which is one of the biggest hits you can make to someone—and that is the expulsion. If resigning avoids the expulsion, the easiest way to close the loophole is to just tie it to the expulsion. If there are the same standards, whether they resign or not, if they would have been expelled, then we would have achieved the goal.
The method the government is bringing in leaves a loophole that obviously is fairly big, because the instant case in front of us may indeed be one of those. So I'm having some trouble understanding, from a non-political—capital-P political—partisan basis why the government is going this way. I'm trying to avoid—