Yes. The whole section under the previous clause 375--debts, trust indentures, receivership.... Those are exceptional circumstances. That sort of very loaded, legalistic verbiage, in a sense, is fairly challenging.
Obviously, people have to obey the law. Obviously, if an organization gets into trouble, there's a whole process by which you can deal with that. That would be an example, Mike. It's overwhelming. Then people have to go to lawyers and they have to start a whole process. They're there to actually give service, and often with limited resources.
It starts to create a very uncomfortable feeling for organizations, whereas if you simply state that you have to be honest, you need an audit, you have to have an annual report, and you have to share results with your members, that's the basic stuff people have to honour.
You can make it much more complicated. If somebody wants to do something that's illegal, they'll find a way around it. How do we make it simple and yet not so general that people can say, “I didn't know I was supposed to behave that way”? Most people know what's right.