Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
My questions go to Mr. Amos and Ms. McClenaghan.
My first question is about absolute liability, unlimited liability, that is. What are the consequences for business practices in that context? Could the lack of a limit mean better prevention? Would it allow rapid response measures to be put in place to limit the damage as much as possible?
Often measures like that are put in place in order to reduce the costs of insurance. The company provides its insurer with proof that it is ready and prepared for any disaster. The insurer can then trust the company and reduce the amount of insurance coverage.
What are the consequences for investment? Will the lack of a limit make investors more inclined to finance a company? They could conclude that a company like that is prepared to deal with anything, compared to another company that could go bankrupt.
Generally speaking, what are the consequences for investors doing business with a company with limited liability, compared with a company that assumes the entire responsibility for its actions?
I would like Mr. Amos to answer that question first.