Mr. Thomas said of the law, "Did we need it? Yes. But to the extent that we have it, no."

George T. Van Gilder, chief executive officer of TOA Reinsurance Company of America, based in Morristown, N.J., said, "Sarbanes-Oxley came together quickly and in an uninformed fashion, and like most pieces of legislation, there is a horrendous implementation period that we are getting past. It needs to be amended to make it more practical."

John P. Woods III, president of John P. Woods Company Inc., a subsidiary of Itasca, Ill.-based Arthur J. Gallagher & Company, the third member of the panel, said despite the reporting requirements, the law, as it currently stands, would not prevent insurance company insolvency and has no impact on the performance of management among insurers.

Mr. Van Gilder noted that the law's reporting requirements are very costly to business and it does not do what it is intended to do?stop corporate malfeasance. He blamed the failures of the law on career politicians who do not have an understanding of the business world.

"This is why we got what we got," he said.

Mr. Thomas said the legislation would lead to more directors and officers claims in the future, not because someone did anything wrong, but because the abundance of data created by the reporting gives impetus to someone finding something to file suit over.

"It's not that someone has done something wrong, but producing all that data adds more fuel for suits," he commented, predicting that there will be an increase in directors and officers suits in the future.

The three also discussed the relationship between insurers, reinsurers and brokers, and how that has changed over the past couple of years.

Mr. Van Gilder said that the reinsurance industry has become more complicated as reinsurers look to protect their interests and are questioning recoverables. Once a handshake agreement was good enough, but as risks increase in magnitude and become more complex, companies are more likely to seek litigation over questions of recoverables.

Mr. Thomas said unlike in the past, insurers increasingly must be clear in what the risk is that they are asking to have reinsured, and that a lack of communication is where a dispute will arise over the risk.

"The biggest thing that has happened today is that there needs to be an open and complete dialogue," he observed.

Mr. Woods said reinsurers, from their experience with asbestos, are looking for risks that are well defined and have a short duration of exposure. They are also seeking consistency in their buying patterns and not straying too far in their risk appetites.

One major strain between cedent and reinsurer, noted Mr. Thomas, is that companies like AIG seek to insure larger risks?once in the millions, now it is in the billions. Reinsurers are reluctant to take on such huge amounts, and that is creating some friction, especially when underwriters are seeking collateralization of the risk. He said it was a way of protecting the cedent for a longer term.

However, Mr. Van Gilder remained critical of the practice, especially over the expense involved.

"It may make the buyer more comfortable, but it does not make the market better." He added, "If all collateralization was required on all transactions, there would not be any capital left."