MELISSA LEE (National): Thank you, Mr Chair. I think that a couple of speakers before, the Minister addressed our questions and then we're trying to remember what the question was. I was adding on to what Mr Bayly had said in terms of the point that was actually made in terms of exclusive covenants. I know we're actually getting rid of it, but when we define grocery products in such a way, where supermarkets have leases that suggest that supermarkets have certain activities which include everything from bread, eggs, even men's shoes—all of those things—even though we're getting rid of this exclusive covenant and the restrictive covenants from the leases, are we not stuck in the position where we're not fixing it? Because a definition of what a "supermarket" is in the lease, for example, as those things, supposedly supermarket activity, even without those covenants—when we remove them—and they can still act as though the covenants exist because it will include everything from pet food, and shoes, and even day-care centres, potentially, because that's supposed to be a supermarket activity.