Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: No, it is a revocable offer, Mr Bayly. There are various scenarios, including when there is a non-revocable offer. But if the only way to respond to the tardiness of the vendor is to withdraw the offer on a property that somebody actually quite likes to buy, their fate is in the hands of the vendor, and if the vendor is tardy by as little as 48 hours in accepting the offer, the brightline test doubles from five years to 10 years, and the practical cost of that could run in to the tens of thousands of dollars. So I wonder if the Minister could explain why he didn't or his officials didn't recommend that even with revocable offers that then put the ball into the court of the vendor—why that's the purchaser's problem. I simply don't understand why it would be that punitive.