Mr. Mark Garrett:

I will comment. As we stated constantly here today, we are seeing huge overlap in terms of what we are trying to achieve. We do have questions and we are not able to provide the certainty of those promoting the Bill in saying this is what it will do. We are asking some questions. If we take the simple act of a surveyor’s report in the seller's pack, what legal implications does that have? Does that shift the legal obligation to the seller from the position of the buyer or does it put the professional indemnity insurance of the person providing that to the seller or the buyer into play? We do not know the answers to those questions. We cannot give answers to those questions. We are saying we want to be very clear on the Bill and we are happy to engage about questions around things like that, as well as the potential costs of areas about which we have concerns. There will be more parties involved, not less. Those are concerns we have expressed in good faith through this process. They are genuine in these circumstances. There is clarity in regard to this in that it seems that it will not apply to the sale of multiple units for example but to single units. That is in the Bill. There are a number of other areas where we have questions in respect of its impact. What we are raising here are legitimate questions to a very significant legal process on which people rely for the purchase of the biggest cost of their lives. That warrants scrutiny. We welcome the fact that the committee is doing that, that is genuine. We come here in good faith for that purpose.