--okay--I actually I think that Mr. Richards, to go back to this issue, should have a say in this matter, because he has a motion. You should hear from him on his motion that sits before Mr. Easter's motion. Your ruling has an impact on Mr. Richards, yet you have not heard from him.
I think it would be premature for you to rule on the eligibility of Mr. Easter's motion if you have not heard from MPs who have motions that sit in front of Mr. Easter's motion and would be materially affected by the ruling you give.
Even if your ruling is in favour of everything that we've been saying, or that I've been saying, it will be challenged.