There are a couple of things. This list seems to be a little bit more robust than the previous one in terms of the numbers we have. We may need a third one.
The other thing I picked up on is that these motions are prescriptive. With what we have done in the previous motion and what may have been interpreted in this one, I want clarity, to put it on the record now, whether we have made a de facto decision on the scope by suggesting that the people here are only here to discuss the measures invoked on February 14.
I would like to ask the movers if they would provide clarity on whether or not they have pre-emptively narrowed the scope prior to us seeking the legal interpretation that we agreed, I thought in good spirit, we would wait to receive.
I would like to ask the movers of this motion and the previous one if they would be willing to clarify whether or not they would allow these motions to be interpreted in a manner that would be consistent with the feedback we receive from legal counsel, or if they have prescribed in these motions specificity that would limit the ministers and limit the members of the public safety committees that have been listed to only discussing those things on the 14th.