Yes, we have already had a brief discussion of this and the relevance of it. The relevance question is a valid point of order, and thank you. I think the colleagues understand that there is this concern about dealing with periods outside of the current motion--elections back to 1997 or the year 2000, with regard to other persons and other rules as they existed at that time. There would have to be a very significant amount of work done just to understand the context in which we would consider some of those questions.
Having said that, we can debate this for a little while longer, but the question has been posed. Mr. Poilievre still has three and a half minutes.
Mr. Mayrand, is there anything you wish to respond to in Mr. Poilievre's first question? No?