Yes, it is.
Actually, Mr. Fisher, when you're talking about the substance of a motion and whether or not it's admissible, that's actually the definition of a point of order. Thank you.
The other point I would raise on this is that I'd like some clarity on the way this motion is worded now, and I don't need a week to look at it. It actually doesn't have any clarity on who is determining the relevancy of the documents. To me, that's problematic as well. It has also removed all of the stipulations around what would be confidential and what wouldn't. That's also, I think, such a substantive amendment that it would be its own motion. I would like clarity on that point, too, because it seems like a pretty big change from the original form and spirit of the motion.
Thank you.