Very quickly, Mr. Chair, I only want to point out the apparent contradiction between Mr. Godin's point of order and Mr. Guimond's point of order.
Mr. Godin was arguing that Mr. Preston was repeating himself and saying the same thing—which was relevant and on point—too many times. Mr. Guimond is saying he's not on point, he's not relevant, so there is a contradiction. If you are repeating yourself but still on point, how can Mr. Godin or Mr. Guimond argue that you're not relevant?