That's a decent point.
If you're going into an election, and there's no overlap, and you want a ruling prior to the writ starting, or even if you're in a pre-writ campaign, any party is developing its campaign, advertising plan, get out the vote plan, or you name it, and there's an issue that comes up that may cause parties to rejig their strategic plan, I think it's incumbent upon the CEO to get that information that they're ruling on to all parties as quickly as possible. You're right, not into a writ campaign, but I consider any time you're in the lead-up to an election, whether it's pre-writ or writ, it's pretty important.
I'll go back to the in-and-out situation. That strategy was developed in the lead-up to and including the writ period. Had we had an advanced ruling prior to that, obviously our method of running that election would have changed. I think it's really, really necessary. That's why we don't want to extend the length of time unduly.
I appreciate the argument. I understand it. We believe it's appropriate. That's all I can say. We might just agree to disagree.