Mr. Falk has challenged that he was first on the list, not Mr. Dreeshen. That's what he has challenged. Just to be clear, I said that Mr. Falk was not first on the list. Mr. Dreeshen was first on the list. Mr. Falk is challenging my decision, because he wants to be first. Mr Dreeshen, from what we've identified, is first.
It would be a yes if you support upholding the decision I made. It would be a no if you do not support my decision that's been made. I think that's clear. If not, I can ask the clerk for a further interpretation.
Is that clear? Okay.
(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 7; nays 4)
Before we go to the speaking order, go ahead, Mr. Simard.