Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I think this is an important motion, and I'm happy to support the amendment, as Mr. Chong has said.
The subamendment's implication that this is kind of a one-off typo—something that has never happened before—just doesn't really reflect the realities of the legitimate and serious long-standing concerns that have been associated with UNRWA. There are legitimate different views on how to respond to that, but it's not as if somebody just accidentally mistranscribed something and the language appeared there, right?
This is a question about material that was put in the textbook—not a typo or an accident. I think the amendment from Mr. Oliphant reflects that reality. The subamendment does not.
Thank you.