The purpose of the motion is exactly the same. We are not even adding any details, but simply extending the motion so that it is more precise, because it refers to an element that does not exist. The change does not really destroy the motion and does not make it invalid. It simply broadens the framework in which it applies. I therefore do not see why we would want to eliminate it.
We checked with the people involved and in our view, there is no reason to say that the motion was not presented. If we had moved different objectives, then I would agree that it should be eliminated, but this is not the case here.