A/HRC/8/7* page 5 21. Belgium, France, Mexico, Poland and Portugal proposed that the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action not be quoted and that the agreed language from the preamble of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities be used. 22. With regard to paragraph 5, India and the Netherlands favoured the original text. Canada and the United Kingdom noted that the reference to Economic and Social Council resolution 1985/17 could be part of the text and requested adding the phrase “or any successor thereto”. 23. India noted that the bracketed text “any of the rights” should be revised upon agreement on article 2. 24. Canada, India, Mexico, the Netherlands and South Africa proposed to replace the last part of the paragraph with “to carry out the functions provided in the present Protocol”. 25. With regard to paragraph 6, Belgium, Germany, Poland, Portugal and Sweden asked for its deletion. Bangladesh, Egypt, India, Mexico, Morocco, South Africa and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) preferred its retention. Article 1 26. Concerning the title, the United Kingdom and the United States proposed adding “to receive and consider communications”. 27. With regard to paragraph 1, several delegates favoured retaining the brackets around the text “and to conduct inquiries” pending a decision on articles 10, 11 and 11 bis, while Canada, China, Denmark, Greece, Japan, the Netherlands, the Russian Federation, Senegal, the United Kingdom and the United States proposed the deletion of this text. It was noted that none of the human rights treaties providing for an inquiry procedure included such a reference. Egypt mentioned that keeping the bracketed text would clarify the competence of the Committee. 28. If an inquiry procedure were included, several delegates proposed the addition of “where applicable” or other similar wording to the bracketed text to reflect the optional character of this procedure. 29. With regard to paragraph 2, several delegations supported its retention. Egypt and the Netherlands noted that, if a reference to inquiries were kept in paragraph 1, paragraph 2 should be revised accordingly. 30. Bangladesh and Egypt suggested replacing the verb “receive” with “consider” in paragraphs 1 and 2. Article 2 31. Concerning the title, New Zealand proposed keeping the word “individual” while China supported its deletion.