A/HRC/8/7* page 15 118. Belgium, with the support of Austria, Brazil, Egypt, Morocco and Norway, suggested adding language from article 32, paragraph 2, of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to clarify that a lack of financial aid could not be justification for not complying with the Covenant. 119. With regard to paragraph 1, Argentina, Bangladesh, Ecuador, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Nepal and the NGO Coalition supported the revised text. China asked for the deletion of “on remedies” in the first line and the replacement of “effective remedies” with “effective measures to implement the recommendations of the Committee” in the last line. 120. With regard to paragraph 2, several delegations preferred its retention, if article 14 were to be kept in the protocol, to underline the voluntary nature of the fund. Bangladesh and Egypt noted that, while the fund would be voluntary, the protocol should not mention this explicitly. Egypt noted that the fund could also be established as a dedicated project of OHCHR. Article 15 121. Professor Eibe Riedel advised delegates to revert to the original draft text, because the Committee reports to the Economic and Social Council, not the General Assembly. Article 16 122. Australia preferred the original draft. Austria and Mexico preferred the word “undertake” while France preferred “encouraged”. Mexico and New Zealand suggested amending the bracketed text in line with article 21 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities “and to do in a manner which recognizes the rights of persons with disabilities to information in accessible format”. The United Kingdom supported the provision of material in accessible formats but preferred not to refer to “rights of persons with disabilities”, as they were not recognized in the Covenant. Article 17 123. Egypt (on behalf of the African Group) noted that the article should either indicate elements to be included in the rules of procedure or be deleted. 124. Several delegates called for the deletion of the alternative text in bold font. 125. Canada proposed new text based on article 39, paragraph 2 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, specifying that the rules “shall provide, inter alia, that: (a) two-thirds of the membership shall constitute a quorum, and (b) decisions of the Committee shall be made by the majority of the members present”. Some delegations preferred changing the word “develop” in the original draft to “modify”, to allow the Committee to assume its new functions without having to review all its existing procedures. 126. Australia, Denmark, Nepal, New Zealand and the United States suggested postponing discussions on this article until it became clearer which issues would be left for the rules of procedure. Japan proposed adding “and the States parties may comment on or make proposal for the rules of procedures, which will be considered by the Committee” to the first sentence.