Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I want to bring to the attention of my colleagues a very important and significant economic milestone in northeastern Pennsylvania that will be celebrated in August. Procter & Gamble's Mehoopany, Pennsylvania, paper products facility, which has been in operation since 1966, will be commemorating its 40th year with an open house and anniversary ceremonies on August 17, 18 and 19.

The Mehoopany plant is the largest P&G plant in North America. It was the first paper products plant built by Procter & Gamble after the company's acquisition of the Charmin Paper Products Company in 1957. It is one of seven P&G paper products plants in the United States and one of more than 70 plants of all products.

I am very proud of the contribution the plant and its workforce provide to our regional and national economy. As a lifelong resident of Wyoming County, where the plant is located, I have seen friends and neighbors for the past four decades benefit from wonderful career opportunities and the ability to earn an honest, stable living at the Mehoopany plant.

The plant is a cornerstone of economic growth and stability in my region with its 2,300 employees and payroll of $175,000,000. In addition, there are another 4,000 people employed as suppliers and vendors. Plant employees live in six northeastern Pennsylvania counties--Bradford, Lackawanna, Luzerne, Sullivan, Susquehanna and Wyoming.

Procter & Gamble gives back to the people of the region with community and charitable giving of nearly $450,000.

The people of my region are very proud of the role the Mehoopany plant plays in providing essential products to the daily lives of our nation's citizens. Consumers in this country benefit from the fine array of paper products, including Bounty towels and napkins, Charmin toilet tissue and Pampers and Luvs Diapers. Products produced at the facility reach over 1,000,000 consumers each day.

I want to offer my congratulations to the employees and management of the Procter & Gamble Mehoopany plant as they celebrate their first 40 years, meet current challenges and look forward to the continued growth of the plant.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution for many reasons. But one is that I know we are achieving real progress in Iraq and Afghanistan. I know this not from government reports or media sources, but from two fine Pennsylvanians. I want to quote from an e-mail I received this morning from a constituent, an Army officer in northwest Iraq commanding the military transition team.

And he writes, ``There are many positive things going on over here that the American public never hear about. My little 10-man team contributed over 150 boxes of school supplies to the schools in my area. Other units purchased grain to give out to small villages. I am very proud of the accomplishments of U.S. and Iraqi forces and it truly is a shame that all of the news tends to be negative towards the activities of the soldiers, both American and Iraqi who are working very hard every day to make this country safe.''

I am very pleased and honored this summer to have an intern, Mike Wright, who is a soldier in the 82nd Airborne. When he arrived in Afghanistan in July 2002, the people had nothing: no schools, no healthcare, no paved roads. But in 7 months his unit helped build the first school and health clinic. When his unit came back to Afghanistan in late 2004, it was a different place. New facilities, factories, more electricity, and miles of paved roads.

When arriving in the village, he tells me his unit would be greeted by small

children, smiling youngsters throwing colorful plastic flowers at them. These examples are among many that illustrate real progress, laying a foundation for future peace, shaping the world where the terrorist message will fall on deaf ears.

Mike told me this also, ``The Afghani war veterans, the old-timers have asked him, why did you abandon us when the Soviets left?''

Today their biggest fear is that we will leave before the mission is done and allow the Taliban or other tyrants to take over. We must know that the Iraqi civilians remember 1991 and fear the same thing. We must complete this mission.

Mr. Speaker, I know that we are achieving real progress in Iraq and Afghanistan. I know this not only from government and media sources, but from two Pennsylvanians.

I want to quote from an email I received this morning from a constituent, an Army officer in Northwest Iraq commanding a Military Transition Team:

``There are many positive things going on over here that the American public never hears about . . . My little 10-man team contributed over 150 boxes of school supplies to the many schools in my area . . . Other units took up a collection and purchased grain to give out to one very small, poor village. I am very proud of the accomplishments of U.S. and Iraqi forces and it truly is a shame that all the news tends to be negative toward the activities of the soldiers (American and Iraqi) who are working very hard every day to make this country safe.''

My summer intern was a soldier in the 82nd Airborne Division. When he arrived in Afghanistan in July, 2002, the people had nothing--no schools, no health care, no paved roads. But in seven months, his unit helped build the first school and health clinic.

When his unit went back to Afghanistan in late 2004, it was a different place--new facilities and factories, more electricity, and miles of paved roads. When arriving in a village, his unit was greeted by smiling youngsters mobbing them, throwing plastic flowers.

These examples are among many that illustrate real progress--laying a foundation for future peace, shaping a world where the terrorist message will fall on deaf ears.

My intern from the 82nd also told me this: Afghani war veterans, the ``old-timers,'' asked, ``Why did you abandon us when the Soviets pulled out?'' Today their biggest fear is that we will leave before the mission is done, and allow the Taliban or other tyrants to take over. Iraqi civilians remember 1991 and fear the same thing.

We must complete the mission.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the foreign operations bill for 2007. The legislation before us is a fair and fiscally responsible bill that sensibly promotes U.S. foreign policy.

I would like to commend Chairman Kolbe on a job well done. He is an effective leader with a strong work ethic, a balanced approach and a remarkable knowledge and command of the subject matter. I have learned a great deal from you, Mr. Chairman, as a member of your subcommittee. As you leave Congress, I wish you the kind of success and respect that you have earned here in the House of Representatives.

This foreign operations bill is a solid bipartisan piece of legislation that helps our government meet our objectives abroad and in turn make America more secure. The bill is $2.4 billion below the President's request, but in light of the many domestic needs here in the U.S., I agree with the chairman that the allocation is fair. Tough choices had to be made to fund our international priorities, and I believe he has made the right choices in setting these priorities.

The bill provides reasonable increases in assistance to our allies in the war on terror, the Millennium Challenge Corporation, and international health objectives that fight the spread of diseases such as AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis. It provides funds for Afghanistan, including nearly $300 million for illegal drug interdiction and law enforcement. The increase in poppy production in Afghanistan is of particular concern to the subcommittee, and these funds are crucial in curbing this very real drug problem.

The bill also includes assistance for Iraq. I know it is a priority of the chairman to fund Iraq and Afghanistan assistance programs in regular appropriations bills and less in supplementals. We are one step closer to doing that in this bill. This bill before us is an important measure that successfully fulfills our commitments abroad and as a result makes America stronger and more secure. I ask for its full support.

Mr. Chairman, the Interior and Environmental appropriations bill we have before us today is a responsible, balanced piece of legislation that very much deserves our support. It might not be a perfect bill, but it is the best possible product given the tight budget restraints that we have had trying to control Federal spending. Chairman Taylor and Ranking Member Dicks deserve our respect and gratitude for drafting a bill which funds a variety of Federal responsibilities, including our national parks, our Federal forests, abandoned mine reclamation, fish and wildlife resources, EPA, Indian programs, museums and arts agencies.

This is a bipartisan bill, and it is the product of fair and impartial hearings.

I think it is fitting that this first appropriations bill of the season shows that it is funded at $211 million below the current fiscal year. We are on a track here to some fiscal sanity.

Tough choices had to be made. The chairman made the right choices.

Also important, it includes a very important amendment offered in full committee by Mr. Peterson which modifies the current congressional moratorium to allow for safe and efficient production of natural gas along our Outer Continental Shelf. This is a rational step to take in a time when we need to be increasing domestic production to meet our Nation's energy needs. Any effort to take this out would be the wrong thing to do right now. This is in this bill because that is where the rule is.

I believe that this bill provides the environmental, energy, resource, cultural and recreational needs of our Nation while still playing a significant role in controlling Federal spending.

Again, I commend the chairman and Mr. Dicks for their hard work in bringing this bill to the floor, and I urge my colleagues to support the bill and to support the Peterson amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I wish to engage in a little colloquy with you.

As you know, the administration proposed $49.5 million for the National Clean Diesel Initiative, which was authorized at $200 million in the Energy Policy Act. We were only able to fund that at $26 million. I am concerned the demand will far exceed the amount the committee was able to provide.

For example, Pennsylvania's 13 school districts have filed applications with EPA for funding to retrofit diesel engines, and we are going to have a lot more of this.

I would like to yield to my friend from New York (Mr. Kuhl).

Mr. Chairman, I rise strongly against this amendment. It was said earlier that this is not the right time to make this decision. Well, it is always easy to say it is not the right time to make a tough decision. And the reason we are in this terrible situation is we have made bad decisions in the past.

There is no reason at all that we should have a North America gas market that is four or five times the rest of the world. We should be paying a competitive price for gas, but we are paying this outrageous price because of the decisions that we have made in the past. And we have made them based on outdated facts.

Let's look at the true facts. Let's look at the facts that technology has changed. We can do this safely; we are doing it safely in other places. We want to preserve Florida's coastline. Nobody wants to do anything that would have any harm. But we also need the natural gas.

We are losing jobs every day because of the price of natural gas in North America. Now, when we lose jobs to China because people over there are willing to work real cheap, we are real upset about that, as we should be.

But we are losing jobs because of the price of natural gas that would pay top American wages, jobs we can't afford to lose. We cannot afford to be uncompetitive in the world. This ban must be lifted. We must figure out how to do it properly so that we are not locking up the resources that we need to be competitive in the world.

This is a very simple subject that just needs a little cold logic put on it, and we can't be worrying about the fears of the past. We have to be taking care of the future. We need to defeat this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Pombo and Ranking Member Rahall for working with me to get H.R. 3721 on the suspension calendar and considered in an expeditious fashion.

At the request of the National Park Service, I introduced H.R. 3721 which would extend for 10 years the current authority for commercial vehicle traffic through the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area along Route 209. All bordering counties and boroughs are supportive of the bill.

In supporting the bill, the National Park Service cites the continuing need for commercial vehicle traffic to travel through the park in a manner that protects park resources and visitors while also providing the Water Gap Recreational Area the financial means for monitoring and enforcement of commercial use restrictions.

The bill is needed to continue a program that has worked for the Park Service and the community surrounding the Water Gap National Recreation Area for over 20 years. The fee collection system resolved the potential problems raised when the 21-mile segment of U.S. Route 209 was transferred to Park Service control. The system allows limited commercial vehicle access, and the tolls allow the Park Service to monitor the road without using regular operation and maintenance budgets.

Authorization for the program was done in 10-year increments. The most recent 10-year increment authorization expired September 30. My bill would extend the authorization to September 30, 2015.

The current program has been in operation since 1983 and was largely successful until it started running a deficit. The main problem with the existing program is the lack of the ability for the park to adjust the fee schedule to cover the expense of operating the contact stations. This problem is resolved by authorizing the park superintendent to adjust fees as necessary to cover operating costs.

A reduction or elimination of commercial traffic is not feasible at this time as the commercial traffic continues to serve local businesses immediately adjacent to the park and concessionaires within the park and is necessary for continued business operation within the area for another decade.

The management of U.S. Route 209, in accordance with this legislation, meets the goals of the park and is supported by the experience of the park, public sentiment, and economic analysis. On behalf of the National Park Service, I ask for your support for this legislation.

Madam Chairman, the bill before us today is one that required many tough choices. It required fiscal discipline. It also required the committee to meet the environmental, land management, cultural, science, resource and recreation needs of the Nation in a responsible manner; tough choices were required and I believe the right and most reasonable choices were made.

The bill helps meet our fiscal responsibilities by cutting $800 million in discretionary spending from the fiscal year 2005 level, but it also allows us enough money that our Nation's priorities can be carried out by the diverse departments and agencies funded in the bill.

There are many competing interests in this bill that had to be balanced and addressed in a tight allocation. We may hear some Members lament that greater funding was not provided for a particular program, but I believe that Members would be hard pressed to name another program that should be cut so the one they favor can be increased. One thing is certain, the gentleman from North Carolina (Chairman Taylor) made a special effort to include both parties in the drafting of

the bill and conducted a fair and impartial hearing process.

The bill places priorities in the areas where they need to be. Increases were provided for wildland firefighting, the operations of the National Parks and National Forest Systems, Superfund hazardous waste cleanup program, environmental science and technology, and Indian health and education.

The bill contains necessary initiatives in forest health, in backlog maintenance in the national parks, Everglades restoration, and the national fire plan. This is a bill that makes tough but right choices and puts priorities where they should be.

This bill is as good as it can be given the budget restrictions. It deserves our support and I urge its passage.

Mr. Speaker, my predecessor in Congress, former Representative Joseph M. McDade, who served in the House for 36 years, has informed me of the passing on February 18 of Frank Collins, a prominent attorney from Ardmore, Pennsylvania, and former Scranton native.

Mr. Collins graduated in 1948 from Scranton Preparatory School, where he was a classmate of Congressman McDade. Collins attended St. Francis College and graduated in 1952 from the University of Scranton. He later received his Jurist Doctorate from the University of Pennsylvania in 1955.

Collins worked for several banks during his distinguished legal career and most recently worked at the law firm of Collins, Johnson and Markey in Media, Pennsylvania. He is survived by his wife of 48 years, Katharine, and seven children and six grandchildren.

Those who knew Collins best pay high tribute to his intellect, integrity and character. Congressman McDade said of Collins, ``His life is a testament to the joy of intellectual pursuit and the use of the Socratic method to attain dependable decisions. Our heartfelt sympathy goes to his lovely wife, Katie, and their children.''

In a moving and eloquent memorial delivered by a fellow attorney and close personal friend, Henry B. FitzPatrick, Collins was remembered for his many friendships, sense of humor, athletic achievements in basketball and golf, enduring and loving marriage, and professional and personal integrity.

``Frank Collins chose to be a lawyer,'' FitzPatrick eulogized. ``It doesn't take long until that profession separates the upright from the rest. It asks questions which can only be answered by those who are serious about being honest, those who can interrogate the depth of their soul to see if there is further will to be summoned for the finding of the right answer. Frank had that quality of honesty-- otherwise he would not have had the trust, as he did, of his clients and fellow lawyers.

``But, we all know that professional honesty might not accompany a person home. The fearlessly scrupulous judge or lawyer might with wife or husband be disingenuous and deceitful; few of us are honest all of the time; Frank Collins was one of that few. He was unable to put a knife in the crack between the levels of integrity demanded of him in his personal and professional lives. For there was no crack, but only the seamless cloth of honesty.''

Those are high words of praise for a truly remarkable individual. I want to thank Congressman McDade for bringing the exemplary life on Frank Collins to my attention so that I could bring it to the attention of my colleagues.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise before you today to honor the Pennsylvania State University as it celebrates its Sesquicentennial. On February 22, 1855, Pennsylvania Governor William Pollock signed the charter that created what is today The Pennsylvania State University. The University will be celebrating its Sesquicentennial for a full year from July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2005.

Penn State was started as a small college dedicated to the study of scientific agriculture; the University was then designated the Commonwealth's sole land-grant institution in 1863 by the Pennsylvania Legislature and has grown to become one of the world's most renowned public universities. The University is well known not only for its agricultural research and extension programs but also engineering, architecture, social sciences, medicine, and law.

Penn State has been instrumental in creating a heart-assist pump developed by medical and engineering faculty in 1976 to prolong the lives of cardiovascular patients. This pump was the first surgically implantable, seam-free, pulsatile blood pump to receive widespread clinical use. It led to the Penn State Heart, the only artificial heart approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. A Penn State surgeon and two engineers also perfected the world's first long-life, rechargeable heart pacemaker.

In 1955, physics Professor Erwin Mueller became the first person to ``see'' an atom, using a field ion electron microscope of his own invention. The device was a landmark advance in scientific instrumentation that allowed a magnification of more than 2 million times.

Penn State in 1955 became the first university to be issued a federal license to operate a nuclear reactor, which it continues to use for studies in the peaceful uses of atomic energy and the training of nuclear industry personnel.

Penn State is a leader in food science. In 1892 Penn State offered America's first collegiate instruction in ice cream manufacture, followed soon after by a pioneering ``short course'' program that has helped to make the University an international center for research in frozen confections. Ice cream gurus Ben & Jerry got their start from a correspondence course in ice cream making from Penn State.

Pennsylvania's and the nation's pure food laws stem partly from the work of pioneer chemist William Frear, who in the early 1900s analyzed foods for government agencies and headed an expert committee whose recommendations shaped the landmark Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906.

In the 1920s, Penn State became the first land-grant college to initiate a comprehensive mushroom research program. Researchers developed improved composts and production practices that were adopted by growers worldwide and also helped Pennsylvania retain its leadership as the number one source of domestic mushrooms.

This institution has contributed tremendously to the Commonwealth and the nation, with graduates throughout the world as well as the largest outreach efforts with programs in every state and 87 foreign countries. The University has 11 academic schools and 20 campuses located throughout the Commonwealth, as well as an extension program that reaches nearly one out of two residents annually. Penn State annually host the largest all student run philanthropy in the world raising over 3.5 million dollars for The Four Diamonds Fund which provides money for comprehensive care of children with cancer, support for their families, and for research of pediatric cancer.

One out of every eight Pennsylvanians and one in every 720 people in the United States, as well as one out of every 50 engineers and one out of every four meteorologists has a Penn State degree. The university also boasts the largest dues paying alumni association in the nation that was established in 1870.

The University has also produced many championship Division I athletic teams, as well as a record breaking and legendary football coach Joe Paterno.

The 150th anniversary of Penn State will highlight what is important and good about this distinguished institution and the fine people and research that it produces.

Mr. Speaker, I urge you and my colleagues to congratulate the administration, faculty, staff, alumni and students of Penn State as they celebrate the Sesquicentennial of this fine institution. I wish them all the best during their next 150 years.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. I rise in opposition to this amendment which I think makes very little sense. Apparently one day someone was in Yellowstone years ago and following a bunch of two-stroke snowmobiles and the deal on a two- stroke snowmobile, they mix oil with the gasoline for the lubricating process, and it eliminates a little haze. The new machines, the four- strokes as the previous speaker said, are very efficient, they are very quiet, and they do not pollute.

And they do not emit that blue smoke. We are trying to eliminate 65,000 snowmobiles a year from Yellowstone when we allow 1.8 million cars to traverse the same roads. The new snowmobiles have about the same technology as the cars and emit about the same amount of hydrocarbons as the cars. So why would we eliminate 65,000 snowmobiles and allow 1.8 million cars?

We have a certain group of people in this country that seem to want to lock up our national treasures, our national parks, and cherished places and keep the public from enjoying them. Snowmobiling is a great way to enjoy the park. It is now very well controlled, and it is a way for people to get out in the wintertime and see a whole other side of these beautiful parks. Instead of going in the summer and following a travel trailer and wandering through the park and not being able to see anything, one can take their own sled and go through and enjoy the beauty of the park.

There is no reason to legislate against this. We are meddling where the Park Service has decided to make a very good compromise and take advantage of the new science and the better machines to allow something that is a very good and wise use of our natural resource.

This is a great way to enjoy the park. It is nonpolluting, it is controlled. It is not nearly as abusive of the air quality as are the normal things we do in the summer with all the cars. This is great recreation.

If we are so intent on reducing every possible amount of damage to the air, why do we not cancel baseball season or football season or at least football season in the wintertime? Because apparently that is what we are worried about. I do not think this makes a lot of sense, and I think we should rely on the Park Service to implement the regulations that they have in place with the restrictions so that people can enjoy our parks.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. I rise against the amendment. My district is 150 miles from New York City. I grew up at 16 years old driving trucks across the George Washington Bridge. I understand what the infrastructure is to the East, and I understand also a little bit about the threat. But this formula has been pretty carefully worked out on population and threat. If you are going to take $450 million away from the rest of the country and give it to metropolitan New York, how are you going to do that? You would have to take $35 million away from California. You would have to take $4 million away from the District of Columbia. I think that this is probably one of the high-threat areas. You would have to take $15 million away from Illinois. I think Chicago is probably a pretty high- threat area. You would have to take $14.75 away from my home State of Pennsylvania. On and on and on and on.

This thing has been worked out. I admire the pluck of my friends from New York to try to get the money for what they think they need it but the whole country needs the money. The sheet that shows us where the $450 million will come from will be on the table.

Mr. Speaker, due to a commitment in my congressional district, on March 17, I missed the vote on H. Res. 557, relating to the liberation of the Iraqi people and the valiant service of the United States Armed Forces and Coalition forces (rollcall vote 64). I support our Nation's efforts in Iraq, and I wholeheartedly support our troops. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall vote 64.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this motion to instruct, and I do it with a lot of history.

For many of the years, about 15 of the years that the Democrats controlled this House, I was a school board member in Tunkhannock, Pennsylvania, and I know what it means to not have enough IDEA funding. We worked

very hard to make the choices to balance our budget, to do what the Federal law required with the amount of money that was given to us.

At that time, the highest that we ever got was 9.9 percent. When the Democrats controlled this House, the most money we ever got was 9.9 percent. This year, we are giving the schools 20 percent. That is double what we ever got when the Democrats were in control.

Now, what is this disingenuous discussion about? We do have choices to make. We made choices to give more funding this year than we have done in the past. There is an extra $1 billion in this bill, and we are halfway to full funding the 40 percent of IDEA. That is much more than we have done in the past, and it will go a long way toward helping school districts with these major challenges.

I want to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Regula) for his leadership on this bill. He always gives us fair and balanced leadership, and this is a fair and balanced bill that lives within realistic priorities and shows that the majority is trying very hard to leave no child behind, to do the right thing for American education.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to adopt this conference report on the interior appropriation bill. It is a reasonable and responsible measure to meet the natural resources, recreational, energy, and cultural needs of our citizens.

The gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Taylor), chairman of this subcommittee, has done an excellent job in working with the Senate to provide a balanced conference report that sets the right priorities, is fiscally responsible, and reflects the values of the majority in the House. One of these priorities, of course, is more money and resources to combat and control wildfires. The bill includes $2.5 billion for the national fire plan, as well as an additional $400 million to repay wildfire suppression expenses from last year.

In addition to providing these historic levels for firefighting, the bill recognizes that we must do more than fight fires once they have started. It takes an integrated fire plan approach which funds wildfire suppression and preparedness, hazardous fuels reduction, and forest health and rehabilitation activities.

I am very pleased that it includes money for new forest pest management in the initiatives, including funds for the wooly hemlock adelgids in the East and the Southern pine beetle and Western mountain bark beetles.

I think we need to address the Indian issue. No one wants, more than the members of this committee, to address this issue. But it does not make any common sense to spend between $9 billion and $12 billion over a 3-year period without a single dime going to the Indians. This gives us a cooling-off period that we can get this thing done, because if we spend $9 billion to $12 billion for an accounting system that gets us no result, there will not be money for wildland fire funding, Indian education and health care, national parks, PILT, and so on.

This bill should be passed. I commend Chairman Taylor and the ranking minority member, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks), for the outstanding job they did under tight budget constraints in meeting the stewardship responsibilities of the Congress. I urge adoption of the conference report.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this supplemental emergency appropriations bill. I too went to Iraq 3 weeks ago to see for myself, and I think we all need to go and see for ourselves the progress that is being made. I would like to give a few of my observations.

As we flew low over the country in our helicopter, I saw that there is more

water than I would have imagined and more agriculture. The other thing is that the farmers and the children out in the country always waved at the helicopter. That was the military helicopter with a machine gunner on each window. They did not know there were Congressmen in there, but the machine gunner waved back.

As we went through Iraq, the people waved at us. They stood; they smiled. I have a pretty good idea of body language, and 70 percent of the people in that country are delighted we are there.

Mr. Chairman, we found and deposed the greatest weapon of mass destruction that this world has known since Hitler and Stalin. Go to the burying fields at al-Hilla, with the mass graves, where they have buried hundreds of thousands of people who were marched into a pit and mowed down with a machine gun and covered over with a bulldozer, whether they were alive or dead, and you understand what went on in that country.

We talked to the doctors and the hospital administrators and the keepers of the graves and the operators of the power plant. These are people striving to get back on their feet, and they need our help. This will be one of the greatest things that we have done in our term in Congress, not only to support our troops but to support the putting back together of Iraq, putting it back together from the damages inflicted on it by Saddam Hussein, because the damage inflicted by our military on structures is very small.

This money in the supplemental will do more for the safety of our troops and the safety of our citizens than most anything we could do. It is hard to comment on some of the things that have been said tonight; they are so ridiculous. We are on a path with a good plan. It is being carried out by young men and women of intense bravery whom we can be very proud of and we need to support them.