Oh, my goodness. It's a lot to go through in two and a half minutes.
To take the second point first, this is a classic case of “trust, but verify”. This is why we need to have multiple sets of eyes involved. It is important to get the information that is coming from official sources. It's also important to make sure that we can triangulate that information, that we can trust it and that we can operate effectively on it.
The inward focus that the Chinese government is engaging in now is not going to keep them safe in terms of future pandemics. That's just the reality of the movement of goods and people across borders.
Historically, when we look at the outbreaks of things such as COVID, SARS and some of the influenza outbreaks we've had, they came from China and that region. That's a quirk of geography in many respects, but it also means that it's all the more important that we have those opportunities to get that sort of information and to conduct that surveillance. It's not because we're trying to spy or do anything nefarious, but because if we know when outbreaks are happening, if we know how that spread is starting to begin and see those patterns, we can address the concerns more effectively and more quickly and we can get the World Health Organization and the other organizations involved.
I don't know that it's so much a choice between being stern and bringing them to the table. It is, as you point out, more about how to strike that balance. We need to have a stern measure, but it can't be so stern that it completely closes China off. That would put all of us at further risk.