Thank you.
The irony of a speaker who just took the better part of an hour speaking interrupting someone after 30 seconds is breathtaking.
The reason I support the amendment is that the current language on the purpose of the act is that it's to “prevent the risk” of a future pandemic. I don't actually think you can prevent the risk. I think the language that has been proposed is good, because it says the purpose is to “reduce as much as possible the risk”. I think that's actually aligned with reality. I don't think you can ever prevent a risk, but you can reduce it.
That's why I think it's a good amendment. I plan on supporting it.