The CFPM did appear at the same meeting on March 2, 2011, and he said,
I think if I were just to take the legislation as written, without the safeguards that are present, I would have a lot more concern, but due to the transparency clauses that exist—the interference complaint process under part IV of the NDA—those types of safeguards certainly make it more robust. It allows me to make sure that there is an avenue of approach, should there be a conflict.
He didn't seem to have the same concerns that you do. Why do you think that is? Why does the person this is supposedly going to affect the most, through the interference that theoretically could be applied to his position, not share the same concern you have?