It is normal, expected, and healthy for stakeholders in a regulatory environment to offer proposals about regulations. What's unhealthy is the proposition that the deliberation process is so fragile that a stakeholder needs to cover every angle, lest they corrupt the outcome.
What you say is true but completely ignores the obvious ways in which what he is proposing benefits his company.
Its like saying it’s normal for a taxi driver to drive people places while he’s got you handcuffed in the trunk.
How is the subject of potential regulation considered a stakeholder?
[dead]
It is normal, expected, and healthy to offer criticism of self interested proposals. And mock even. What is unhealthy is to imply someone said what they did not.