He is one of the authors of the BIP proposal but there are five more. So they all agree on those points in Phase B.
I don't know what to think. It feels like choosing between two evils, hoping you picked the lesser one. Allow satoshi-era coins to be stolen if a strong-enough quantum computer becomes a reality. That would cause a devastating affect on the network. The alternative looks even worse: freeze the coins and effectively take them out of circulation for the greater good of the network and again destroying trust in Bitcoin and censoring it.
I think everyone is overestimating the effect of this.
All it does is reintroduce some more supply into circulation, it does not change the total coin count or anything else. Once it happens, it is done and the network has swallowed the solution to the problem. We are not talking about something that will kill Bitcoin for example by completely breaking it. One of the reasons why people are exaggerating this is because everyone has been writing about this in a very negative way for a long time. If it is something that is an expected progression of the network's evolution, and if we start talking about it as something that must happen and something that is normal then the fears will lower over time. A smart attacker would not dump compromised coins fast, it is actually a very good way to build a country reserve.

Shitcoin people inflate both their circulating and total supply all the time in many ways, relax.
Fair point. Some people would mention that they don't want 1 million BTC mined by Satoshi getting stolen. But they don't realize 1 million BTC is an estimation[1] and IIRC each 50 mined BTC was mined into different P2PK "address". While the effect probably isn't devastating on Bitcoin network, it definitely will have impact on Bitcoin price and easily turned into FUD.
You can reframe it to something more normal such as "some satoshi-era Bitcoin finally mined using quantum computers".
You've probably read it, but Jameson Lopp write interesting argument about this viewpoint. Here's a part of his argument.
But wait, you may be thinking, wouldn't quantum "miners" have earned their coins by all the work and resources invested in building a quantum computer? I suppose, in the same sense that a burglar earns their spoils by the resources they invest into surveilling targets and learning the skills needed to break into buildings. What I say "earned" I mean through productive mutual trade.
[1]
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=175996.0