If you agree with the questions but for reasons which are additional to those given, there doesn't seem to be anything stopping you from giving your reasons for answering "yes". If you agree with the government's reasons, there's no need to repeat them. What they are asking is that if you disagree, you explain why. That doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

Whilst the general thrust of the proposal is to be welcomed, I disagree with several of the detailed proposals. For example, they propose to exclude only music performed indoors, yet a few musicians playing unamplified in a rural pub garden will probably cause less disturbance than an amplified rock band playing indoors in an urban environment.

I also don't understand why they have not accepted the 200 cut-off recommended by the select committee.