Of course there’s a point. It might be that it dawns on CASA that its intentions have unintended consequences, and CASA might move to change the intrument before it comes into force.
Assume this scenario:
You’re flying from YBHI to YTIB day VFR small aeroplane, no alternate required. You plan to carry, and triple check that you’re carrying, 35 minutes’ FFR. At the point of no return to YBHI your fuel calculations indicate that you will arrive overhead YTIB with 31 minutes’ FFR, and you continue. You conduct a further in-flight fuel quantity check and, as a consequence, you expect to arrive overhead YTIB with only 29 minutes’ FFR.
How do you comply with this rule:
If, as a result of an in-flight fuel quantity check ... the usable fuel expected to be remaining on arrival at the destination aerodrome is less than the fixed fuel reserve (where no alternate aerodrome is required), the pilot in command must take appropriate action and proceed to an en-route alternate so as to perform a safe landing with not less than the fixed fuel reserve remaining.
[Note to the drafters: The word “then” in your instrument is redundant.]
Again: I’m not interested in anyone’s personal opinion about the circumstances in which you found yourself with 29 minutes’ FFR remaining. Just tell me how you would comply with that rule, if it came into force.