Homeguard
In May 2000 BALPA conviened a meeting at the request of one of their members to discuss the issues relating to EFATO and Rule 5. It was attended by representitives from Gapan, AOPA and the CAA legal dept who gave their considered opinion, not fact, as you say.
At the end of the meeting the "jiberish" to which you refer was issued as a statement and published in a at least one GA magazine regarding EFATO and Rule 5.
I am not aware that anything has changed since that meeting other than the redrafting of Rule 5 in a simpler format.
Any proposed change to the content of Rule 5 would of course give the fraternity of complainers who live at the end of most runways, the opportunity they are looking for, to lobby support for even more stringent rules to prevent aviation all together.