Just to clarify some of the confusion over the two entities that are being quoted here.
The JAA (Joint Aviation Authorities) is just an organistaion formed from various European (as in georaphical) Aviation Authorities, who agreed to work to a set of standard requirements, as laid down in JAR-OPS1. It is not an EU organisation and therefore its requirements are NOT legally binding. Subpart Q of JAR-OPS1 was meant to be a standard FTL scheme but as was stated most of the countries with less restrictive FTL schemes would not agree to it. Not much choice for the JAA there. What do you do...scrap the whole idea because of one area of disagreement.
EASA (European Aviation Security Agency??) is an EU organisation and thereofre any requirements will be legally binding under European Law. That is the big differance.
Please dont forget that for many countries these proposals will increase their FTL schemes and therefore improve overall European safety. So we shoudn't just dissmiss this as typical EU bureaucracy.
What we do need to ensure is that a reasonable MINIMUM is put in place. Therefore there would be no reason why the UK should not stick with CAP371, After all it would comply with the European minimums.