I can understand people's frustrations about the theory, however it really is no different to other countries who also impose non ICAO requirements. The lure of European wages attract a lot of pilots (lets face it, its not the flying) so the JAA shortcoming are often lamented.
An FAA PPL includes night privileges. Are CASA going to issue a Night VFR endorsement on the basis of this? The FAA licence is ICAO, the pilot has worked hard on getting their PPL(H) ... I'm not trying to pick holes, I merely want to highlight that JAA is far from being the only authority to impose additional requirements.
A JAA ATPL will allow you to act as commander of a multi-crew helicopter. Therefore you are required to have multi-crew experience before you are given the licence permitting you to carry out such a role. I do not know of any genuine multi-crew helicopters that aren't operating IFR, so an IR is a requirement too.
If you have suitable experience, yes you will have to pay around AU$ 1,800 to take the JAA exams, and undertake a skills test. However you will then command a AU$ 70,000 - AU$ 190,000 salary in a job commensurate to your experience.
Although many overseas pilots feel that JAA requirements are belittling their achievements, the true must be felt by the JAA licence holders if other pilots who weren't subjected to the same onerous rules are given the same licence as themselves.
The JAA system may have its faults in excessive training minima, however it is merely asking all pilots who wish to exercise the privileges of a JAA licence to have done exactly the same amount of training. To exempt overseas pilots would be a slap in the face to JAA-trained pilots.