Karrank-Goose Alert!
Unfortunately you're getting confused between a restricted PPL (current/exists) and a recreational pilot licence/certificate (cobblers poor idea).
The so called recreational licence would allow less medically able (and IMHO less able, less well trained and less well supervised pilots) to fly in the same airspace as Part 61 licence holders as long as an aircraft is below a certain weight.
Part 103 (microlighting rule) was originally written to cover essentially "hang-gliders with lawn mower engines," it is woefully inadequate to responsibly and safely oversee and regulate the "new breed" of microlights. Their performance is often in excess of traditional light training aircraft yet licencing and medical requirements are vastly different.
A PPL holder and a (if instated) Recreational pilot certificate holder will be flying similar aircraft in the SAME airspace with a passenger. Why does one of them need to know more than the other? Why does only one of them have to pass independent theory exams? Why does one of them have a more rigorous medical? Why does one of them have to be trained by a qualified flying instructor yet one can be 'trained by his mate' who's probably got less flying experience than the average PPL?!!! This nonsense already goes on in NZ as it is with microlights. CAA should be trying to bring microlighting up to at least the same standard as Part 61 not encourage it to continue to plod along it's current course with the instatement of this, just a trumped up regurgitation of the current microlight certificate, which is rubbish in it's own right!
Having spoken to quite a few NZ pilots I gather that the introduction of such a licence would brng quite a number of folk who no longer meet an aviation Class 1, 2 or 3 medical standard to come back into aviation.
Now I may be a cynic but unfortunately as we age or as events occur, one may become unfit to hold an aviation medical. That's just life! There should NOT be a differing set of criteria just because an aircraft is under a certain weight (and with Tecnams and Alpi's compared to 152's and PA-38's that weight difference is very small!) I do not agree that the risk is acceptable simply because there is only a maximum of 1 pax and the aircraft should not be flown over congested areas.
New Zealand has a recreational pilot licence-it's called a PPL!
P.S. Apologies for the length.