The biggest problem with the standards of newly trained air crew lay at the foot of the training organisations, and then ultimatly the CAA. Aviation is probably the only profession where new recruits are taught by the members of the profession who have the least experience. Doctors, accountants, architects etc all get their training from highly qualified people who have been in their industry for many years. This is evident at any flight school where you will find 250hr instructors teaching new recruits - why, because the industry won't hire as a rule a new pilot until he has some kind of experience, so he does an instructors rating and sand sacks his hours that way.
At the end of the day, I don't necessarily feel that a low time instructor is always a bad instructor, but the guys are seldom given the instruction tools to do their job well in the first place. A flight school will typically screen the better of their students and offer them an instuctors rating in return for a year or so of work for very low salaries once they get their CPL's. The CAA needs to step in to ensure standards in the form of some kind of instructors school where all ratings, upgrades and renewals are done in order to ensure standards and latest teaching techniques are applied as a standard.
The reason why low time crew make it in other parts of the world is that airlines/operators there spend a whole lot more on training, and they don't accept below standard performance.