Simple.....what?
To uncross wires a little bit, nothing is that simple.
With regards to the JAA. Yes it was a voluntary get together of enthusiastic NAA and some 30+ NAA signed up for it. Less than half that number ever reached compliance and probaly never would have (my opinion).
It would be impossible for EASA to legislate ignoring ICAO and act in isolation. Therefore a future overal standard licence to be imposed on all member states, who act in a world market and which conflicts with ICAO, will not happen.
As to your point that that member countries stuck closely to the JAR - they did not. France retained and also constructed individual standards of its own as have many other countries. The UK, ignoring JAR, devised a difference much more radical than anybody in establishing the NPPL and, although not intended as such, could be seen at the time as sticking one up em.
Would the EU through EASA dare to devise a detailed licence to be imposed on each state. If it did it will be a first. EASA will do no more than produce a framework, not in conflict with ICAO, which can and will be interpreted and applied in different ways in different states as now. Witness such in many other industries.
As to the different standards for the NPPL, they are in the main artificial. They were devised to satisfy any difficult questions from the Dept. of Transport who would quite reasonably ask; why, having just sponsored a new statute (ANO) at the request of the CAA to comply with the JAA agreement, were they (the CAA) coming back with a scheme just like the old one which had just been changed. The NPPL had to look different.
What could justify, in any future EASA debate, restrictiing a similarly trained pilot from flying an aircraft in excess of 2 tonnes when another pilot could fly an aircraft up to 5.7 tonnes without any real difference in skills training?
What could justify restricting one pilot from flying say a Sarotoga up to MAUW full of duty free wine but without more than 3 passengers while another could fill all seats with people but not take home so much wine?
What could justify the not allowing of the NPPL holder the ability to qualify to fly at night when the flying course to do so did not require a test or examination? Flying at night has never been seen as exceptionally different to flying during the day.
What is it in the training of the JAA PPL that allows them but prevents the NPPL achieving an IMCR?
Is there any real explanation of any of this close2 that you can give to me in my ignorance.