It's obviously not a genuine Q rustle but I will answer it anyway.
The context is completely different.
The FAA IR is much more achievable than the JAA IR.
But then if Europe did not have its stupidly gold plated IR, increasingly gold plated over the past decades, and had improved the utility of GA with things like GPS approaches as soon as these became so obviously proven elsewhere, especially ones without on-field ATC, the present mess would not be such a mess.
Policymaking should be evidence based. There is ample evidence the IMCR is working well and has done so for decades. There is NO evidence against it.
A separate approach is to dump the IMCR and push for a "reduced IR". This is favoured by many - mostly Euro IR holders who got their IR many years ago - and is an objectively reasonable view. Unfortunately, the politics of that are just as hard, and additionally if this came about in any form that is actually likely in Europe (i.e. still a substantial ground school increment over the FAA version) we would not have the uptake which the IMCR has, not by a very long way.
The best solution for the UK is to work out some sort of UK-only exemption. I don't think it is impossible. But there isn't a formal mechanism for "filing a difference to EASA".