mm_flynn
A couple of views I have formed from the debate 1 - It will be impossible to have an IR that does not have some minimum amount of training - every other rating has a minimum number.
Agreed - this is also politically unavoidable. I would pick the FAA's 15hrs - this is sure to get gold plated to 20-25hrs using the absolutely inevitable "European process" but that is still OK for an ab initio IR.
A big part of the UK IR problem is that there are very few places to be taught and I suspect they have to pay big fees to the CAA. If the same organisations that can do PPL, night, IMCr, multi, etc. could do IR this would be a big step in accessibility and cost containment.
This, and the other stuff you list, has been more eloquently described by others as "death by a thousand cuts". It's certainly true that historically the huge size of the JAA ground school has driven a lot of the usual private IR candidates (older pilots; usually in their 50s+) to the US route, and also things like the JAA audiogram, but it is probably the collective effect of these various smaller factors that has been the killer. Also, the latest indications are that by the time EASA gets stuck into FCL, say 2010, the private IR ground school will be much reduced.
Beagle
Your proposal is good IMHO but "1.0 To fly IMC/IFR in permitted EU airspace" is the gotcha whose detail will make the difference between the "Europeans" accepting it on one hand, and going totally berserk on the other. This bit needs to be worked out. I am doing a little airspace study. Never received your email BTW.