Hmmmmmmm...........I suppose that it is inevitable that with the growth of aviation there will need to be an increase in rules and regulations as types of aircraft grow etc and in many ways the CAA does do a good job. I have heard of them occassionally considering people who dont't quite meet the eyesight requirements on an individual basis which is good. However there are also things like the previous example and one I read about recently where they are demanding £65 or so just so that someone can continue counting hours spent teaching air cadets in a motor glider towards keeping their PPL valid, even though they had been doing it for years before and were obviously qualified.
Having said that it is inevitable that GA will become more restricted as it grows and with increasing numbers of GA aircraft I suppose this is necessary so it would be best to work with the CAA rather than against them and try to "lessen the impact". I would like things to be in the 20s but that would be downright dangerous with the numbers of planes about today. Still though, this doesnt give the CAA the right to one day say that you have to pay a certain amount for a certain certificate that says you can do what you've been doing for years anyway. The FAA is an example of what the CAA could be like minus a few bureaucratic splodges. I accept what you say: that we should work with them, but you must admit that in some cases the CAA do impose expensive, restrictive, un-necessary rules.