I wanted to get back to the point I was trying to make - probably badly.
I understand Group rules are not a matter of law and may, or may not be an insurance condition.
I had understood that until recently a current Group member could fly with another Group member who had exceeded the 90 day rule. Great! The "expired" Group member now has the comfort of a current pilot to help sort out any problems arising during the three required "movements".
Now, if my understanding is correct he has only two alternatives. Fly solo or with a FI.
OK, flying with a FI may solve the problem BUT how many will go solo? How does the latter promote safety? - and yet it is quite legal? How does flying with a curent Group member who choses to undertake the flight and IS current on type, not promote safety?
Finally, why should we have imposed a legislative change wich involves us in additional cost without there being any evidence of which I am aware that safety is improved in consequence?