This is no prejudice but all about the interests of the public, consumers and private flying generally. BTW, BEagle's interest is financial.. .. .Re. '...... very little difference between the JAA and NPPL requirements, other than the minimum number of hours and the medical requirements.'. .They are, actually, big differences. Some are concerned about the capability and safety levels produced by the current system, let alone NPPL pilots being let-loose with even less competence and worse medical standards. . .. .Why would the CAA agree to this Naff Private Pilots Licence proposal and isn't it obviously motivated by a desire to sell shoe-string (=more profitable) courses to shoals of sucker students?. .If a reduced standards 'National' Driving Licence were to be proposed, the driving schools, insurance companies, motoring organisations and politicians would all ridicule it, for all the reasons that this NPPL proposal cannot be in the public interest.. . . .As in driver and other licensing regimes, there shouldn't be any objection to 'grandfather' rights (to renewal) for existing licence holders who can meet the current technical and medical requirements. . .. .Many are justifiably concerned or jittery about who/what is flying over or, maybe, into them.. .Private flying is already unpopular enough, so why make excellent ammunition for those who believe, already, that it is a 'cowboy', corner-cutting, anti-social and dangerous nuisance?. .. .Never forget that, in public perception and the media, any activity or hobby or 'industry' is only as good as the worst of its enthusiasts or operators or practitioners. This NPPL would mean more undesirables and notorious incidents.