Thanks for that alouette.
I had two reasons for making my observation: (1) the language used in the CARs does not reflect that used in JARs - i.e. there is no such thing as a Performance Class 1 helicopter - operations are performed in PC1, 2 or 3; and (2) in Europe there is no central regulation of heliports - they are still within the remit of the States.
For the capability of the BK117, it can be operated in all three classes.
Perhaps you have missed the point that these regulations (and all regulations issued by a Signatory State) have to show compliance with ICAO Annex 14 (heliports) and Annex 6 (operations). Your anger might therefore better be directed at ICAO - from whose SARPs all of these regulations are derived.
I would question SASless' contention that the Authority be required to prove that operations are compliant. It is for the operator to establish an operating regime that is both safe and compliant. To have it any other way would be to require the Authority to (directly) manage the operation.
Clearly, the NZ CAA are not qualified to do this, nor do they have the staff or the budget.
Jim