Pace
As in any comittee many people hold different views and may express those views. That does not mean that they are official EASA statements or policy.
Now come on Pace, you dont really mean that. One of the ways we run our politics is for senior officials to indicate policy partly of course to assess the reaction but partly to indicate in which direction policy is likely to evolve.
Eric Sivel is no ordinary person - he is deputy head of rule making. I suspect he is an experienced enough person to know exactly what he is saying.
In the same way the Prime Minsister's office however much we may mistrust politicians is not inclined to respond to petitions in a way that is unsubstantiated particulaly when they specifically refer to having consulted with EASA, the DTi and the CAA.
We need to be very careful. There are those who would rather see the demise of the IMCr or its son or daughter for all the wrong reasons. You can bet there are some on this forum. After the comments I have read by EASA, the CAA, the Dti and others, only some of which I have reproduced I have a little more faith. Unfortunately there may also be individuals on committee with less apparent agenda; it is important the voice of private pilots is heard that we will not willingly accept the impostion of regulations that have no case basis in safety, are without regulatory impact assessment and are a restraint of priviliges already held.