Utfart, please don't assume false and insulting motives by others. I'm not doing that about you, even if I think your comments wrong.
This has been a constant theme: those opposing IMCR use terms like ignorance, guilt, lack of diligence... and on other threads: "die-hards", "stubbornly defending", or referring them as too lazy or too stupid to get a "proper" IR.
Why are people so threatened by the IMCR? You may not think it has any chance of being agreed by EASA, in which case, just smile quietly and ignore people pressing for it. I don't think anyone is trying to impose IMCR on other countries (though I think it might be a good idea). No one is trying to make anyone else do anything they don't want to. We're just trying to persuade people to let the UK continue with a rating that is wanted and serves a useful purpose. I think there's evidence that it improves safety, but there's certainly no evidence that it causes harm.
So what's the problem?
I don't feel I've made any wrong assumptions about people's motives, there are clearly two camps in the argument. Maybe I've been misunderstood by my lack of position on the issue. Allow me to clarify, I don't care about the IMCR as I don't fly in the U.K., if it remains in place 10 years from now, or even becomes available in Europe, it won't have any impact on my life whatsoever.
I have not meant to use the terms ignorance, and lack of diligence, to a attack defenders of the IMCR. It was intended to point out that those whom many have trusted (and paid) to represent their interest, seem to have done an extremely poor job. Regardless of our opinions on the work of Jim Thorpe within the FCL.008 committe, he was the EAS delegate. Why no attack on the AOPA rep on the commitee? Why no attack on the organizers of AOPA UK who didn't manage to get a rep on the commitee? Mr. Thorpe has chosen to publish some information and I'm sure he knew there would be dialogue. I don't feel sorry for him and I'm grateful for the information, but the news he told us wasn't really a surprise, and nothing different than one with knowledge of the mandate should have expected.
I'm in favour of any additional training undertaken by pilots, it can only be a good thing. I was motivated to comment by my perception of a lack of focus in the debate. No personal insult was intended.