And if it is "safety" based then the CAA needs to make a good case for retaining it, because it heavily detracts from the utility value of general aviation, which results in poorer pilot currency, a reduced safety, and economic damage.
It's pretty obvious that the case for "safety" here is about the same as the "safety" case for holding back GPS approaches. Both them and PCL work just fine in the USA....
I am sure the CAA can see this line of attack coming, which is why they are not going to go public with any reasons for being against PCL. The moment they state that they don't like it for safety reasons, they are toast. And if they give other reasons, they are toast as well. So they are just going to stonewall.