Ha! M'sieu Le Frog just can't bring himself to say we want an IMC rating just like our magnificent Britsh cousins!
I think it is actually Mr Ladida Bowlerhat who has been at the basis of gold plating the JAR IR, claiming that the FAA IR training package was "insufficient to navigate the airways safely".
The reasons why the European national instrument ratings have always been expensive to obtain could be summarized as protectionist motives to shield national carriers from smaller start up competitors. The UK flight school "industry" has then jumped on the bandwagon, lobbying for extensions of the curriculum for their own financial benefit.
Clearly the French move should be applauded, as it will contribute to aviation safety by making a very useful additional training within reach of the private pilot community. One shouldn't forget that, per flight hour, FAA-certificated pilots have a much better safety record than their JAA-brethren. If one limits the statistic to the FAA-certificated pilots flying in
Europe, the FAA safety lead over JAA becomes embarrassing. Why ? Because the majority of them is instrument rated. And why is that ? Because it less expensive to obtain and because unlike the JAA instrument rating, the requirements to obtain it do not distract from the real safety issues that a general aviation pilot would normally encounter when flying IFR.
It also puts the horse trading that took place in the EASA committee meeting of 7/8 december last year into perspective, with the UK getting a European Commission Aviation Transport Directorship and then some... (some "partnership" , eh )
[Note that the result of that vote hasn't made it to the European Parliament yet].
It will be really funny if other EU countries start to accept this rating. This would lead to a de facto European IMCR.
It is not funny. It is a disgrace that Europe has to operate in this way and it proves the complete credibility bankruptcy of EASA and the Aviation "Safety" people at the Commission.