Most of the drivel from Europe reveals a universal lack of understanding across the board.
I personally believe it is a painful symptom to trying to "Europeanize" something that most member states seem reluctant to let go.
The result is then an awful "compromise" that is likely to create havoc and decrease overall air safety. So either you agree on something like "European Air Law", and that implies
- that a Bulgarian Examiner is as good as a Latvian one
- that the semicircular system in Italy is going to be the same as in France
- that you don't invent obstacles to flying that have nothing to do with safety (the 8.333 kHz radio springs to mind)
- ...
or you don't touch it and leave things the way they are.
Also, the way EASA operates now is totally unacceptable, with prominent figures like Goudou or Sivel going about sprouting complete nonsense, with rulemaking technicians like Cluzeau (aka "the Frog Einstein" on this forum) just collecting input without a clear vision and then claiming that some piece of junk is "the best compromise for a legislative proposal that was obtainable". The cherry on the cake is then some classical civil service bickering between the Commission officials (Mr. B's superiors, predecessors and subordinates) and EASA about who fulfills what role...
Add to that complete intransparency of the rulemaking process and the lack of vision with many member states' CAA's and Transport Ministeries and pretty soon politicians start wondering about the "disconnect" between citizens and politics (or citizens and Europe).