Agreed, but be aware of the scope. You might also want to slip in that you'd like a G-V for Christmas. Just like a request to keep the IMC rating in place as a national rating, it's likely to get a 'noted' response.
Well you could argue an either / or solution. Either you convert the IMC into an Enroute Instrument Rating; Or you convert it into an Enroute Instrument Rating, limited to UK airspace; Or you grandfather the UK IMC privileges.
As noted above, there is a significant safety benefit in doing this, as it avoids people losing currency because not being able to fly legally anymore and then risking their lives skud running.
One should also discuss the economic impact and the need for proportionality in regulation.
To claim that all this is "out of scope", comparing it to wishing a G-V for Christmas sounds a bit off the mark to me. Especially as people on the continent seem to comment against the EIR, grandfathering of UK IMC rights would then be the most sensible solution.
Sure, the EASA drone can write 1000 times "noted" everytime she doesn't like what she's reading, but with the pressure on Kneepkens sufficiently high that he's organizing a survey about himself, I doubt that properly motivated comments would be just ignored at this time. Kneepkens would do so at his peril.
Besides, I couldn't afford a Gulfstream V jet. But some proper, honest, safety enhancing and user friendly regulation improvements would be welcome.