nonradio Section (a) which applies to
all aircraft requires pilots to fly at a height which, if a power unit fails, allows an emergency landing
"without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface." The exemption for helicopters in Section (d) is subject to a stricter proviso that
"the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface." Given that it allows an exemption from complying with the primary rule, I don't think it's unreasonable that the pilot has to satisfy a stricter test.
-------------------------------
The FAA gives the reason for allowing helicopter operations to be conducted below the minimum altitudes set for fixed-wing aircraft as:
"The helicopter's unique operating characteristics, the most important of which is its ability to execute pinpoint emergency landings during power failure."
That is an excerpt from the part of the FAA's website which explains the 'low flying' rules to citizens considering reporting aircraft for alleged low flying. It explains to the public that helicopters present less of a danger to people on the ground than other aircraft and, for that reason, are permitted to fly lower. (Isn't it refreshing to see a positive image being promoted.
)
The exemption for helicopters is entirely sensible for the reason the FAA gives. I'd estimate the chances of the CAA adopting the idea here as approximately nil.