Pitts
My teaching of ab initio PPL's was a long time ago and I guess I am not really focussing on that sector. What I see is the result of the development of the PPL into a 'working' pilot who has been heavily influenced by his foundational years and his transition into the world of operational flying. Don't forget that my perspective is a global one not just confined to the European or even the North American and antipodean worlds.
All the lack of PPL accidents means is that we are getting better at doing simple stuff and staying away from the killers like loss of control, CFIT and inadvertent IMC. As I said the average CPL is good at doing his job which is almost always one carried out in VMC but also may carry the need for an IFR capability that is rarely used. Often the only IFR in IMC logged (I mean genuine cloud flying or night flying without NVG's) is the prof check and annual recurrent training. This leaves the poorly trained open to the vagaries of bad weather and technical failures that test him (her) beyond their abilities.
When you have a system that sets 'minimums' of every metric then they have a habit of becoming the target standard. If you use the minimum as your standard then the normal every day fluctuations in human performance will deliver days when you fall below that standard. That's why customers that care (the bigger oil companies for example) will demand more than the regulatory minimum.
We care a lot about the failures of human factors in our flying world but fail to recognise the failures of the regulatory humans who have failed to give us a structure that is truly fit for purpose.
G.