Actually, you need to ask EASA or, more properly, JAA that question. To be fair to the CAA, they do block or amend as many questions as they can - all of the CTKIs from the UK schools attended the Belgrano every month for a year a few years ago to help with this. The free lunches were good!
As I've said before in other forums (fora?), whoever contributed to the JAA dog's breakfast should hang their collective heads in shame for screwing up what could have been a world class system. It is inexcusable that up to 20% of the questions are wrong, and that some of the graphics are so poor that you cannot read the numbers.
Having said all that, EASA have recognised that the whole system is an international joke, and a series of Learning Objectives have been identified that require amendment, for which no further questions will be written until that happens. The 1500 questions per year that are being written will be filling in gaps for areas that have previously not been addressed, and will be written in a new way - for example, rather than just asking to regurgitate facts, the facts will be regarded as "underpinning" or essential knowledge that are required to be known in order to answer questions at a higher cognitive level, perhaps a realworld scenario. Modern technology will also be taken advantage of - many authorities are using computer based exams so we can ask for specific numbers rather than inviting you to guess 1 out of 4. The LBA is already doing this.
As for useless information - yes, stuff that enables you fix equipment that a pilot can't fix anyway is overkill, but around 90% of it is stuff that a motivated professional would know at the end of a career anyway - all EASA are doing is making sure you know it before you start your career. I have no particular beef with that - my problem is with the abysmal nature and scope of the questions, many of which have no proper references for a school to teach properly so, while an LO may be all well and good, a question writer will have referred to an obscure publication that nobody has ever heard of for a question that comes under it (e.g. the marshmallow psychological stuff like One Minute Manager - by no means accepted doctrine at college level). This is particularly true with Human Factors, which I notice particularly as I am a CRMI. It's OK, for example, to know something about mosquito born infections, but a very rare variation like Dengue Fever? Per-lease!! That's not even mentioned in the LOs! One of our instructors is a heart surgeon and even he had to look it up! It's a bit like asking a car driver questions about trucks just in case one is ever driven.
BTW, loooking at some Australian questions, it looks as if they are not too far behind either
Phil