It seems to me that for most older NPPLs the licence was welcome in that the reduced medical criteria enabled those who would have been grounded following certain illnesses were able to carry on with acceptable limitations. I reckon the vast majority only got a NPPL for this reason. The NPPL medical rules were eminently sensible as your own GP has a far better take on your current health than a remote AME who sees you infrequently and has no ongoing access to your medical records. Indeed that was one of the main selling points as a replacement for the largely meaningless class 2 examination which is like an MOT and only covers your condition on the day. It looks like the NPPL medical type model will be repeated in the USA soon too for regular PPLs.
So the ill thought out revisions will likely ground an awful lot of us older pilots for absolutely no valid medical reason, creating untold stress, misery and denying the GA industry of a large revenue source - after all we are the ones with the reserves of disposable income - as long as we managed our pensions well!
Rather than encouraging GA it looks to me that the CAA, whilst paying lip service to releasing the shackles, have decided that they went too far and now want to put the claws back in, probably as the AMEs could see a big reduction in potential income. As usual all this only comes to light after the thing is introduced, we all having been tantalised by the false promise of simplification and "good news" ahead.
It stinks. The LAA should be ashamed of themselves in signing this debacle off and it proves that certain elements in the CAA as well as being either ignorant or incompetent don't understand GA at all. I speak as an ex employee myself, so am not proud.