I think you answered your own question;

Committees are there to action recommendations (among other things). There is no such thing as a "no brainer" (imho that's how we get into these messes). What makes sense to you and I, may not make sense to other disciplines and vice versa. I recall many discussions about safety rule recommendations at past zone meetings and even AGMs. It's amazing what happens (and what you learn) when you have practitioners of many different disciplines in a room. What may be considered safe practice for one discipline may be unsafe for another. This, to my mind, is a large component of the safety committee's responsibility. To communicate and co-ordinate with the other committees and ZD (because geography and environment may be a factor).

In fact, I think we're talking about this not because we want new rules put in effect but, because these new rules impact us negatively, and this is a result of an incomplete communication before putting these rules in place.

There is a purpose for committees, I think the issue is effectiveness of process (or lack thereof).