I get your point Term and you ask some good questions of which the answers to some are obvious (and harsh reality) but also some that don't have answers.
I want to play devils advocate on this next part so it is designed that way.
Let's say Bazely has his eyes on the best 22 kids in the country. 11 of them can't afford that $2k for whatever reason and in some of those cases, would probably make the u20s and u23s (Ian Hogg is a good example). That's $6k for parents. Now Bazely has the option of putting out the best 22 or the best 11 and "the next 11 that can afford it". This then no longer becomes something prestigious because if Joe Smith has a kid that is just below the level required, but can afford the $2k, then his kid goes when the truth is, he is not good enough.
Does Bazely then say to kids before they come to trials 'can you afford $2k?' Let's say that Alex Rufer and his parents can't afford $2k because of family circumstances and he does not go, how does that work? I know NZF said they can look at cases of hardship but if they have a few cases of hardship, they can't say yes to everyone, and then, what makes them say yes to one kid and not another? Also if you are a parent who has paid and find out others have not, you are going to ask questions and want your cash back.
I do not like this because now, the white shirt becomes a matter of who can afford it, not who deserves it. Earning the right to wear the AW shirt has been a privilege and one earned (in 99% of cases), that can now be put up for debate. I get that times need to change, but make the senior team pay because as pro footballers, they can afford it. The kids can't.