all aircraft above 5000’ were treated as “ in the system” and given a directed traffic information service
Traffic_Is_Er_Was is correct.
It's always been clear that some here either have - or had at the time - a poor understanding of the earlier procedures.
The very fact that we have not even tried any terminal Class E airspace at a non-tower airport shows the incredible resistance to change – or possibly because of the lack of people with the ability to show leadership at CASA.
Times have changed.
The earlier attempt to introduce NAS highlighted the fact that due process had not been followed by various parties, and instead it was said a "crash or crash through" approach had been adopted.
Airspace Reform – Quiet Reflection
Safety Management System Failure - Australia
I suspect that these days a "trial" would not be entertained unless at the minimum evidence of a safety risk existed at a location that required addressing (in which case why would it be a "trial"??), followed by a CBA, industry consultation - particularly by the directly affected parties - with agreement, a thorough education campaign completed etc. etc.