It isn't a question of whether or not C is safer than E, it is a question of whether or not the traffic levels require C. Where E has replaced G with DTI (sorry about the acronyms but I'm sure that you are with me. E with Directed Traffic Information is really F but in Australia we are used to that, we call airspace D but ATC still use C procedures etc.) Nevertheless E with a professional controller separating must be better than G with two pilots trying to sort out Rafferties Rules separation in their cockpits, regardless of what VFR are doing on the radio or whether or not VFR are equipped with anti stealth gear. I think of E as like our G but the supplier of DTI, i.e. someone in an office on the ground, with the overall picture clearly in front of him, (and some professional training and computer aids to assist him,) must be the best person to sort out IFR separation in all but the quietest environments surely? If transponders aren't required in G, why make them compulsory if that G is replaced with E, a better alternative? Doesn't make sense to me. The problem is that some of our controllers, having grown up with C airspace, (which is really B here, culture at work I agree) can't imagine having "controlled airspace" without owning everything that moves in it. This has to be the only country in the world wherein the tug driver needs a bloody clearance to drive across the tarmac after pushback!! That doesn't mean that they can't adjust, in my opinion the level of service from ATC (co-operation, flexibility, etc) has improved out of sight over the last say ten years, but if we need to retrain some old Flight Service Officers who don't have the same culture of control, well why not?.
The argument that our pilots are not competent to operate in the U.S. because of our "culture" is not one that I support and my experience indicates the opposite. It certainly is true that some will find it difficult for a while to fly without quacking on the radio , but the adjustment won't take long.