How can it sensibly be Dick Smith’s or any other member of the public’s responsibility to do cost/benefit analyses for the various airspace options?
Surely if the OAR was doing its job, it would have these kinds of figures and the risk mitigation data at its fingertips? OAR should be able to say that the detailed analysis of implementation of and running Class E to 1,200’ in certain parts of the ‘J’ curve would cost approximately $X and save Y lives every Z decades (or maybe the number is zero lives saved?), and that OAR considers the expenditure of $X is justified/ is not justified.
Same with e.g. putting D at e.g. Port Hedland or Mildura.
Airservices should be able to state - and justify with data - that it would cost $X to establish and run e.g. D at e.g. Mildura and OAR should be able to state - and justify with data - why the risks mitigated would / would not be worth $X.
The question: “Who’s gonna pay?” is pretty silly if the cost and risks mitigated are not quantified first.