ozm8 (good handle),
I think that the issues are somewhat more complex; the cost of providing E and C is the same, arguably it costs more for E, radar or not.
It is clear that class C is safer than class E. Equally you can say class E is safer than class G.
What is happening here is a “vast amount” of class C is being replaced by E, a downgrade in safety for probably extra cost... It's harder to do E than C due to its unpredictable, ever changing environment. Harder equals more ATCs. Great work folks. See the USA model, more ATCs per flight hour, why?
This is then "offset" with a small band of levels i.e. two IFR levels, over a massive area, which is currently G airspace being replaced by E; where there is no identifiable lack of safety in it being G, due to the particular levels; i.e. high… No cost savings... Same workload issues, same ATC numbers needed.
Over Tassie the class C is replaced by class G between Fl125 and FL145; demonstrably less safe. no cost savings...
Less safety, more cost for those that pay = more flexibility to those that don't.
Dodgy unique procedures not available anywhere else in the world too; the whole package doesn’t smell to good. No consultation with those that don't like any element; well not after the first complaint.
Advantages for most is no pay (in E) for all the things that they currently don’t pay for in C; but it is the nasty ATCs don’t give me a clearance… because I didn’t flight plan; you mongrels… But there’s no traffic, I know, you don’t, so you should just jump and give me first priority because I’m noisy… I’ll fix you, I’ll get rid of you… How, lets change all the CTA into OCTA; done, no more pesky ATCs. Sure...
Did you know that IFATCA describes class E as uncontrolled airspace? They are currently lobbying ICAO to have them also declare it as such, uncontrolled airspace with enhanced IFR services… You know it makes sense…
Bottle of Rum