The reason people are having a go at DFC is because his view of a particular area of flying (pilots with current instrument skills, and using them) bears no relation to reality.
It's a bit like going to a CAA safety meeting. A mere mention of the dreaded 3-letter words (GPS or IFR) gets people hissing at you. Those meetings are aimed at very low hour VFR-only pilots, which is fair enough because they form undoubtedly the biggest single group in UK GA and they do keep having daft and easily avoidable incidents.
The problem is when people who preach that stuff refuse to accept that there is another group of pilots who have long since moved on.
I don't know why. Maybe they regard them as a threat of some sort?
It's possible, at a price, to get a plane that's well equipped, and it's possible to get trained up and with the application of some more money and time one can stay current with all that. But the old hands have a problem coming to grips with this. So we have for example the CAA "safety" leaflet #25 which contains mostly complete bull. This is largely why the bulk of GA is still firmly back in the 1960s rut and is gradually sinking deeper and deeper into it. The flying schools are losing students all the time; it's no wonder they are lobbying the CAA to hit the FAA option. A whole lot of good that would do; killing off the one group of pilots who have put in the time and money to get good machines and who stay current in them.
Here in the UK we have the IMC Rating which was an astonishingly imaginative and brilliant piece of progress, which I am certain nobody could bring in today. It has its faults; chiefly that the minimum training required is well behind its legal privileges, but one could say the same for the PPL and I doubt anybody wants to go down that road
A lot of IMCR holders are like most PPL holders: skint and doing too few hours, yet the traditionalists are slagging off the IMCR when really they should be asking why are people doing so few hours. A part of the answer is that one cannot get one's hands on a suitable plane unless one buys one or buys into one. But no IMCR instructor is going to tell you that!
Outside the UK, nothing short of a full IR is any good for serious flying, unless one is where the weather is nice, or in say the USA where one can fly VFR up to 17999ft.
A lot of the old timers that administer GA policy are quite old fashioned, and that's why there is this struggle around getting and maintaining European IFR privileges.
There is never likely to be a problem flying around VFR; that's a long accepted institution which, apart from local restrictions, is never likely to go away.
It's IFR flight that a lot of traditionalists have a problem with. This is what we see in this thread.