hmmmm....
Wasn't expecting such a forceful rant, but then I have been away from PPRuNe for a while, I forgot what it was like.
If we have to turn the temperature up in the debate (and I wish we could have just stuck to information passing) the whole point about Class D airspace is that VFR is permitted and that controllers have a duty, yes a duty, to provide access to it to all classes of airspace users if traffic permits.
DAP has determined that the Scottish TMA is largely Class D. This is the same DAP who has determined that the London TMA should be Class A. Presumably DAP has a way of calculating this and has concluded that the Scottish TMA can support VFR operations. And I must say that the colleagues that you have left behind you are always very helpful in providing that access, so I guess and hope that your view is a minority one.
Furthermore, you like to quote legal definitions and talk about the 500' rule, but may I draw your attention to the fact that nowhere does VFR require sight of the surface. It is perfectly legal to fly VFR provided that you are separated vertically or laterally from cloud. Navigation may be on instruments or may be by dead reckoning, but it is my responsibility, not yours, unless you put me on a heading.
Finally, your point about paying route charges. I don't want to open old wounds but let me remind you that Eurocontrol, on behalf of NATS, charges me for operating on routes where no service is offered (at night outside controlled airspace.) If there was a fair system of charges being raised for services provided, then I would be perfectly happy to pay for services when I required them, but so long as I am charged in the absence of a service I feel quite comfortable in accepting a service in the absence of a charge.
I do hope that now someone will answer my original query in a helpful and informative way...or are those days past in this forum?