Minimum safe enroute altitudes are for aircraft flying on instruments. You wouldn't be flying VFR in IMC now, would you? The minimum VFR altitude is 500 ft from any person, vessel, vehicle or structure because if flying VFR in the UK, you should be able to see any terrain in the way
No. The minimum legal distance from persons vessels vehicles or structures is 500ft. The lowest safe level to fly at is decided by the pilot in accordance with certain rules and guidance.
The legal minimum vertical separation from the mountains of Nepal on an IFR flight is 1000ft. (1000 above everything within 5nm of the aircraft is what the ANO says). But you will not get any operators that call that a safe level - try +2000ft and more again to allow for the wind.
Airspace is established for all airspace users - not just the select few you think should be there. If FL85 is a problem then why? - It is a valid VFR cruising level in the semi-circular system used in controlled airspace.
Ever wonder why VFR flights are cruising at FL+500 in controlled airspace and Class D does not require separation from IFR flights. Could it be to make VFR integration easier?
What airspace clas are you operating in Canada. Told any VFR guys to "stay the **** out of the way ". No. Bet you will never again either unless you retrun to the UK.
Look round you at US / Canada. See a slightly different attitude to aircraft operating VFR or GA IFR flights?
As I said earlier. Based on your expression, my action on being in the same situation would be to file IFR until inside the TMA and then change to VFR at top of descent into Cumbernauld.
Regards,
DFC