WWW, you are trying to change your spots, aren't you? It wasn't all that long ago that you might well have been seen as a rich playboy yourself.... surely those UAS aircraft were just playthings for the privileged few, at the tax-payers expense no less!
Seriously though, objections from GA regarding the proposed controlled airspace stem from the fact that this is one of the more busy GA transit lanes in UK, between Birmingham and East Midlands airspace, effectively being the connection between north and south of the country. Thompson certainly knew the busy status of the airspace when they began commercial operations at Coventry.
Traditionally, aircraft using Coventry have required a much shorter final approach leg and it is only the arrival of bigger airliners which require a much longer final that has recently caused this to become a problem.
Inbound 737s do, in fact, already have in place a separation service, via Coventry's ATC Radar, albeit with some occasional inconvenience due to "unknown" traffic crossing the centreline to runway 23 at around 7 or 8 miles. Unfortunately, this also relates to MSA for that area and many GA aircraft cannot go higher, especially in winter. It is mainly this traffic that Coventry want to control, understandable to some extent.
The very large amount of Class G that Coventry now want to "grab" (it's as big as Birmingham's, but for far fewer movements) will effectively plug the gap in the existing Class G in that area, mainly to avoid Thompson aircraft having to be vectored, or, God forbid - GO AROUND! (will there ever be a case of an airliner in controlled airspace being held off or orbited for transit traffic?).
There is undoubtedly a commercial issue here and not just one of safety.
If they do get all the airspace they are asking for, they will cause at least two bottlenecks for GA, with some potential for some pilots attempting a poor weather VFR transit below the airspace, in one area below MSA, rather than face an ATC delay. Unfortunately, since the Thompson operation began, Coventry have earned rather a "reputation" for already attempting to
control passing aircraft merely requesting a FIS in Class G airspace.
Presumably, no small proportion of the possible "conflicts" for their Class G inbound traffic
could already have been prevented by installing a secondary radar - but this, of course would have cost Thompson money that they obviously didn't want to spend.