Bloggs,
Why don't you go and read the (just for starters) Airservices Airspace 2000 research reports into what actually happened at CTAF/MBZ, ditto Rob Lee's PCH report, ditto the most recent, the Ambidji report, for the facts on what pilots actually do around airfields in Glass G airspace.
Then read what CASA's McCormick actually said, in the Senate hearings, about compliance rates for calls in CTAF/CTAF(R) ----- his whole point is that the magic word --- "mandate" ------ makes no difference to compliance rates.
If your belief systems tell you otherwise, that's fine, freedom of religion is enshrined in our Constitution, but to produce the best possible safety outcomes, I prefer informed fact based rulemaking.
As to Government airspace policy, is how it got into legislation the point? The facts is that the Airspace Act and Regulations package is in place, it incorporates (as part of the legislation --- enforceable) the Airspace Policy Statement.
As I recall, that legislation was supported by Labor, when in Opposition.
Tootle pip!!
PS: I do most sincerely recommend you read the proposed radio requirements in CARs 166 NFRM.