You're dead-set wrong on E airspace, but at least there's a degree of civility in the debate.
Howabout,
Izzzatso!!! Only if many organizations and authorities around the world are wrong, starting with ICAO.
I have never ceased to be amazed at the vociferous objection to change in matters aviation in Australia, my first realization of this being the domestic pilots campaign against the use of weather radar. There are just so many other examples, over the years. In fact, there have been few technological advances that have nor been objected to by a particular group of domestic pilots.
In the main it is only domestic pilots, and then largely only members of the AFAP, who have long resisted harmonizations with the rest of the world. AIPA had little to say about NAS, how could they, working in all varieties of airspace, including the dreaded E, around the world on a daily basis.
As Dick Smith continually tries to point out, ATC direct costs are not the only costs attributable to airspace categorization, the Airservices practice of giving absolute priority over VFR also presents serious problems ---- very little VFR traffic is "private flight". So one category of commercial operations suffers unnecessary costs. No such discrimination exists in US, as one example. That Airservices only derives revenue from one has only added to the blatant discrimination against VFR.
The extract from a letter in a previous post, about the savage enforcement within Airservices may well be true as part of th explanation ( in DCA days the trappers were referred to as the Airstapo) ----- as is the Australian practice of all aviation law (and not just major offenses)--- right down to inadvertent clerical errors -- being criminal law ----- with widespread "strict liability", meaning there is only an extremely limited defense.
However, on matters of airspace categorization, it is fundamentally untenable to suggest that Australia is the only soldier in the battalion in step. That the rest of the world had got it wrong.
Perhaps some of you should read the views of CASA's John McCormick, about Australian aviation, viz-a-vie the rest of the world, and our real place in "the big picture". It's all on the CASA web site. I agree with his remarks.
Tootle pip!!
PS: OAR is part CASA, not "the Department", the Civil Aviation Act is not the only legislation administered by CASA.