Far more CAS than necessary is 'grabbed', and then, despite assurances to the contrary, GA is excluded. They are then required to fly around the outside, thus wasting time, and fuel, and at the same time increasing risk of collision by funnelling them through the remaining narrow gaps. Once CAS is established, it can't be shifted, and the promised periodic reviews of it's operation almost never happen.
I can only repeat that the objectors might have more credibility if they refrained from referring to an airspace "grab". It is a change of status after due process; also, any introduction is subject to a later review. To make a blanket statement that "GA is excluded" is nonsense; if you consider that clearance has been refused on a particular occasion for no good reason, then file a report about it and the facts can be ascertained. And if you do route around or below CAS, what is the problem? There could be as many or as few unknown aircraft near your level as in any other part of Class G airspace - and you always keep a very good look-out, do you not?
As regards the dimensions of CAS, they are the minimum necessary to contain the IFR routes and procedures; as wb9999 refers, the establishment of CAS for that purpose is actually the ICAO norm, the pilots and pax in such aircraft deserving a better deal than just hoping for the best in Class G, albeit with a TS or DS.
2 s