Snakecharma, your heartfelt reply to Dick strikes a chord in me. There seems to be a problem in Australian Aviation that divisions are drawn between "Sky gods" flying heavy jets with a hundred or more pax, "RAAF" pilots flying at taxpayers expense, and "weekend warriors" who of course are characterised as bumbling fools, then of course there are the even lower folks on the totem pole, LSA, weight shifters, etc. This is unhelpful.
Have you considered that the weekend warrior and her family are as much entitled to protection from YOU as you are from them? This is where the Aviation Act with its priority on the safety of RPT passengers above all fails first in my opinion.
I understand your working environment provides challenges to separation but to blame it all on some theoretical VFR PPL holder is a bit rich. To put that another way; he may be looking out of a scratched windscreen, with Thirty year old radios in a noisy environment, but you have an air-conditioned quiet cockpit with the latest tools and superb training, so exactly who is responsible if an airprox occurs? In my opinion both of you.
I cannot comment on the debate Dick started because I don't have the experience, but I would like to suggest that the underlying idea that somehow volume of passengers count in determining who gets safe passage is fatally flawed.
In a marine environment, (with one exception*) large and small vessels seem to co exist quite well and while big ships often have right away, they are not absolved of blame if they hit something smaller, nor do they go around slagging off at recreational boaters.
*The one exception being a certain ships pilot who is irrationally hostile to all recreational vessels and who can be heard on VHF calling them "marine pollution".