Ya know Winnie, some years back when Dick Smith was making his second tilt at the CASA "windmill" (mid '90s) he ran a series of seminars around the country based on a similar "sky is falling" mentality. His premise, like your's was a comparison of fatalities and hours flown crap.
Makes for great headlines (which I suspect was the aim of the exercise) but has very little bearing on the overall state of safety of the industry. On that basis if we were to have "one" airline accident suddenly Oz's overall standard of safety is shot regardless of the cause. What a load of cobblers!
As you stated in an earlier post (but rather selectively) other factors such as wx and terrain need to be considered when comparing systems. Similarly (the bits you left out), as many here have attempted to point out, so does radar coverage, charts, FIS services, ATC numbers, culture, infrastucture ..........
These are the items that NAS continues to ignore. Surely a safety case would put these "unfounded" fears to rest! Or would it?
And the cost/ benefit analysis?