Dick, I feel I must support Spodman here, direct quote from your first post:
It sounds to me as if the whole issue is industrial. That is, industrial resistance to change by the air traffic controllers has resulted in a system where our aircraft are fitted with some of the best ADS-B transceivers in the world, but they are not actually used in the J curve in Australia to help prevent accidents.
This is
a) Completely and utterly wrong. There is no agenda, industrial or otherwise from ATCs to prevent better use of ADS-B to improve both safety and service levels in Australia.
b) Offensive, and borderline defamatory to operational ATCs, all of whom do the best they can with the rules and facilities they have, and many of whom are actively working and advocating to improve procedures and safety levels in spite of bureaucratic difficulties.
For the above quote, you absolutely should apologise. If you want to get operational ATCs on side, don't attack them with baseless accusations.
Operational ATCs would like nothing more than to be able to improve the service and safety level that they provide by fully implementing the benefits of ADS-B, including greater coverage where it is of benefit, airspace and sector design that works with the technology we have, ground system based safety nets that are fit for purpose, procedures, and appropriate separation standards.
We are not the ones you should be attacking, and to do so only serves to alienate a professional group that could be on your side if you choose to make your arguments in a less inflammatory fashion. There are many issues with the rollout of ADS-B in Australia, ATCs want to see it done better too.
If you want to see improvement, perhaps consider that you might be more effective if you got the industry professionals onside.