Neutrality should be the rule for all services, and a distinction between wired and wireless not only defies reason, it also abandons the portion of the Internet that is currently most lacking in openness and neutrality. Users are increasingly demanding the ability to do many, if not all, of the same things in a wireless environment as they do in a wired one. Regardless of what regulation may look like or whether there is any regulation at all, there shouldn’t be a distinction between the neutrality available on wired services and that available on wireless services.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation's Cindy Cohn does a reasonable job of parsing the Google/Verizon net neutrality proposal, finding some good ideas, some interesting ideas, and some really BAD ideas – and the idea that wireless internet access should be exempt from any neutrality provisions is about the worst.
Oh – and you think this doesn't concern us here in Australia? How long before someone here gets the same ideas, or before it gets "exported" to us via trade agreements with the USA (as has happened already with copyright and software patent provisions)? This is not an argument we can ignore – the outcomes will affect us eventually.