Ann: Judicial review update, page-48

So whos got a legal background and thinks they know whether the OSCG claims are justified under the regulation?

the guidelines themselves are not clear cut and its hard to argue that MEL was not acting in the spirit of the regulation:

* OCSG agrees mel undertook consultation, but did not have have a "plan" as there was no evidence of a "plan"
* OCSG does agree that stakeholders within 2km were consulted, but this was too narrow.
* the consultation was not effective... Is it meant to be effective?!?!? Should this be measured by number of protestors?!?
* why should mel undertake consultation for activities it is not doing as part of the current program?

If the court rules in favour of MEL i suspect therell be a new Director of OCSG who can can interpret their own regulations. The Director has put her job on the line based on public bias.