As an very infrequent and hopefully somewhat useful poster on this site, my late sortie to the fray is a deliberate step back, necessary to put distance between missive construct and the pure act of uncalled political bastardry we have collectively had dumped on us. Most commentators, rightfully responded to the situation over past days venting a mixture of indignation and disbelieve that such actions could occur in Australia: Two days ago, I to would have so vented.

Yet I submit this PEP 11 cancellation taken by Scott Magabe is but one more step on the nasty road of Australian political intrigue surrounding Australian Energy Policy and we, as BPH shareholders, are but one more unit of collateral damage in that sad litany. A current long running case study of political bastardry is currently playing out and serves as witness to the levels of moral depravation these people sink, including using every tactic to hid their malfeasance.

Currently Mr. B. Collaery is enduring Government wrath due to his defence of a ASIO whistle blower whose remorse exposed a grossly illegal activity that significantly advantaged Australia’s position against the newly formed nation of Timor when it came to dividing spoils of hydrocarbon deposits in “mutually administered” Bonaparte waters. What we witness today, 17 plus years after the fact, is the guilty prosecuting the innocent: manipulating Australia’s judicial system with contrived secrecy claims to hide their sins. And both political parties are guilty of sustaining the legal action; ever hear Mr. Albanese mention he would correct this wrong and drop the case? The below links summarize the saga for those unfamiliar with the case.

Explained:the show (non)trial of Bernard Collaery - Crikey

https://www.crikey.com.au ›2021/11/10 › bernard-coll...

lawyerscriticise government's high court bid to keep Collaery ...

https://www.theguardian.com ›australia-news › dec › b...

Previously I have written that understanding critical aspects in this game is as much about interpreting what cast shadows and the need to look past the obvious put in place to distract critical analysis. Therefore BPH Shareholders need to ask salient questions such as:

a) Who is a significant potential participant in the NSW Co2 sequestration space? Is that party at arm’s length distance from political shenanigans that so blighted and stalled out BPH Nopta approvals? Will that party be pleased with Scott Magabe’s intervention?

b) Why announce and finance a new gas fired power station in NSW when there is clearly a gas feedstock shortage? Or do they have vision to an alternate source that requires an uncluttered pitch that a cheaper source nearby would stymie?

c) While we are at it, which company has significant shareholding in major Australian gas suppliers. Hint: watch the video, take note of relevant company names, then do your own research into top shareholders in key Australian energy suppliers. See any common factor? https://www.bitchute.com/video/QReZCLRnwF79/

In my opinion, PEP 11 was killed by Scott and his flock of Morris dancers not because the project is weak in any part, but rather because it is actually very sound, technically, commercially and environmentally. As such it is a threat, so truss the reasons in fallacious political double speak. I have written enough but left you, fellow shareholders, with a key that should you so choose, will open a door that has always been in view but like so much, resides in the shadows.