The BPH Energy Ltd $6.32/share Party, page-3883

I still think it will be after the election. I just said I am "looking" for a decision. To answer your question directly, there is a possibility they give the anti-everythings the shortest amount of time possible to protest and make it an election issue, then if they get re-elected they can say, "well see, that is why this project should proceed, because we got re-elected". Which would make the incredibly hard job of the "renewal/production license" easier to sell, later in the election term (potentially 2 years from NOPTA approval, if the Joint Authority gives extra time).

But it all depends how the delay is actually framed:

Scenario 1:
If Scott Morrison said "Just delay it as long as you can". Then I think Keith Pitt may decide on it prior to parliament being dissolved.

Scenario 2:
If Scott Morrison said "Delay it until after the election". Then I think it will be after the election with either Liberals or Labor in Government.

Scenario 3:
In this scenario they may be getting prepared for a potential Environmental Defenders Office law suit, a law suit similar to Santos', where EDO will claim it was not in the "public interest" and the Government will claim it is in the "national interest" just as the OPGGS act requires.

Scenario 4:
There is a chance they are actually waiting for ASX:MMR (which I have not seen talked about for maybe a year on these forums but, that could be a possibility) as the guidelines do mention "parent companies" which the "Joint Authority may take into account" -Offshore Petroleum Exploration Guideline: Work-Bid Australian Government Department of Industry, Innovation and Science (2015). This scenario is the most complicated because eventually there would need to be a three way communication (ASX-Government-MMR) to say MMR is viable and then MMR may reinstate with PEP-11 being granted simultaneously (if this scenario was true, which I think is unlikely). The AAT caseload report suggests the average turnaround for these cases is about 46 weeks, which would be around the 30/03/2022 as shown here: 55155407

Scenario 5:
There is a possibility Keith Pitt would rather approve it under the COVID scheme then let them remove 3D seismic testing.

Scenario 6:
The scenario all bullish shareholders want. Just as they did in the past before the Narrabri approval, and just as they were claiming Newcastle needed a new gas fired power plant, the Government may go on a grand crusade up and down the East Coast spruiking "Gas Led Recovery", and explain why carbon capture and storage is so important. CCS is the key here because back in July 2020 the Joint Authority caused a change to happen when the first application returned to NOPTA under "further information required" it re-emerged without its exemption, but shortly after BPH also announced it was looking at CCS... So there is a possibility the Joint Authority asked/hinted/mentioned to the applicant if they would consider CCS.

Scenario 7:
Keith Pitt has mentioned "financial probity" and he would therefore know that if he rejected the first application the companies share price may respond, then if he received the second application and then did the same thing, he would effectively be creating two negative news catalysts, so maybe he just wants to do away with both at the same time. (The most bearish scenario).