Fanotta,Interesting, the media seems to have switched on alot of...

Fanotta,

Interesting, the media seems to have switched on alot of publicity about gas running out and two seperate industry bodies are running gas adds, and it all started just after nsw passed there bill.

Either way, I think legal action occurs.

If federal says yes, nsw in court over constitution legality, if federal says no, they themselves in court for potential bias and or procedural un fairness.

Considering nopta made a recommendation under laws pre nsw legislation changes, a court may wish the JA decision be based on pre existing laws because those were the laws at the time, and part way in the process.

I can not see that the legislation is backdated to pre the nopta decision.

Nor can I see that in zegalls bill federally.

Either way if in court I think a judge maybe scathing due to plus 1 year to decide and the targeted legislation that singles out one entity.

It is not hard to see both governments have not decided and changed the rules before deciding deliberately.

The nsw governor is a retired judge, if still a member of the judiciary, would have a professional obligation to decline it if un constitutional.

Barristers and judges serve the courts as they are court representatives utmost.

They must always put the court first and the laws it governs.