Thank you to our legal team that comprised of our paid professional legal representatives and key volunteers for giving our community a voice. Fighting for our regional community against a heartless government.

The WRL and VNI-West projects if allowed to proceed in their current form will have irreversible negative and significant life changing effects on our communities.

Behind the complexity and depth of the legal arguments are individuals, families, and small business that do not have the capacity to undertake a legal fight such as this.

Thank you to the Legal Team for being our voice.

On September 7^th, 8^th, 11^th and 12^th I attended our proceedings in the Supreme Court in Melbourne. Somewhere completely foreign to me, an environment that at times felt daunting and intimidating.

Key takeaways from the hearing:

• The State Government’s legal team dedicated significant time arguing that no one could take the Government to court about these Orders, that in their view the Orders were not subject to any scrutiny from anyone, including the parliament.
• They also spent a lot of time asserting that the Orders were above the law, a law set down by parliament.
• Our legal team made a powerful case against both assertions, and we believe we have delivered a compelling argument to have these orders quashed as unlawful.
• The decision sits with the judge and this is a complex matter.
• We hope to receive his decision in the next 1-2 months, but it is not possible to know when exactly it will be made.

Throughout this time in court, I reflected on the last three years of uncertainty, pain and suffering that this WRL project has brought to our lives and communities and more recently to the VNI West affected communities. I also thought of the wonderful people that I have met and who have demonstrated a powerful and united resistance.

The community have contributed in many ways, by volunteering many thousands of hours to the campaign, by showing their unwavering support and through their many generous donations.

The MCHPA committee is humbled to have been tasked with bringing this matter before the court. Our committee and many volunteers have been tireless in the work that has gone into getting us this far and I sincerely thank them for their work.

Thanks also to the many thousands of community members who have been with us on this three plus year journey and to the others who have just joined the fight.

Our united and unrelenting stance has and will deliver a better solution, we remain United in our opposition to this horrendously dangerous project. Our fight continues.

Day 3 September 11^th, 2023

• David Batt KC continued his submissions today on behalf of the Minister.
• He spent considerable time on submissions relating to standing, relying (as earlier) on the fact that standing has not been determined in the AEMO proceeding to support a submission that the Alliance does not have standing in this proceeding.
• David also devoted some hours to general background, including how the Victorian legislation fits into the ‘national’ scheme (referring to the NEL as a ‘template’) and taking the court through various provisions in the NEVA.
• In the afternoon, David turned to the first of the Alliance’s grounds; he will continue with these submissions tomorrow.
• The Judge again asked questions throughout the day, clarifying submissions where this was necessary and challenging counsel where his Honour was not convinced by a particular argument.
• David Batt is expected to complete the Minister’s submission tomorrow early afternoon (we are expecting no more than 2 hours for our reply submissions, with counsel working this evening on speaking notes).

Day 4  September 12^th, 2023

• The Alliance’s hearing of its challenge against the Minister’s February and May orders finished today.
• During the morning David Batt KC worked through the balance of the Minister’s submissions (assisted by junior counsel).  The judge again had a number of questions in relation to the submissions.
• Importantly, during the course of the hearing over the past four days, the Minister conceded that without the orders, option 5 was the preferred option under the RIT-T for VNI West.
• Nick Wood SC presented the Alliance’s reply submissions after the lunch break.  The purpose of a reply is to respond only to matters raised in the opponent’s submissions.
• Nick spoke clearly and persuasively to the issues of standing, the construction and interpretation of section 16Y (under which the orders were made) and, briefly, to other grounds.
• The judge has reserved judgment.
• There is no specific timeframe in which the court is required to hand down judgment.  Earlier this year the court indicated that a hearing and judgment might be possible before the end of the year, but the matters which were the subject of submissions are complex and this might not be the case.