John Ip @ipster.bsky.social · 04/12/2024I see your point about mandatory relevant considerations. But I understood Dean to be discussing the substance of what s 267 might protect against in the context of funding withdrawal. 120 2
John Ip @ipster.bsky.social · 04/12/2024That is, suppose minister (after being successfully JR’ed for failure to take into account MRC in putative Collins v Clark) makes same decision again. Further suppose decision motivated by desire to penalise certain kinds of research, but framed in terms of government priorities for growth etc. 110 1
Eddie Clark @dreddieclark.bsky.social · 04/12/2024Improper purpose is always a really hard ground to unless people are stupid enough to go on the record. In that respect... /stares at David Seymour's twitter feed. 150 5
