THE depth of the hole that the Environment Department has dug for itself became clear the moment Airtel-Vodafone launched its appeal against the Oakleigh Vinery decision.
Having spent seven months dutifully signing off on the recommendations of its professional staff at open planning meetings, Environment’s politicians decided enough was enough.

They were not there just to rubber-stamp decisions already made – they had a more important role. They were a board of directors exercising its right to run the department their way.

So, with scant regard to the advice from professionals in the fields of both planning and health, the deputies launched an attack on mobile phone masts and the company that wanted to erect one.

With no right to reply, Airtel just had to take it. The frustration of being subjected to amateur hour can be seen in the letter published on this page.

Who needs science, fact and analysis when you can have baseless opinions and conjecture? The strict parameters of the planning law suddenly seemed very easy to bend.

And it’s also easy to win an argument when there is nobody to argue back.

Carried away in the heat of the moment – ‘you see, we do make a difference’ – it is questionable how many of the deputies thought through the consequences should Airtel appeal.

For starters, who will present Environment’s case to the independent planning panel?

Will it be one of the professional staff? That would be one of the same staff who accepted the advice of the director of public health and the Environmental Health department.

Or will one of the deputies have the courage to step forward themselves and defend their decision?

It seems unlikely.

Either way, given that the considered professional opinion of Environment’s planning officers has so far been countered only by off-the-cuff ramblings, Airtel should go into the appeal confident of success.

At the very least, they will have the luxury of being able to defend themselves against groundless accusations and Wikipedia science.