The inquiry into the area plan for the east was conducted in an adversarial manner.

Despite a denial by the Cabinet Office earlier this year, the report into the inquiry written by chairman Michael Hurley said that it was conducted with an ’adversarial approach’.

A Freedom of Information request revealed that the government decided objectors to the plan were not entitled to legal aid as it was ’an inquisitorial process and not adversarial’.

The response from Cabinet Office added: ’Regarding the appointment of legal representation for the Cabinet Office, it is important to bear in mind that Cabinet Office is acting for the public at large to ensure adequate zoning of all types of land and not for or against any particular party.

’It is an inquisitorial process and not adversarial and so does not have the same degree of determination of individuals’ rights as legal proceedings for which legal aid can be granted.’

However, people who appeared in front of the inquiry, including Onchan MHK Rob Callister and Braddan Commissioners’ chairman Andrew Jessopp disagreed, that the inquiry wasn’t adversarial.

Mr Jessopp previously told the Examiner that ’in a case with winners and losers, it is adversarial’.

And it would appear that inquiry chairman Mr Hurley agrees.

In his report he outlined that he conducted ’five round-table sessions’ to look at issues such as population, the environment and development briefs.

He added: ’A more formal, adversarial approach was adopted for the consideration of representations concerning the treatment of specific sites.’

The report, published late last week, will impact upon the island’s planning system for years to come.

During and after the inquiry, members of the public decried the fact that, while the Cabinet Office and property developers hired UK barristers, they were not able to seek legal aid.

The Cabinet Office spent about £70,000 on its barrister John Barrett (pictured above) who quizzed objectors to the area plan on behalf of the government.