Windfarms, both offshore and onshore, were one of the key issues in the election campaign.

And a significant number of new MHKs secured their seats on an anti-Mooir Vannin ticket.

With two candidates in the running for Chief Minister, where does this leave the Ørsted project? The independent examining body is due to report with its recommendations to the new Council of Ministers in early December.

In her manifesto, Kirrie Jenkins said she remained opposed to plans for an onshore windfarm in her constituency at Earystane and Scard.

She did not mention Mooir Vannin. But in a consultation submission, she said consent should be ‘refused, or at minimum deferred, pending robust evidence, enforceable conditions, and independent monitoring’.

This could mean that if she is elected as Chief Minister, she could not take part in the decision to approve or refuse the application when it goes to CoMin, as she would be conflicted by her public statement.

Chris Thomas’s manifesto, meanwhile, could be described as critical of offshore wind.

It points out that he voted against the government’s offshore energy production strategy.

And he calls for the original agreement for lease awarded to Ørsted in 2015 to be published.

Could he be described as conflicted?

It is likely that a number of others in a Kirrie Jenkins or Chris Thomas CoMin would also be opposed to Mooir Vannin, and they too would be conflicted.

Other MHKs would have to be drafted in as acting Ministers for the decision-making process, but they would come from a very limited pool of those who have not made public announcements on the offshore windfarm.

It may be that MLCs would have to be brought in to do the job - which would raise questions about the democratic legitimacy of any decision made.

Could a new CoMin conclude that ultimately it should be for Tynwald to decide?

The chances of Ørsted securing a marine infrastructure licence appear to be diminishing at every political turn.