And his reasons for refusing the school were limited. He found that the school would not be compatible with the rural character of its immediate surroundings, because of its two-storey buildings and paving. That meant that the school did not meet two of the objectives of its 1(a) zone. He dismissed all other grounds raised by Camden Council in its defence of the Quranic Society's appeal.

It will be interesting to see this week whether those real reasons for the decision the crux of the court battle over the school make it through to the public consciousness. A major part of the problem is that Camden Council chose to call, as part of its case, evidence from people opposed to the school on religious grounds.

The council offered into evidence witnesses who spoke of Camden residents not wanting to feel alienated in ``their own town'' who didn't want to see prayer mats rolled out while they were waiting in the queue in the post office.

They tendered evidence from residents who said the school would be a terrorist breeding ground, that it didn't fit with Australia's ``egalitarian culture''. Those are views that many Camden residents would find offensive but by

being raised in court they have tarnished the town's name.

Commissioner Brown did not repeat those views or comment on them. He simply said that they were irrelevant and he had given them no weight.

This week, Camden Council should be doing more than just celebrating the court's vindication of its decision last year to reject the school. It should be going on the front foot to promote community harmony and tolerance.

Because if the outside world has mixed messages about the way Camden feels about people of other cultures, the council's evidence is partly to blame.

rsenescall@fairfaxmedia.com .au