conducive to maintaining the relationship. It is certainly not the case that people act in that way only where it is believed to be necessary to do so for the survival of a relationship.
107 As to "advancing" a relationship, the applicant contends that there was no evidence to support a finding that the applicant believed that exercising her public functions was "capable of deepening or strengthening" the relationship. In response the Commission relies on evidence as to the dynamics of the relationship, which suggested that the applicant was conscious of a need to accommodate and assuage Mr Maguire's insecurities by supporting him and projects for which he was a strident advocate (see [10.29]).
108 The applicant specifically refers to the Commission's recording (at [11.556]) of Counsel Assisting's submissions as to matters which "tended in favour of" a conclusion that the applicant had exercised her official functions preferentially in favour of the ACTA proposal influenced by a desire to maintain or advance the relationship:
… [Counsel Assisting] identified the following matters, which they contended, when considered cumulatively, tended in favour of such a conclusion:
11.556.1. the nature and strength of Ms Berejiklian's close personal relationship with Mr Maguire including Mr Maguire's status as a member of Ms Berejiklian's 'love circle'
11.556.2. Mr Maguire's role as the 'principal proponent' within government for the ACTA proposal to the knowledge of Ms Berejiklian
11.556.3. Mr Maguire's level of access to Ms Berejiklian and his preparedness to directly lobby her in order to seek to advance projects of which he was supportive, including the ACTA proposal
11.556.4. Mr Maguire's manner of lobbying – a self-described 'serial pest' who was variously described by others as, amongst other things, persistent and aggressive
11.556.5. the absence of any measures taken by Ms Berejiklian to insulate herself from Mr Maguire's influence over her decision-making insofar as it concerned projects advanced by him
11.556.6. Ms Berejiklian's apparent preparedness to take, or not take, steps in her public life with a view to placating Mr Maguire and maintaining their personal relationship
11.556.7. Ms Berejiklian's acknowledgment that the fact that the project was being advanced by Mr Maguire 'could have been part of the consideration' and 'would have been a factor'
11.556.8. the absence of evidence supporting a conclusion that Ms Berejiklian supported the ACTA proposal because she concluded that it was in the public interest to do so.
109 As to these eight subparagraphs, the applicant submits that: the first refers only to the existence of the relationship; the second to fourth refer to matters about Mr Maguire's position, and do not go to the issue of the applicant's state of mind; the fifth and eighth
