11.572.8. The premier's office questioned why the ACTA submission could not be delayed until the new year, to allow time for market testing of costings and project planning to be completed.
11.572.9. Treasury recommended that the ACTA ERC submission not be supported as 'a net benefit to the State [had] not been adequately demonstrated'.
11.572.10. Mr Blunden:
- 11.572.10.1. inferred Ms Berejiklian wanted the ACTA matter to proceed in a substantive sense because 'her office had put it on the agenda'. He drew the same inference about Mr Ayres
- 11.572.10.2. queried whether this was the most appropriate expenditure of $5.5 million of taxpayers' money
- 11.572.10.3. questioned whether the ACTA proposal was a government priority as it 'didn't stand out as anything particularly special that was a requirement, and particularly with the lack of a, a rigorous BCR'.
11.572.11. When the matter was taken off the ERC agenda, Mr Maguire 'fired up', and Ms Berejiklian reinstated it.
133 The ERC decision was subject to conditions. The evidence of those involved in the implementation of that decision, specifically Mr Barnes, was that the frequency of requests for updates from the Premier's office about its progress was "atypical" ([11.554]); and, according to Mr Hangar (then a director within the Department of Industry), the way in which the project had come forward and the speed at which his department was required to procure the business case (which had to be revisited) all indicated that there was a "strong interest" from the Premier's office regarding the project ([11.555]).
134 The applicant accepted that her support for the ACTA proposal "could have been" influenced by the fact that it was being advanced by Mr Maguire ([11.194]). This left for the fact-finder the assessment of whether that evidence, which is extracted in part immediately below, was to be understood as referring only to influence arising from his being the local member, and not to influence arising from their close personal relationship ([11.549]):
This submission finds support in Ms Berejiklian['s] acceptance that her support for the ACTA proposal 'could have been' influenced by the fact it was being advanced by Mr Maguire:
[Counsel Assisting]: Was your support for the Australian Clay Target Association submission influenced by the fact that it was a project being advanced by Mr Maguire?
[Ms Berejiklian]: It could have been part of the consideration, but the absolute consideration for me, the strongest consideration, was the consequence of the Orange by-election. That's the strongest recollection I have. I don't remember meeting with him. I don't remember the meeting.
[Q]: So it was a possible factor, but at least the dominant factor, at least so far as you can recall now–?
[A]: In my mind, yeah.
[Q]: –is the Orange by-election in the way that you and I have been discussing over the last few minutes, is that right?
[A]: Yeah. Yeah. (Italics in original.)
135 It was open on this evidence, in the context of the other findings available to the Commission, to find that Ms Berejiklian's strong support of the ACTA proposal was influenced, first, by the fact that it was being advanced by Mr Maguire and had been for
