Can you draw a difference between a desire to build or improve a relationship with a G7 or G20 mission and all the team members mobilized to make that happen as opposed to buying a property? That seems to be the last conclusion, that the head of mission gets whatever they want.
The basis for that comment is that, if a head of mission sees fit to build or strengthen a relationship with one of the G7, then that happens. What's the difference between that type of mandate, goal or desire? Compare that type of influence with their ability to be able to choose a residence to live in.