Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...

Page: 211
[805] In preparation for the meeting of April 7, 1999, Ms. Guscott, responded to an email from
Mr. Moore, ADM, on March 23, 1999, as found in Exhibit P-79, Tab 128. In this email she stated
that it:
would be my perference as I have been working closely with the
company and understand all their ways. I suggest because of past
experience with this company that someone (region) take the lead
one ensuring good notes and records are kept.
2010 FC 495 (CanLII)
[806] She also sent an email to Mr. Beaubier in Ottawa in preparation for this meeting. This email
was entered as Exhibit P-80, Tab 48. Ms. Guscott says:
With caution I provide you the following background information,
but felt it only fair that you have the appropriate background. The
company built the mill without ever consulting or meeting with
DIAND, they chose to do all their deals with YTG, we were
approached late in the game.
(Emphasis added)
[807] As previously noted, this is factually inaccurate. More importantly, on the basis of the
documentary evidence, it is clear that Ms. Guscott knew that this was inaccurate. She goes on in the
same email to admit that:
Yes, we were late getting permits out but there was plenty of wood
available for purchase in December, they chose to blame us, and I
guess if I was a company trying to get the community on side I
would do the same, but they broke a fair amount of deals to buy
wood and not everyone is happy with them in the community, the
bottom line is they could not run the mill based on their analysis of
28cm and they have had to go back a rethink, and seek to obtain
concessions from government to have a monopoly on all the wood
(Emphasis added)