Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...

Page: 218
adequately issue CTPs; and third, quality and accuracy of permit documentation were below
reasonable levels.
[827] It is important to remember that KPMG only interviewed personnel from DIAND and the
Department of Justice. The KPMG report expressed the opinions and beliefs of the Defendant at
that time.
2010 FC 495 (CanLII)
[828] As a result KPMG identified three broad areas for improvement. Of importance to this case
is the observation that the planning function was not supporting the timber allocation and permitting
process. Additionally, KPMG noted that the quality control function had not been integrated into the
permitting process. It was noted that a number of instances had been observed where quality or
accuracy had been below reasonably acceptable limits.
[829] Second, the Minister commissioned a report by Mr. George Tough in 2001 after the
November 2001 meeting with the YFIA. In April 2002, the Tough Report was produced. This
report was entered as Exhibit P-79, Tab 379.
[830] Several witnesses commented on this report, including Mr. Irwin and Mr. Sewell. Mr. Irwin
and Mr. Sewell both said that the Tough Report was credible and that Mr. Tough was credible. In
his report, Mr. Tough observed that the Yukon land space includes too many failed forest
enterprises. He posed a critical question: “Where was DIAND”