Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...

Page: 74
[290] Minister Irwin, in his previously mentioned June 18, 1996 letter, to Mr. Devries expressly
acknowledged that the initial LPL proposal was not adequate. As such it cannot be argued that the
initial LPL proposal was relied upon by the Defendant. In this letter Minister Irwin said, “I assure
you that we will give proper consideration to the project once a proposal has been received.”
(Emphasis added)
2010 FC 495 (CanLII)
[291] In his letter of June 7 th , 1996, Mr. Bourgh thanked the Minister for the opportunity to meet
at the Gold Show. He expressed his understanding that the LPL proposal would be given serious
consideration. Mr. Bourgh did not refer to the commitments made by Mr. Irwin and Mr. Doughty at
the Gold Show. The Plaintiffs allege that this was not an oversight or an omission.
[292] Mr. Gartshore testified that the absence of any mention of the Gold Show commitment in
Mr. Bourgh’s June 7 th letter was a deliberate decision by LPL. This decision was made to avoid
offending the RDG and Yukon Regional Office by having “gone over their heads”. Mr. Gartshore
explained this rationale in a letter to Mr. Brian Kerr on June 17 th , entered as Exhibit P-12.
[293] Mr. Gartshore and Mr. Staffen testified that Mr. Ivanski had met with them and expressed
his displeasure about LPL having gone over his head. Mr. Gartshore testified that this meeting took
place at Panda’s Restaurant, in Whitehorse, and Mr. Staffen says that it happened in Mr. Ivanski’s
office. Mr. Bourgh also remembered having a meeting with Mr. Ivanski at Panda’s Restaurant.