Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay / -Timmins-Baie James
ND)
Mrs Claudette Boyer (Ottawa-Vanier L)
Mr Brian Coburn (Carleton-Gloucester PC)
Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North / -Nord PC)
Mr Raminder Gill (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale PC)
Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex L)
Ms Frances Lankin (Beaches-East York ND)
Mr Bill Murdoch (Bruce-Grey PC)
Substitutions / Membres remplaçants
Mr Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa PC)
Also taking part / Autres participants et
participantes
Mr Morley Kells (Etobicoke-Lakeshore PC)
Clerk pro tem/ Greffière par intérim
Ms Tonia Grannum
Staff / Personnel
Ms Susan Klein, legislative counsel
The committee met at 1000 in room 1.
KMFC HOLDINGS INC ACT, 2000
Consideration of Bill Pr28,
An Act to revive KMFC Holdings Inc.
The Vice-Chair
(Garfield Dunlop): Good morning, everyone. We're going
to call the meeting to order.
The first order of business
is Bill Pr28, an Act to revive KMFC Holdings Inc. The sponsor is
Mr Gerry Ouellette. I'd like to ask Mr Ouellette and the
applicant if they would like to come forward, please.
Mr Jerry J. Ouellette
(Oshawa): Thank you, Mr Chair. Just a brief summary: the
company was brought forward in 1988 and was dissolved in 1996.
Through a series of errors in the dissolution the reality was
that there were some holdings that needed to be addressed at that
time and the company has to be revived in order to address those
holdings.
We've brought the individuals
forward and I believe we can introduce ourselves. They have a
presentation, should we like, or I'll leave it to your
discretion, Chair, as to how you'd like to handle it.
The
Vice-Chair: Please introduce yourselves. If we can have
a brief presentation, that would be fine.
Mr Joel
Palter: Good morning. My name is Joel Palter. I'm the
lawyer for the applicants. This is Mrs Ruth Kaaz and Mr Harold
Kaaz.
Briefly, the company was
dissolved. At the time it was dissolved, Mr and Mrs Kaaz were the
sole officers and directors of the company. The sole shareholder
of the company was a company called Dlorah Zaak Investments Ins.
Mr and Mrs Kaaz are still, and were at that time, the sole
officers, directors and shareholders of that company. All the
voting shares are held by them. Mr Kaaz holds some of the voting
shares in trust only for their children, so basically it is their
company.
Back in 1989, KMFC Holdings
was a nominee and trustee for Dlorah Zaak Investments with
respect to specific property. Inadvertently, everyone forgot that
to be the case and, come 1996, the Kaazes no longer thought they
needed KMFC Holdings and they dissolved it. It certainly had no
assets. It simply was a trustee for their existing company.
I'm happy to answer any more
specific questions.
The
Vice-Chair: Are there any questions from the committee?
Mr Ouellette, do you have anything to add to that?
Mr
Ouellette: No, not necessarily, Chair. I think that kind
of explains the situation.
The
Vice-Chair: Can I ask the parliamentary assistant if
there are any questions from the government.
Mr Brian Coburn
(Ottawa-Orléans): No, there are none and we have
received no objections.
The
Vice-Chair: Are the members ready to vote on this?
OK.
Shall section 1 carry?
Carried.
Shall section 2 carry?
Carried.
Shall section 3 carry?
Carried.
Shall the preamble carry?
Carried.
Shall the title carry?
Carried.
Shall the bill carry?
Carried.
Shall I report the bill to
the House? Yes.
Thank you very much, sir.
Mr Palter:
Thank you very much.
The
Vice-Chair: That's the way government works around
here.
MUNICIPALITY OF SIOUX
LOOKOUT ACT, 2000
Consideration of Bill Pr31,
An act to change the name of The Corporation of the Town of Sioux
Lookout to The Corporation of the Municipality of Sioux
Lookout.
The
Vice-Chair: We're going to number 3, Bill Pr31. Is it OK
with the committee if we go on without Mr Hampton? He is not
available this morning. Does anybody disagree with that?
Mrs Claudette Boyer
(Ottawa-Vanier): No problem.
The
Vice-Chair: Would the applicant introduce himself and
carry on with any comments he may have.
Mr John
McDonald: I'd like to introduce our chief administrative
officer, John Baird, and our administrative assistant, Twyla
Nicholson. I myself am the mayor of the now town of Sioux
Lookout, and I want to thank you very much for allowing us to
come here today to make this presentation.
1010
The
Vice-Chair: Acclaimed, at that.
Mr McDonald:
Thank you. Yes, I was very honoured to receive that.
We amalgamated in 1998 under
a commissioner's restructuring order and the name of our
community was not dealt with at that time. There was a suggestion
that it be put on a ballot and have the people decide if they
wanted a name change, but
the council of the time elected not to do that. We just finished
our third year of amalgamation. It has become abundantly clear
that we are no longer a town, we are now a municipality,
especially when you look at the other restructuring orders that
are taking place across the province that are similar to ours.
Their names have been changed to "municipality", which more
adequately fits the situation. I might add we grew from six
square kilometres to 536 square kilometres, so that gives you an
idea of the size of our community.
There has been some concern
among some of our residents that there is a large cost associated
with this. Our council has clearly demonstrated that we are not
going to automatically change all of our letterhead immediately
because it's not necessary. As the supplies are used up and we
replace them, we'll replace them with the new name. The only two
things that require immediate change would be our corporation
seal and maybe our parking tickets. Other than that, we're not
looking at a major expense for this name change.
I personally and council have
worked hard to try and unify our community and we feel that
calling it a municipality more adequately fits our situation. I
think that's about all I would like to say about the
application.
The
Vice-Chair: Does anyone else have any comments on this
application? I ask the parliamentary assistant if he has any
comments.
Mr Coburn:
I'd just like to report that we have no objections from any of
the ministries. I'd just like to point out as well that this has
been quite a process for you, and, hopefully, with the passage of
the red tape bill, this is something that in the future has
eliminated this convoluted process and municipalities will be
able to move on and be able to do it.
The
Vice-Chair: Do any of the committee members have any
questions? Is everyone ready to vote?
Shall section 1 carry?
Carried.
Shall section 2 carry?
Carried.
Shall section 3 carry?
Carried.
Shall section 4 carry?
Carried.
Shall the preamble carry?
Carried.
Shall the title carry?
Carried.
Shall the bill carry?
Carried.
Shall I report the bill to
the House? Carried.
Thank you very much. Is there
any snow up there?
Mr McDonald:
About five inches, but it's fairly mild.
The
Vice-Chair: Are you expecting a good snowmobile
winter?
Mr McDonald:
We didn't have a good one last year, but I hope this year.
The
Vice-Chair: Good luck. Thanks for being here.
Mr McDonald:
Thank you very much.
CANADIAN NATIONAL EXHIBITION
ASSOCIATION ACT, 2000
Consideration of Bill Pr32,
An Act respecting the Canadian National Exhibition
Association.
The
Vice-Chair: The committee will go back to Bill Pr32, An
Act respecting the Canadian National Exhibition Association. The
sponsor is Mr Morley Kells.
Mr Morley Kells
(Etobicoke-Lakeshore): Good morning. I have with me
today Mr Charney. He's been representing the Canadian National
Exhibition Association as long as I can remember. We were here
some 15 or 20 years ago doing something similar. The bill is
straightforward. The explanatory note is short. The exhibition
association has applied for special legislation to alter the
composition of its membership and of its board of directors. Of
course, the government feels that this is in order. It's laid out
there in detail. I'm sure Mr Charney would be happy to answer any
questions you have.
The
Vice-Chair: Do you have any questions yourself, sir?
Mr Gerald
Charney: I don't. I have been here on three other
occasions over the years amending the legislation.
The
Vice-Chair: Do any committee members have questions?
Mr Pat Hoy
(Chatham-Kent Essex): The membership of the association
is divided into four sections and you put specific numbers to
membership, for example, from the municipal section, "not to
exceed 27 members." Are these membership numbers changing with
the passage of this bill or do they remain the same?
Mr Charney:
The municipal section numbers have changed. The municipality used
to nominate 15 members at large and the association is taking it
upon itself to nominate the 15 members at large. We feel we are
closer to the local community than municipal council, and with
their approval they have transferred that at-large membership to
us. In that sense it's changing.
Mr Hoy: Are
any of the other membership sections changing?
Mr Charney:
No.
Mr Hoy: They
remain the same.
The
Vice-Chair: Any other questions? Does the parliamentary
assistant have any comments on this?
Mr Coburn:
No. We have no objections. In fact, we hadn't heard from the city
of Toronto and staff have tried on a number of occasions to
contact them to see if they had any concerns. We hadn't received
a reply so it can't be something of any concern to them. So we
have no objections.
Mr Kells:
They're too busy running an independent country.
Interjection: They have other items
on their plate.
The
Vice-Chair: Are the members ready to vote on this?
Shall section 1 carry?
Carried.
Shall section 2 carry?
Carried.
Shall section 3 carry?
Carried.
Shall section 4 carry?
Carried.
Shall section 5 carry?
Carried.
Shall the preamble carry?
Carried.
Shall the title carry?
Carried.
Shall the bill carry?
Carried.
Shall I report the bill to the House? Agreed.
Thank you very much, sir.
BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA
TRUST COMPANY ACT, 2000
Consideration of Bill Pr26,
An Act respecting The Bank of Nova Scotia Trust Company and
National Trust Company.
The
Vice-Chair: May I have the indulgence of the committee
to proceed without Mr Mazzilli? He is on his way in to work.
This bill has gone to the
estate commissioners. I have a report back and will read it out.
It is to Mr DesRosiers, the Clerk of the Legislative
Assembly.
"Dear Mr DesRosiers:
"Report pursuant to section
58, Legislative Assembly Act
"Re: Bill Pr26, An Act
respecting The Bank of Nova Scotia Trust Company and National
Trust Company
"We are of the opinion that
the bill in its present form, attached, should pass.
"Dated this 7th day of
November, 2000."
It is signed by Susan Greer
and John D. Ground, the estate bill commissioners.
I would ask the applicants
to introduce themselves, please, and make any comments they may
have on the bill.
Mr Stephen
Clark: I'm Stephen Clark. I'm a partner with the law
firm of McCarthy Tétrault. With me is Rory MacDonald, who is
the president and chief executive officer of the Bank of Nova
Scotia Trust Co.
The
Vice-Chair: Do you any kind of presentation or comments
you would like to make?
Mr Clark:
We can give a short introduction, if that would be helpful.
The
Vice-Chair: That would be great.
Mr Clark:
The bill that is before you now is similar to one that was
presented a couple of years ago. If we back up a bit, as most of
us are aware, the Canadian banks acquired the trust companies
and, beginning with the acquisition by the Bank of Nova Scotia of
Montreal Trust Co back in 1994, a couple of years later, the Bank
of Nova Scotia requested that all of the personal trust business
that was in Montreal Trust be moved to the Bank of Nova Scotia
Trust Co. The only way to accomplish that is to either appear
before a judge and request that each and every estate where an
individual executor or trustee has been named, and that was
naming Montreal Trust, be moved to Scotia Trust-that's a huge
process and burden on the courts. The other problem is that many
of the individual trustees or executors do not exist to consent
personally, because they are now deceased, with the result that
the only way the personal trust business can be moved from one
trust company to another is with private legislation.
Accordingly, the Bank of
Nova Scotia Trust Co appeared a couple of years ago and asked
that it be moved to the Bank of Nova Scotia Trust Co. A private
bill was done doing that and was similarly enacted in each of the
provinces of Canada.
The Toronto-Dominion Bank
has done exactly the same thing with respect to its personal
trust business. Then, finally, here we are now in 1997, when the
Bank of Nova Scotia acquired the National Trust Co. So this bill
similarly moves all of the personal trusts over from National
Trust Co to the Bank of Nova Scotia Trust Co. The Bank of Nova
Scotia Trust Co assumes all of the obligations with respect to
each of those trusts, therefore there is no impact on any one of
the individual trusts that moves over. That's a brief explanation
of what this is about.
The
Vice-Chair: Thank you. Are there any questions by any of
the committee members on this?
Mrs Boyer:
I'm just wondering about the letter you reported to us from Madam
Justice Susan Greer. Why is this coming to us? Because they had
already applied to the court, or what? I'm just curious to see
that a judge would write such a letter.
Clerk Pro Tem (Ms
Tonia Grannum): No. What happens is, this bill had an
estate provision so it had to be referred to the Commissioners of
Estate, and then they report back to the committee. This is their
report.
Mrs Boyer:
OK. I was just wondering if it's not a personal matter. Thank
you.
The
Vice-Chair: Does the parliamentary assistant have any
comments on this?
Mr Coburn:
No, other than to tell you that from circulation to the various
ministries affected there's no objections to it at all.
The
Vice-Chair: Are the members ready to vote on this
bill?
Shall section 1 carry?
Carried.
Shall section 2 carry?
Carried.
Shall section 3 carry?
Carried.
Shall section 4 carry?
Carried.
Shall section 5 carry?
Carried.
Shall section 6 carry?
Carried.
Shall section 7 carry?
Carried.
Shall section 8 carry?
Carried.
Shall section 9 carry?
Carried.
Shall the preamble carry?
Carried.
Shall the title carry?
Carried.
Shall the bill carry?
Carried.
Shall I report the bill to
the House? Yes.
Thank you very much,
sirs.
Is there anything else we
have for the committee? No. With that, we stand adjourned.
