Legislative Assembly of Ontario

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The committee met at 0902 in committee room 1.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Good morning, everyone. The Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs will now come to order.

Allied Contractors (Kitchener) Limited Act, 2024

Consideration of the following bill:

Bill Pr32, An Act to revive Allied Contractors (Kitchener) Limited.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): First on the agenda today, we have the consideration of Bill Pr32, An Act to revive Allied Contractors (Kitchener) Limited.

First, I’m going to ask the MPP sponsor to introduce herself.

M^me Lucille Collard, MPP: My name is Lucille Collard. I’m the MPP for Ottawa–Vanier, and I’m the sponsor for Bill Pr32, Allied Contractors (Kitchener) Limited Act, 2024.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Thank you very much. We have our applicant joining us via Zoom, so I’m going to ask them to introduce themselves.

Mr. Vijay Hanspal: My name is Vijay Hanspal. I’m here for the revival of the company Allied Contractors (Kitchener) Ltd.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Thank you very much.

We’ll return to the MPP sponsor. Madame Collard, do you have any comments regarding Pr32?

M^me Lucille Collard: No, I don’t. I did initially make some kind of inquiry because this company seemed to be from Kitchener. Obviously, that’s not in Ottawa–Vanier, but I understand that there is a link; that the applicant has an intention of opening the business in my riding, so I’ve agreed to sponsor it.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): I’ll return to Mr. Hanspal for any comments on the bill.

Mr. Vijay Hanspal: The company, Allied Contractors (Kitchener) Ltd. was formed back in 1972. It was a sister company to a company incorporated in Kenya, East Africa, in 1970. The end for both companies was to carry out investments in construction projects.

For various reasons, the Ontario company was not able to follow through on much activity. We got quite tied up with projects in East Africa. We were looking after the company administratively, but unfortunately, at some point in the late 1980s or early 1990s, the registered address of the company in Kitchener, the building itself, we believe was demolished and rebuilt into something else, and we were not notified. It was not possible for the people dealing with the mail to forward it to us. We weren’t notified, so the company was struck off because we weren’t filing returns and what have you.

We’re now at the point where we’d like to go back to revive the company on the basis that it has got the same name as the tenured company. We’ve filed incorporation documents to support that and are looking to make investments in the company, looking at possibly starting off in Ottawa.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Thank you. Are there any other interested parties in attendance here today? I don’t see any.

Now I’ll look to the government, if there are any comments or questions. I recognize Mr. Harris.

Mr. Mike Harris: Thank you for appearing here virtually this morning, Mr. Hanspal.

The questions that I have are twofold: (1) You knew the company existed. Why not follow up over the years with the filings and required pieces to keep the business running? (2) Are there any taxation issues or any money owing to the province or the government of Canada with the closure of the company, and are you prepared, if there are, to make sure that everything is in good standing to be able to continue operation?

Mr. Vijay Hanspal: Yes. Firstly, by the time we found out or we were aware that the company had been struck off, it was too late for us to act by then. We were quite far on the other side of the world, being based in Kenya, and correspondence back then was pretty much slow mail. The Kitchener office would forward mail—there was a mail-forwarding facility, and they’d forward mail to the UK, and then the UK would forward it to us. I guess it was one of those things where you got an occasional brown envelope, and it took us a while to be like, “Oh, okay. We’ve not received anything in a while. Let’s look into this.” By then, we found out that the company had been struck off. And then, I think it was a case where we meant to get back to getting the company up and running again, but we weren’t ready at that point to follow through on it, so we didn’t think there was any point of doing so until now.

There’s nothing owed to anybody from the company—be it the government, be it any private individuals or companies. In terms of good standing, yes, the company is in good standing.

Mr. Mike Harris: And in terms of your legal standing and other directors of the company or other potential directors of the company, there are no issues—obviously, in Kenya or here—with being a registered director?

Mr. Vijay Hanspal: There are no issues.

Mr. Mike Harris: The last question from me is, how well do you know the Chandaria family—Sunir and Navin?

Mr. Vijay Hanspal: I don’t know them directly myself, but yes, I do occasionally bump into them—

Mr. Mike Harris: That’s interesting. I know them quite well. Navin passed away a couple of years ago, I believe—

Mr. Vijay Hanspal: Yes.

Mr. Mike Harris: —but I still bump into Sunir every once in a while. He’s the honorary consul general of Kenya—that’s why—and he’s from Kitchener.

Mr. Vijay Hanspal: Yes, small world.

0910

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): At this point, I’ll turn to the committee members for questions or comments for Mr. Hanspal. Mr. Smith.

Mr. Dave Smith: The company hasn’t existed for 30 years. Why revive it? Why not just create a new company, 12345 Ontario Ltd., operating as Allied Contractors? That, to me, is the cleanest, fastest way of doing it.

Mr. Vijay Hanspal: Agreed. The reasons behind this are more sentimental than they are commercial. The company was incorporated by, I guess, the older generation, and the name of the company is the same as the company that was formed in Kenya a couple of years before. Having gone through the company register, it’s not possible to form a company with the same name because there are quite a few already taken—and that was submitted in the application, the federal reservation report. So it’s mainly sentimental—that it was a company incorporated by the family quite a while ago. We’d like to continue it and try to keep the same name, which would be a little bit difficult to do, considering the names that are available. It’s pretty much that reason.

Mr. David Smith: It’s not impossible, though, to just operate as Allied Contractors. The name of the company would be the numbered company, and you simply are “operating as.” Lots of companies do it. That’s one of the great things about the franchise. Pizza Pizza, for example, has more than 200 franchises across Ontario. What you see on the sign is “Pizza Pizza,” but each of those individual franchisees is a numbered company in Ontario.

Mr. Vijay Hanspal: Agreed. But they probably started off with the intention, at that point in time, of starting a commercial business and going into a franchise with Pizza Pizza, whereas I think the aim here was to keep the same company number that the family started, keep the same company as much as possible—no reason why we couldn’t go back to it. That was the main motivation behind it.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Mr. Kanapathi, I have you as the next speaker.

Mr. Logan Kanapathi: Mr. Hanspal, thank you for joining through virtual. I have a couple of questions.

Have you explored other names and titles for incorporation?

Mr. Vijay Hanspal: Yes, we did. I’ve submitted a federal reservation report, which lists all the company names that are similar to Allied Contractors. There is, obviously, this one, which was Allied Contractors (Kitchener), then there’s Allied Contractors Inc.—there are quite a lot of combinations which are very similar, so it wouldn’t have been possible to start up another company with the same name. And then we didn’t really want to do a “trading as,” just as a front—and then we would have moved away from reviving the original company. We didn’t see any reason why we shouldn’t do that.

Mr. Logan Kanapathi: My colleague Dave was asking—why was the original company not able to undertake business when it was first incorporated in 1972?

Mr. Vijay Hanspal: At the same time, the projects in East Africa—business got quite busy, so we weren’t able to have enough resources and manpower to follow through on the intentions of pushing Ontario business forward. It’s one of those things where it was sitting on the back burner, and I guess at that point we just didn’t get a chance to get around to it, so the original plan changed.

Mr. Logan Kanapathi: My final question: Do you still have active business in Kenya?

Mr. Vijay Hanspal: We do, yes.

Mr. Logan Kanapathi: So you are a Canadian, and you have a business in Kenya—you also continue business in Kenya.

You’re originally from Kenya?

Mr. Vijay Hanspal: Yes.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): I have Miss Taylor on my list.

Miss Monique Taylor: Thank you for joining us today.

As I’ve been listening, I’ve heard that you want to revive the name and ensure that you were able to keep that name within your family.

Do you have intentions of actually running the business here in Ontario?

Mr. Vijay Hanspal: Absolutely, yes. Hence, the drive to revive it; hence, putting the effort behind it, because there is intention of reviving the company and making investment.

Miss Monique Taylor: So you plan on hiring people and getting it running again?

Mr. Vijay Hanspal: Absolutely, yes.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Are there any further questions or comments from committee members?

Seeing none, are the members ready to vote? Okay.

Section 1: Are there any questions or comments? Shall section 1 carry? All those in favour? All those opposed? Carried.

Section 2: Are there any questions or comments? Seeing none, shall section 2 carry? All those in favour? All those opposed? Section 2 is carried.

Section 3: Are there any questions or comments? Seeing none, shall section 3 carry? All those in favour? All those opposed? Section 3 is carried.

Regarding the preamble, are there any questions or comments? Seeing none, shall the preamble carry? All those in favour? All those opposed? The preamble carries.

As for the bill title, are there any questions or comments? Shall the title carry? All those in favour? All those opposed? The title is carried.

And the bill as a whole: Are there any remaining questions or comments? Seeing none, shall the bill carry? All those in favour? All those opposed? The bill is carried.

Shall I report the bill to the House? All those in favour? All those opposed? I shall report the bill to the House. That is carried.

That concludes the committee’s consideration of Bill Pr32.

Thank you very much, Mr. Hanspal, for joining us.

Mr. Vijay Hanspal: Thank you for everyone’s help on this, and I appreciate the committee’s time.

Eastern Children of Israel Congregation Act, 2024

Consideration of the following bill:

Bill Pr36, An Act to revive Eastern Children of Israel Congregation.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Next on the agenda today, we have the consideration of Bill Pr36, An Act to revive Eastern Children of Israel Congregation.

First, I will ask the MPP sponsor to join us and to introduce himself.

Mr. Billy Pang, MPP: I’m Billy Pang, MPP for Markham–Unionville.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Thank you very much.

Now I will ask the applicant to introduce himself.

Mr. Eric Solomon: I’m Eric Solomon.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Thank you very much, Mr. Solomon.

MPP Pang, now I will refer to you, should you have any comments on the bill.

Mr. Billy Pang: Thank you, Madam Chair and members. It is my pleasure to introduce to you Mr. Eric Solomon, the applicant for Bill Pr36, An Act to revive Eastern Children of Israel Congregation, which will be considered by this committee today. Your comments or questions regarding this private bill are welcome, and Mr. Solomon will answer your questions.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): In that case, Mr. Solomon, do you have any comments on this bill?

Mr. Eric Solomon: I guess everyone has the compendium, and perhaps I can just review this.

Basically, what happens with old Jewish synagogues is, one of their big responsibilities is to take care of the dead; in fact, it’s the most important responsibility of a synagogue. A lot of these synagogues were started, like Eastern Children of Israel, a long time ago—this one, in 1917. In 1947, it purchased cemetery plots in an area called Bathurst Lawn cemetery. We still have those plots, although most of them are taken up by people who are deceased. But there are some that are still reserved for old congregants.

0920

Even though Bathurst Lawn cemetery manages the cemetery plots for Eastern Children and other old congregations, when somebody passes away who has a reservation under Eastern Children of Israel, someone has to be contacted, as a representative of Eastern Children of Israel. That has fallen upon me, because there’s really nobody left. As it says in the compendium, my father and his brothers did that; before then, it was probably his father. Because the synagogue has been closed up for over 60 years, there’s hardly anyone left standing. There’s a Jewish charity that will take over this responsibility, but in order to take over the responsibility, they have to take over the plots. In order to take over the plots, we have to transfer them to them.

We found out that Eastern Children had been incorporated in 1917 and dissolved in 1955, so until it’s revived, we can’t legally transfer the plots. That’s the reason for this revival.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): I think that those were very succinct, considering the multi-layered challenges.

I will ask if there are any other interested parties in attendance. I don’t see any.

Are there any comments from the government? Mr. Harris.

Mr. Mike Harris: I don’t think there’s going to be much of an issue here, but would you be, then, a director in that company and be able to dispense the plots? How will that piece work since there’s no one left?

Mr. Eric Solomon: I would be the director. I would basically arrange to give the property to this charity, and then we’re done.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): At this point, I will call for questions or comments from the committee members to Mr. Solomon. I see Mr. Oosterhoff, first on my list.

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: My question is just around the default in 1955. Was that—

Mr. Eric Solomon: I was three years old, okay?

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: So what you did you think? No, I’m just wondering if there’s any history around that, because it’s interesting. Was it just that there weren’t many members?

Mr. Eric Solomon: I can’t answer that. I’m sorry.

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: No worries. I just thought I’d ask.

Mr. Eric Solomon: In those days, I don’t even know what rules there were when you had to report. Somebody didn’t do something.

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: So the congregation continued to exist for another 10 years or so, even though, technically, the corporation was dissolved? They kind of just kept meeting, but they weren’t really a legal entity?

Mr. Eric Solomon: Well, I think the answer to that is, at some point, they opened a bank account—it’s not like today, where you open a bank account and you have to give them your brother and sister as security.

The reason I say that is, I have a bank account where I am able to deposit cheques—nope. The bank, really, probably has no proper paperwork. They opened a bank account. The bank account probably was opened 70 years ago, and it’s still there. And if I ever tried to change it, I wouldn’t be able to. Somehow, I got put on signing authority about 25 years ago so I could deposit a few cheques when somebody dies and make a payment to Bathurst Lawn. So it’s a real mess.

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: Wow. Interesting.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further questions? Mr. Smith.

Mr. Dave Smith: If I understand correctly, you’re going to revive the company, you’re going to hand it over to the charity, and then you’re going to close the company again. Is that correct?

Mr. Eric Solomon: Yes.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Any other comments or questions from committee members?

In that case, are the members ready to vote? Yes, all members are ready to vote? Okay. Give folks an elbow if you’re not sure.

Mr. Mike Harris: Let’s bundle it all together, Chair.

The Chair (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Okay.

Section 1: Are there any questions or comments on section 1 of the bill? Seeing none, shall section 1 carry? All those in favour? All those opposed? Section 1 is carried.

Section 2: Are there any questions or comments? Seeing none, shall section 2 carry? All those in favour? All those opposed? Section 2 is carried.

Regarding section 3: Are there any questions or comments? Seeing none, shall section 3 carry? All those in favour? All those opposed? Section 3 is carried.

Regarding the preamble: Are there any questions or comments? Seeing none, shall the preamble carry? All those in favour? All those opposed? The preamble is carried.

Regarding the bill title: Are there any questions or comments? Seeing none, shall the title carry? All those in favour? All those opposed? The title is carried.

Regarding the bill as a whole: Are there any questions or comments? Shall the bill carry? All those in favour? All those opposed? The bill is carried.

Shall I report the bill to the House? All those in favour? All those opposed? In that case, I shall report the bill to the House. That is carried.

Thank you. That concludes this committee’s consideration of Bill Pr36.

Is there any further business? In that case, this committee is adjourned.

The committee adjourned at 0927.

 

 

 

 

 

STANDING COMMITTEE ON PROCEDURE AND HOUSE AFFAIRS

Chair / Présidente

Ms. Jennifer K. French (Oshawa ND)

 

Vice-Chair / Vice-Président

Mr. Matthew Rae (Perth–Wellington PC)

 

Ms. Jennifer K. French (Oshawa ND)

Mr. Mike Harris (Kitchener–Conestoga PC)

Ms. Christine Hogarth (Etobicoke–Lakeshore PC)

Mr. Ted Hsu (Kingston and the Islands / Kingston et les Îles L)

Mr. Logan Kanapathi (Markham–Thornhill PC)

Mr. Anthony Leardi (Essex PC)

Mr. Matthew Rae (Perth–Wellington PC)

Mr. Amarjot Sandhu (Brampton West / Brampton-Ouest PC)

Mr. Stéphane Sarrazin (Glengarry–Prescott–Russell PC)

Miss Monique Taylor (Hamilton Mountain ND)

MPP Jamie West (Sudbury ND)

 

Substitutions / Membres remplaçants

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff (Niagara West / Niagara-Ouest PC)

Mr. Dave Smith (Peterborough–Kawartha PC)

 

Clerk / Greffier

Mr. Christopher Tyrell

 

Staff / Personnel

Ms. Catherine Oh, legislative counsel