Bill C-31 · 37th Parliament · Jean Chrétien
Export Development Act
An Act to amend the Export Development Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedSept. 20, 2001
- Debated in principleOct. 2, 2001
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberOct. 30, 2001
- Passed the second chamberDec. 5, 2001
- Became lawDec. 18, 2001
Leading supporters
Ranked by the part each played: who is responsible for the bill, who carried it, and who spoke for it most.
- Jean ChrétienPrime Minister
Who carries this bill
Arrows run from the person responsible to those who answer to them on this bill. The critic leads the Senate’s scrutiny and answers to no one on it.
Where members stand
Votes and debate for this bill have not been read yet.
How it changed on the way
52% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (3,147 words introduced, 2,649 passed).
moderate changeintent mostly kept
The bill passed with the addition of the royal assent date and minor expansions to the list of consequential regulatory amendments. Environmental review rules, liability caps, and the corporate name change remained intact.
- Added royal assent date to the bill header.
After: “[Assented to 18th December, 2001]”
How precisely it is written
vagueChallenging the law: ModerateDisputing a charge: Hard
The core environmental duty turns on subjective judgments about what is 'likely' and what is 'justified,' with key terms left undefined in the statute itself. Broad power to define terms, set criteria and create exceptions is handed to the Board through a non-statutory directive.
Open to argument
“whether the project is likely to have adverse environmental effects despite the implementation of mitigation measures”
Uses predictive and evaluative language without statutory definitions or objective thresholds.“whether the Corporation is justified in entering into the transaction”
Introduces an open-ended policy judgment rather than a factual test.
Clear-cut
“liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding $10,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or to both”
Sets fixed maximum penalties with no discretion.
Discretion. The Board alone decides definitions, criteria and exceptions in the directive, and the Auditor General only audits design and implementation every five years.
Challenging the law itself. The undefined 'likely' and 'justified' standards could support a vagueness or overbreadth argument under the Charter doctrines referenced in the query.
Disputing a charge under it. The only offence provision (name misuse) uses clear numerical limits and requires no interpretive judgment.
Read by a language model from the royal assent text; every quoted phrase appears in the bill. A reading of the drafting, not legal advice.
Did it work?
partly effective
The 2001 amendments established a statutory requirement for EDC environmental reviews and mandated periodic Auditor General audits, which have occurred as required and identified ongoing implementation gaps. Multiple OAG performance audits and legislative reviews confirm the framework's existence but highlight limited application and persistent shortcomings in scope, monitoring, and transparency.
- Report of the Auditor General of Canada—Environmental and Social Review Directive—Export Development Canada (2023)auditOnly 33 (0.4%) of 7,768 transactions from 2019–2023 were subject to review under the directive, with incomplete monitoring and insufficient identification of high-risk projects.
- Report of the Auditor General of Canada—Export Development Canada’s Environmental and Social Review Directive (2019)auditThe Corporation’s processes had most elements of a suitably designed framework and were operating as designed, with integration of human rights considerations.
- Export Development Canada legislative review 2018reviewReviews of the Export Development Act, including post-2001 changes, led to further mandate expansions while affirming the environmental review obligation introduced in 2001.
- 2008 legislative review of Export Development Canada (Senate Standing Committee)reviewExamined operation of the Act post-2001 amendments, including governance and environmental provisions, as part of the statutory 10-year review cycle.
Who lobbied on it
No lobbying registration naming this bill is loaded.
Stages and dates from LEGISinfo.