An Act to amend the Act of incorporation of the Conference of Mennonites in Canada

How it changed on the way

77% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (2,166 words introduced, 1,282 passed).

substantial changeintent mostly kept

The bill as passed kept the core name change and revised objects but added new sections on corporate continuation, membership, expanded powers including annuities, property disposition by gift or loan, meeting location rules, and application of the Canada Corporations Act while updating notice requirements and removing old property time limits. Over three-quarters of the introduced text was replaced or altered during passage.

• Changed recipient of head office change notice from Secretary of State to Minister of Industry.

  Before: “Notice in writing shall be given to the Secretary of State by the Corporation concerning any change of the head office and a copy of such notice shall be published forthwith in the Canada Gazette.”

  After: “Notice in writing shall be given to the Minister of Industry by the Corporation concerning any change of the head office and a copy of such notice shall be published in the Canada Gazette.”

• Replaced old property holding time limits with new rules on disposition by gift or loan.

  Before: “No parcel of land, or interest therein, at any time acquired by the Corproation and not required for its actual use and occupation, and not held by way of security, shall be held by the Corporation, or by any trustee on its behalf, for a longer period than ten years after the acquisition thereof”

  After: “Disposition of property by gift or loan”

How precisely it is written

mixedChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Moderate

The bill mixes fixed numerical rules and clear corporate mechanics with repeated subjective phrases that let the board decide what is necessary, advisable or expedient. This leaves room for argument over the exact scope of powers and meetings.

Open to argument

• “generally, to do all such things as are likely to promote the objects of the Cor”

  Uses the open-ended standard 'likely to promote' instead of listing specific actions.

• “upon such terms and conditions as it considers expedient”

  Leaves the terms entirely to the corporation's own opinion without objective criteria.

• “rities as it considers advisable”

  Investment choices rest on the subjective judgment of the corporation rather than defined limits.

• “at such times and places as the board of directors considers necessary”

  Meeting schedule is governed by the board's view of necessity rather than fixed dates or triggers.

Clear-cut

• “not less than three and not more than twenty directors”

  Sets exact numerical bounds on board size.

• “at least three out of every four meetings held by the Corporation shall be held in Canada”

  Provides an objective fraction and location rule.

Discretion. The board and corporation retain wide latitude to set meeting times, investment choices, gift terms, and any action they view as promoting the objects, with only minimal reporting to the Minister of Industry.

Challenging the law itself. This is a private incorporation statute with no obvious Charter rights engaged and little direct impact on individuals.

Disputing a charge under it. Subjective phrases such as 'likely to promote' or 'considers expedient' could be disputed when arguing whether a particular act falls inside the granted powers.

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.