Bill S-40 · 37th Parliament · Jean Chrétien
An Act to amend the Payment Clearing and Settlement Act
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedMarch 4, 2002
- Debated in principleMarch 11, 2002
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberMarch 18, 2002
- Passed the second chamberMay 9, 2002
- Became lawJune 4, 2002
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
73% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (653 words introduced, 643 passed).
substantial changeintent kept
The bill added the date of royal assent and removed a numeric identifier from the opening text. The core provisions on netting agreements and collateral for securities and derivatives clearing houses remained unchanged in substance.
How precisely it is written
mostly preciseChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Hard
The bill supplies clear definitions for key terms and states in objective language what bankruptcy laws cannot do to netting agreements or collateral. The main subjective element is the Minister's power to designate additional clearing houses.
Open to argument
“the Minister is of the opinion that it is in the public interest to do so”
This subjective standard lets the Minister decide designation based on personal judgment rather than fixed criteria.
Clear-cut
“the Canadian Derivatives Clearing Corporation, incorporated under the Canada Business Corporations Act”
Naming specific entities by corporate statute creates an objective, closed list.
Discretion. The Minister alone decides whether to designate further entities by forming an opinion on public interest, with no further statutory limits or review criteria stated.
Challenging the law itself. The provision is a narrow carve-out from bankruptcy rules and does not directly engage Charter rights such as section 7 liberty or section 8 search and seizure.
Disputing a charge under it. The text declares legal effects rather than creating duties or offences, so disputes would centre on whether a given action falls inside the defined netting or collateral protections.
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?
no evaluation found
Who lobbied on it
No lobbying registration naming this bill is loaded.
Stages and dates from LEGISinfo.