Bill C-25 · 37th Parliament · Jean Chrétien
Public Service Modernization Act
An Act to modernize employment and labour relations in the public service and to amend the Financial Administration Act and the Canadian Centre for Management Development Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedFeb. 6, 2003
- Debated in principleFeb. 20, 2003
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberJune 3, 2003
- Passed the second chamberNov. 3, 2003
- Became lawNov. 7, 2003
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
56% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (83,273 words introduced, 83,037 passed). A committee amended it.
substantial changeintent mostly kept
Over half the bill text was altered between introduction and royal assent, mainly through reorganized headings, added transitional provisions, and the insertion of the assent date. The core Public Service Labour Relations Act and related amendments remained intact in substance.
- Added royal assent date at the end of the long title.
After: “[Assented to 7th November, 2003]”
How precisely it is written
mixedChallenging the law: ModerateDisputing a charge: Hard
The text relies heavily on defined terms and numbered procedural steps that create clear boundaries in most cases. Subjective phrases such as 'appropriate for collective bargaining' and 'considers appropriate' still leave room for argument over coverage.
Open to argument
“unit appropriate for collective bargaining”
This phrase uses an objective-sounding label but requires the Board to apply a judgment-based test each time.“son considers appropriate for the proper conduct of the Board's business”
The standard turns on the Chairperson’s personal assessment rather than fixed criteria.
Clear-cut
“a panel of not less than three members, at least one of whom is the Chairperson or a Vice-Chairperson”
Exact numerical minimum and required composition remove discretion on panel size.
Discretion. The Board and Chairperson retain wide latitude to decide bargaining-unit boundaries, hearing formats, mediation methods, and what notices to post, while the Governor in Council designates the Minister and the Board issues many regulations.
Challenging the law itself. Broad discretion over certification and essential-services designations could be attacked under Charter s. 2(d) freedom of association on grounds of vagueness or overbreadth, though the many defined terms weaken such claims.
Disputing a charge under it. Detailed definitions, cross-references to schedules, and mandatory procedural steps make it difficult for a party to argue that the rule itself does not clearly cover the conduct.
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 2011 statutory review found the PSMA was successfully implemented in a technical sense with all but one legislative requirement met and a sound framework established, though some provisions remain untested and changes were proposed to fully realize its objectives. An accompanying evaluation of implementation funding and a 2010 Auditor General audit confirmed legislative requirements were met to a significant degree with immediate and short-term outcomes achieved, but long-term effectiveness could not be fully assessed.
- Report of the review of the Public Service Modernization Act, 2003reviewThe PSMA has been successfully implemented in a technical sense with tribunals established, ICMS and LMCC in place, and delegation instruments signed, though portions remain untested and the legislation requires adjustments to fully meet public service needs.
- Evaluation of the Public Service Modernization Act Strategic Investment FrameworkevaluationPSMA legislative requirements were met to a significant degree and immediate/short-term outcomes of the implementation funding were achieved, but medium- and long-term outcomes could not be conclusively assessed due to limited outcome data and attribution challenges.
Who lobbied on it
No lobbying registration naming this bill is loaded.
Stages and dates from LEGISinfo.