Bill C-37 · 37th Parliament · Jean Chrétien
An Act to amend the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedMay 15, 2003
- Debated in principleSept. 26, 2003
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberOct. 20, 2003
- Passed the second chamberNov. 5, 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
85% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (34,010 words introduced, 13,603 passed).
substantial changeintent mostly kept
The bill was passed with an assent date added and one sentence completed for clarity on benefit entitlements after elections. Core rules on reserve force participation, elective service payments, and pension fund transfers stayed the same.
- Added royal assent date to the bill title.
After: “[Assented to 7th November, 2003]”
- Extended final sentence to specify that entitlement ceases only for service covered by the election.
Before: “cease to be entitled to any benefit under that Act”
After: “cease to be entitled to any benefit under that Act in respect of any service of that contributor to which that election relates.”
How precisely it is written
vagueChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Moderate
The bill relies heavily on regulations and ministerial discretion for core calculations like transfer values and benefit amounts. Many rules hinge on subjective judgments rather than fixed criteria.
Open to argument
“as determined in accordance with the regulations”
Leaves the actual formula or method undefined in the statute itself.“the Minister considers just and proper under the circumstances”
Subjective standard that invites argument over fairness in each case.“the Minister may take any remedial action that the Minister consid”
Broad discretion without statutory limits on scope or conditions.
Clear-cut
“a child of the contributor who (a) is less than eighteen years of age”
Uses a clear numerical age cutoff.“shall not exceed four-fifths of the basic allowance”
Provides a fixed fractional limit.“payable within 30 days after the day on which a participant ceases”
Specifies an exact time period.
Discretion. Extensive powers are delegated to the Governor in Council for regulations and to the Minister for opinions, remedial actions, and apportionment decisions.
Challenging the law itself. Vagueness and overbreadth claims under Charter s. 7 would face difficulty because the provisions concern economic benefits rather than liberty or security of the person.
Disputing a charge under it. A person could dispute application by arguing that regulations were not properly followed or that ministerial discretion was exercised on improper grounds, but the text supplies few fixed statutory benchmarks to test against.
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.