Bill C-36 · 38th Parliament · Paul Martin
An Act to change the boundaries of the Acadie—Bathurst and Miramichi electoral districts
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedDec. 10, 2004
- Debated in principleDec. 10, 2004
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberDec. 10, 2004
- Passed the second chamberFeb. 22, 2005
- Became lawFeb. 24, 2005
Leading supporters
Ranked by the part each played: who is responsible for the bill, who carried it, and who spoke for it most.
- Paul MartinPrime 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
40% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (568 words introduced, 537 passed).
minor changeintent kept
The bill received royal assent with added official details such as the chapter number and assent date. Minor formatting and section numbering were cleaned up, but the substantive boundary changes and coming-into-force rules stayed the same.
- Added chapter number, statutes title, and assent date to the header.
Before: “First Session, Thirty-eighth Parliament, 53 Elizabeth II, 2004 HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA BILL C-36”
After: “First Session, Thirty-eighth Parliament, 53-54 Elizabeth II, 2004-2005 STATUTES OF CANADA 2005 CHAPTER 6”
How precisely it is written
preciseChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Hard
The bill uses exact geographic descriptions, population figures, and fixed dates to redraw two electoral districts. All operative rules are tied to specific statutes and schedules with no subjective language.
Clear-cut
“Consisting of the County of Gloucester, excepting that part of the Village of Belledune contained therein.”
Defines the new Acadie–Bathurst boundary by reference to named counties and villages only.“sections 1 and 2 come into force on the first dissolution of Parliament that occurs at any time after the expiry of three months after the day on which this Act receives royal assent.”
Fixes commencement by an objective calendar and parliamentary event rather than ministerial discretion.
Discretion. No power is delegated to ministers, officials or regulations; all changes are enacted directly by the statute and schedules.
Challenging the law itself. The text contains no vague standards or broad discretion that would engage section 7 or section 2 Charter vagueness or overbreadth claims.
Disputing a charge under it. Boundary descriptions rely on fixed geographic and municipal units, leaving little room to dispute whether a given location falls inside or outside the districts.
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?
effective
Bill C-36 directly amended the 2003 representation order to implement the specific boundary changes between Acadie—Bathurst and Miramichi recommended by the special Electoral Boundaries Commission, and these changes took effect upon the next dissolution of Parliament. Official records confirm the statutory enactment achieved the boundary adjustments without subsequent challenges or reversals.
- Raîche v. Canada (Attorney General), 2004 FC 679courtThe Federal Court ruling prompted the boundary review and subsequent legislation to correct community-of-interest issues, which Bill C-36 implemented.
- Final Report of the Miramichi and Acadie-Bathurst Electoral Boundaries Commission (December 2004)reviewThe Commission recommended transferring specific parishes to Acadie–Bathurst, which Parliament enacted via Bill C-36.
- Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs evidence (February 2005)reviewCommittee testimony confirmed Bill C-36 amends the representation order to give effect to the Commission's recommendations following the court order.
Who lobbied on it
No lobbying registration naming this bill is loaded.
Stages and dates from LEGISinfo.