Bill C-39 · 38th Parliament · Paul Martin
An Act to amend the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act and to enact An Act respecting the provision of funding for diagnostic and medical equipment
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedFeb. 7, 2005
- Debated in principleFeb. 10, 2005
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberFeb. 18, 2005
- Passed the second chamberMarch 21, 2005
- Became lawMarch 23, 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
79% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (1,660 words introduced, 1,450 passed).
substantial changeintent mostly kept
The core funding transfers and equipment payments remained intact, but Parliament added a standalone communiqués section and extended the definition of the 2004 plan to the equipment act. The parliamentary review clause was restructured and a new heading was inserted.
- A new standalone section 25.91 on communiqués was added after the review clause.
After: “COMMUNIQUÉS 25.91 For greater certainty and for the purposes of this Part (V.1), the 2004 10-Year Plan to Strengthen Health Care includes the communiqués released in respect of the First Ministers' Meeting on the Future of Health Care that was held from September 13 to 15, 2004.”
- The equipment funding act received an added paragraph defining the 2004 plan.
After: “For greater certainty and for the purposes of this Act, the 2004 10-Year Plan to Strengthen Health Care includes the communiqués released in respect of the First Ministers' Meeting on the Future of Health Care that was held from September 13 to 15, 2004.”
How precisely it is written
mixedChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Hard
The bill fixes exact dollar figures, multipliers, fiscal-year ranges and population formulas for transfers. Yet it repeatedly hands the Minister open-ended power over timing and manner of payments.
Open to argument
“at the times and in the manner that the Minister considers appropriate”
Subjective ministerial judgment replaces any objective schedule or criteria.
Clear-cut
“$12.65 billion for the fiscal year beginning on April 1, 2004”
Concrete sum and date leave no room for interpretation.“the product obtained by multiplying the cash contribution for the immediately preceding year by 1.06, rounded to the nearest thousand”
Mathematical formula supplies an objective, repeatable test.“determined by the Chief Statistician of Canada on the basis of Statistics Canada's official estimate of the population of that province on June 1, 2004”
Specific official and date create a clear factual anchor.
Discretion. The Minister may choose any timing and manner for payments out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund and the trust indenture alone governs provincial shares from the trust.
Challenging the law itself. The provisions allocate federal funds rather than restrict individual conduct, so a Charter vagueness or overbreadth claim would face a high threshold.
Disputing a charge under it. Any dispute would centre on internal government accounting and trust terms, not on whether a private party breached a clear prohibition.
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.