Bill C-66 · 38th Parliament · Paul Martin
Energy Costs Assistance Measures Act
An Act to authorize payments to provide assistance in relation to energy costs, housing energy consumption and public transit infrastructure, and to make consequential amendments to certain Acts
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedOct. 6, 2005
- Debated in principleNov. 21, 2005
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberNov. 21, 2005
- Passed the second chamberNov. 24, 2005
- Became lawNov. 25, 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
41% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (1,674 words introduced, 1,632 passed).
moderate changeintent mostly kept
The Energy Costs Assistance Measures Act passed with 41% of the introduced text altered, mainly in structure and references. Core payment authorizations for energy costs, housing efficiency, and transit remained unchanged from introduction to royal assent.
- Added chapter number and assent date to the title page.
After: “STATUTES OF CANADA 2005 CHAPTER 49”
- Updated session description in the header.
Before: “Bill C-26 1st Session, 38th Parliament, 53-54 Elizabeth II, 2004-2005”
After: “First Session, Thirty-eighth Parliament, 53-54 Elizabeth II, 2004-2005”
How precisely it is written
mostly preciseChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Hard
The Act sets fixed dollar amounts, exact time windows, and eligibility rules by cross-reference to the Income Tax Act and Old Age Security Act. A few phrases still hand ministers open-ended judgment on what is reasonable or appropriate.
Open to argument
“any portion of $250 that the Minister considers reasonable in the circum”
Uses a subjective reasonableness test instead of a fixed formula or objective test.“at the times and in the manner that that Minister considers appropriate”
Leaves timing and method entirely to ministerial opinion with no statutory limits.“can reasonably be expected to receive”
Introduces a predictive and subjective standard open to prolonged argument.
Clear-cut
“for the period beginning on April 1, 2005 and ending on March 31, 2010”
Fixes precise calendar dates rather than vague or open-ended periods.
Discretion. Ministers decide reasonableness of splits, timing and manner of payments, expected future receipts, and program design under broad terms approved only by Treasury Board.
Challenging the law itself. The Act authorizes spending and cross-references existing benefit rules rather than imposing restrictions that would readily engage Charter vagueness or overbreadth claims.
Disputing a charge under it. Eligibility turns on objective facts already determined under the Income Tax Act or Old Age Security Act, leaving little room for factual dispute once those determinations are made.
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.