An Act to amend the Official Languages Act (promotion of English and French)

How it changed on the way

76% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (562 words introduced, 311 passed).

substantial changeintent mostly kept

The bill kept its core aim of strengthening Part VII obligations but rewrote the duty on federal institutions and added an explicit limit respecting provincial jurisdiction. It also expanded the list of bodies excluded from new regulations.

• Duty on institutions was rephrased and shortened.

  Before: “Within the scope of their functions, duties and powers, federal institutions shall ensure that positive measures are taken for the ongoing and effective advancement and implementation of the Government of Ca- nada's commitments under subsection (1).”

  After: “Every federal institution has the duty to ensure that positive measures are taken for the implementation of the commitments under subsection (1).”

• New clause added to protect provincial powers.

  After: “For greater certainty, this implementation shall be carried out while respecting the jurisdiction and powers of the provinces.”

• Regulation-making power now excludes two additional ethics offices.

  Before: “other than the Senate, the House of Com- mons or the Library of Parliament,”

  After: “other than the Senate, House of Commons, Library of Parliament, office of the Senate Ethics Officer or office of the Ethics Com- missioner,”

How precisely it is written

vagueChallenging the law: ModerateDisputing a charge: Easy

The bill creates a duty on federal institutions to take undefined positive measures and allows court remedies, but leaves the content of those measures open to interpretation. Broad regulation-making power and a vague provincial-respect clause add further uncertainty.

Open to argument

• “positive measures are taken for the implementation of the commitments”

  The term positive measures supplies no objective test or defined content, inviting prolonged argument over what satisfies the duty.

• “while respecting the jurisdiction and powers of the provinces”

  This phrase uses an undefined standard of respect rather than a clear limit or test.

• “prescribing the manner in which any duties of those institutions under this Part are to be carried out”

  The regulation power is open-ended and contains no enumerated boundaries or criteria.

Discretion. The Governor in Council receives an open-ended power to issue regulations that define how federal institutions must fulfil the new duty, while federal institutions themselves decide what counts as positive measures.

Challenging the law itself. The undefined phrase positive measures could be attacked for vagueness under the Charter doctrines of vagueness and overbreadth, engaging sections 16 and 7.

Disputing a charge under it. A federal institution could readily argue that its chosen actions qualify as positive measures because the statute supplies no objective yardstick.

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.