Bill S-36 · 38th Parliament · Paul Martin
An Act to amend the Export and Import of Rough Diamonds Act
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedMay 18, 2005
- Debated in principleJune 8, 2005
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberJune 19, 2005
- Passed the second chamberNov. 25, 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
46% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (633 words introduced, 614 passed).
minor changeintent kept
The bill received royal assent with no changes to its substantive provisions or purpose. Differences were limited to dates, chapter numbering, and removal of line-number artifacts from the introduced version.
How precisely it is written
mixedChallenging the law: ModerateDisputing a charge: Moderate
The bill anchors the core definition of rough diamond to specific tariff subheadings and sets objective parceling rules, yet it repeatedly hands exclusions, publication formats and return orders to ministerial opinion or future regulations. This mix of fixed references and open-ended discretion produces both clear black-letter duties and areas open to argument.
Open to argument
“in any form and manner that the Minister considers appropriate”
The phrase substitutes the Minister’s subjective judgment for any fixed statutory standard.“the Minister may order the person who imported the rough diamonds to return them”
The trigger for the order is left to ministerial discretion without listed objective criteria.“prescribing the classes of diamonds to be excluded from the definition "rough dia”
The power to define the central term is delegated entirely to regulation without statutory limits.
Clear-cut
“falls under subheading 7102.10, 7102.21 or 7102.31 in the List of Tariff Provisions set out in the schedule to the Customs Tariff”
The definition incorporates numbered, externally verifiable tariff codes rather than open-ended descriptions.“the rough diamonds in the container are not parcelled with diamonds excluded from the definition "rough diamond" or with anything else”
The parceling obligation is stated as a concrete, observable requirement.
Discretion. Wide latitude remains with the Minister of Natural Resources to set excluded classes by regulation, choose publication methods, and decide when to issue return orders.
Challenging the law itself. The combination of undefined regulatory power and the phrase “considers appropriate” could support a vagueness argument under section 7 of the Charter if enforcement affects liberty or security of the person.
Disputing a charge under it. The parceling and tariff-code rules are concrete and therefore relatively easy to apply, but disputes over whether particular stones fall inside or outside a yet-to-be-made regulation would be harder to resolve.
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.