Bill C-12 · 39th Parliament · Stephen Harper
Emergency Management Act
An Act to provide for emergency management and to amend and repeal certain Acts
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedMay 8, 2006
- Debated in principleSept. 22, 2006
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberDec. 11, 2006
- Passed the second chamberJune 5, 2007
- Became lawJune 22, 2007
Leading supporters
Ranked by the part each played: who is responsible for the bill, who carried it, and who spoke for it most.
- Stephen HarperPrime Minister
- Michael A. MeighenSenate · Sponsor in the Senate
- Laurie HawnJoins colleagues in support and affirms the bill confirms federal coordination without overriding locals.
- Réal MénardSpeaks with pleasure about the bill and affirms federal responsibility for emergency management.
- Dave MacKenzieStates outright support and notes the bill will bring needed improvements to emergency management.
- Derek LeeDescribes the bill as needed due to evolving awareness of emergencies and disasters.
- Paul SzaboSpeaker states the Liberal caucus will be supporting Bill C-12 as it is extremely important to Canada.
- Joe ComartinSpeaker states the government has needed this bill for quite some time to prepare for emergencies with plans and coordination.
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
How it changed on the way
65% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (2,603 words introduced, 2,101 passed).
substantial changeintent mostly kept
The bill retained its core definitions, ministerial responsibilities, and emergency plan requirements from introduction to royal assent. New sections on national leadership and a coordinating amendment with Bill C-2 were added, along with the final assent date and chapter number.
- Inserted coordinating amendment section referencing Bill C-2.
After: “COORDINATING AMENDMENT 12. Bill C-2”
How precisely it is written
mixedChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Hard
The Act supplies defined terms and numbered lists of ministerial duties yet relies on open-ended phrases such as leadership, coordination and potential emergencies. Broad grants to the Governor in Council and undefined standards leave wide interpretive space.
Open to argument
“exercising leadership relating to emergency management in Canada by coordinating”
Subjective standard that invites argument over what actions qualify as leadership or adequate coordination.“The Governor in Council may on the recommendation of the Minister make orders or regulations”
Broad discretion to create binding rules on preparation, resources and financial assistance.
Clear-cut
“within 30 days after the request is received”
Fixed time limit supplies an objective test for notice obligations.“spond to a provincial emergency unless the government of the province requests assistance or there is an agreement with the province that requires or permits the assistance”
Clear condition precedent limits federal action to two enumerated triggers.“This Act other than section 12 comes into force on a day to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council”
Precise mechanism and exception for commencement.
Discretion. Extensive discretion remains with the Minister to define leadership and coordination activities and with the Governor in Council to add responsibilities, issue regulations and declare provincial emergencies of federal concern.
Challenging the law itself. Framework language and executive discretion may raise vagueness or overbreadth claims under Charter sections 7 or 2 but the absence of direct limits on individuals makes facial challenges difficult.
Disputing a charge under it. Duties rest almost entirely on ministers and government institutions rather than private persons, so disputes would centre on internal compliance rather than individual breach.
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?
not effective
Auditor General of Canada reports and departmental internal audits repeatedly document non-compliance with the Emergency Management Act's requirements for risk identification, plan preparation, maintenance, testing, and implementation across federal institutions. No comprehensive statutory review or evaluation of the Act's overall success in strengthening national emergency management was identified.
- Report 8—Emergency Management in First Nations Communities—Indigenous Services Canada (2022)auditIndigenous Services Canada did not have an updated emergency management plan as required under the Emergency Management Act and had not addressed preparedness and mitigation issues identified in the 2013 audit.
- Internal Audit of Emergency Management Planning: Leadership and Oversight (Public Safety Canada)auditGovernance, risk management, and controls for Public Safety Canada's leadership role under the Emergency Management Act are not yet sufficiently mature.
- Audit of NRCan's Emergency Management Activities (2019)auditWhile progress occurred since 2014, opportunities remain to improve training, exercises, and effectiveness of emergency management processes required by the Act.
- Report 2—Mitigating the Impacts of Severe Weather (2016)auditThe federal government had not done enough to fulfill coordination and mitigation responsibilities under the Emergency Management Act for long-term severe weather impacts.
Who lobbied on it
No lobbying registration naming this bill is loaded.
Stages and dates from LEGISinfo.