Bill S-1001 · 39th Parliament · Stephen Harper
Scouts Canada Act
An Act respecting Scouts Canada
Senate bill. Became law.
- IntroducedJune 26, 2006
- Debated in principleOct. 25, 2006
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberDec. 6, 2006
- Passed the second chamberFeb. 2, 2007
- Became lawFeb. 21, 2007
Leading supporters
Ranked by the part each played: who is responsible for the bill, who carried it, and who spoke for it most.
- Consiglio Di NinoSenate · Sponsor in the Senate
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
13% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (1,652 words introduced, 1,630 passed).
minor changeintent kept
The bill received royal assent with added formal headings and date information plus minor line-break and spacing adjustments. Core provisions, name change, and preamble stayed identical.
- Added royal assent date and bill identifier at top of final version.
After: “ASSENTED TO 21st FEBRUARY, 2007 BILL S-1001”
- Adjusted line break in description of name change.
Before: “reflect more accurately its current status in Canada.”
After: “re- flect more accurately its current status in Canada.”
How precisely it is written
mostly preciseChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Moderate
The Act uses specific lists, fixed locations, and numbered powers to continue a named corporation and grant it defined rights. A few phrases still leave room for judgment on what is advisable or approved.
Open to argument
“in such manner as it may from time to time deem advisable for those purposes”
Subjective test of advisability lets the corporation decide without an objective standard.
Clear-cut
“The head office of the Corporation is in the city of Ottawa, or elsewhere as may be fixed by by-law.”
Names a specific city and ties any change to a formal by-law process.
Discretion. The Minister of the Crown responsible for trade-marks and designs must approve new emblems, and the executive committee may choose meeting times and places; most other powers are exercised by by-law or annual meeting.
Challenging the law itself. This is a private incorporation statute with no obvious limits on section 2(b) or 7 Charter rights and no broad regulatory discretion that would support a vagueness claim.
Disputing a charge under it. A person accused of unauthorized use of emblems could argue whether a new mark was properly filed and approved, but the list of protected prior marks is fixed and narrow.
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?
The evidence has not been searched yet.
Who lobbied on it
No lobbying registration naming this bill is loaded.
Stages and dates from LEGISinfo.