Bill C-39 · 40th Parliament · Stephen Harper
An Act to amend the Judges Act
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedJune 10, 2009
- Debated in principleJune 10, 2009
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberJune 10, 2009
- Passed the second chamberJune 17, 2009
- Became lawJune 18, 2009
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
- Gerry St. GermainSenate · Sponsor in the Senate
- The SpeakerThe words announce the bill has passed all stages without change.
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.
What it set out to do
The Library of Parliament does not prepare Legislative Summaries for self-explanatory measures. The following is a short summary: On 10 June 2009, The Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians introduced Bill C-39, An Act to amend the Judges Act, in the House of Commons and it was given first reading. Bill C-39 amends the Judges Act to change the number of judges referred to in paragraph 16(d) to 31.
Summary by the Library of Parliament.
Where members stand
For it 1
Voted for it, or spoke in support
Challenging it 0
Support only with changes, or serious objections raised in debate
Against it 0
Voted against it and argued against it
How it changed on the way
The texts have not been compared yet.
How precisely it is written
preciseChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Hard
The bill replaces one paragraph in the Judges Act with exact numbers for judges and salaries. No subjective words or discretion appear in the text.
Clear-cut
“the 31 puisne judges of the Court of Queen's Bench, $232,300 each”
Uses a fixed integer and exact dollar figure with no ranges or qualifiers.
Discretion. No power is granted to ministers, officials or regulations; the numbers are set directly by statute.
Challenging the law itself. The amendment contains no prohibitions, standards or discretion that could engage Charter rights such as section 7 or 15.
Disputing a charge under it. The provision creates no offences or obligations for individuals, so disputes over breach cannot arise.
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.