Bill C-3 · 40th Parliament · Stephen Harper
Gender Equity in Indian Registration Act
An Act to promote gender equity in Indian registration by responding to the Court of Appeal for British Columbia decision in McIvor v. Canada (Registrar of Indian and Northern Affairs)
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedMarch 11, 2010
- Debated in principleMarch 29, 2010
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberNov. 22, 2010
- Passed the second chamberDec. 8, 2010
- Became lawDec. 14, 2010
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
- Patrick BrazeauSenate · Sponsor in the Senate
- Chuck StrahlEncourages all members to support the bill and amendments to address charter violations before the deadline.
- Bruce StantonSpeaks in favor of the bill's goals to end gender discrimination and meet the court deadline.
- Jean CrowderStates New Democrats will support the bill at second reading.
- Todd RussellPraises the bill as action to address long-standing inequality and injustice.
- John DuncanSpeaker urges all members to support the bill to remove gender discrimination.
- Shelly GloverExpresses full support for the bill as an effective response to the court ruling.
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
On 11 March 2010, the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development introduced Bill C-3, An Act to promote gender equity in Indian registration by responding to the Court of Appeal for British Columbia decision in McIvor v. Canada (Registrar of Indian and Northern Affairs) (Gender Equity in Indian Registration Act) in the House of Commons and it was given first reading. In April 2009, the Court of Appeal for British Columbia ruled in the case of McIvor v. Canada that certain registration provisions of the Indian Act are unconstitutional as they violate the equality provision of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Court suspended its declaration of invalidity for 12 months - to April 6, 2010 - to give Parliament time to amend the Indian Act. Bill C-3 proposes to render eligible the grandchildren of women who lost status as a result of marrying non-Indian men for registration (Indian status) in accordance with the Indian Act. The proposed amendments do not extend to other situations.
Summary by the Library of Parliament.
Where members stand
How it changed on the way
69% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (1,421 words introduced, 1,323 passed). A committee amended it.
substantial changeintent mostly kept
The core registration changes remained intact but Parliament added a new reporting and review requirement. Several explanatory notes and transitional provisions from the introduced version were dropped or renumbered.
- Inserted a requirement that the Minister table a report on the Act within two years and that a parliamentary committee review both the report and the Act.
After: “3.1 (1) The Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development shall cause to be laid before each House of Parliament, not later than two years after this Act comes into force, a report on the provisions and implementation of this Act.”
How precisely it is written
mostly preciseChallenging the law: ModerateDisputing a charge: Hard
The Act supplies fixed historical dates and a chain of specific family circumstances that determine eligibility for registration under new paragraph 6(1)(c.1). A handful of provisions use broader language that could generate argument about their reach.
Open to argument
“undertake a review of any provision of this Act”
The committee’s review mandate is open-ended rather than confined to listed issues or standards.“for anything done or omitted to be done in good faith in the exercise of their powers or the performance of their duties, only because”
The liability shield hinges on a subjective good-faith test without objective boundaries.
Clear-cut
“was born on or after the day on which the marriage referred to in subparagraph (i) occurred and, unless the person's parents married each other prior to April 17, 1985, was born prior to that date”
Eligibility rests on concrete calendar dates and a clear chronological test.“not later than two years after this Act comes into force”
The Minister’s reporting obligation is tied to an objective, measurable deadline.
Discretion. The Governor in Council alone chooses the coming-into-force date after 5 April 2010, and the Minister controls the content of the report that must be tabled.
Challenging the law itself. The detailed factual criteria limit vagueness or overbreadth claims under section 7 of the Charter, yet the remedial scope could still be attacked as under-inclusive under section 15.
Disputing a charge under it. Entitlement turns on verifiable register entries and fixed historical facts rather than discretionary or subjective judgments.
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?
partly effective
Bill C-3 addressed the specific gender discrimination identified in McIvor v. Canada by creating new registration entitlements under s. 6(1)(c.1) of the Indian Act, but left residual sex-based inequities that prompted further litigation (Descheneaux) and additional amendments via Bill S-3 (2017). The mandated 2013 Report to Parliament documented implementation but no independent audits or evaluations assessed long-term equity outcomes.
- Report to Parliament - Gender Equity in Indian Registration Act (AANDC, 2013)reviewThe report details numbers of new registrations and implementation of C-3 provisions as required by statute but does not evaluate whether gender equity was fully achieved.
- Auditor General of Canada Report on Registration Under the Indian Act (2025)auditNotes C-3 as a partial step in a series of amendments but highlights ongoing issues with registration inequities and program impacts.
Who lobbied on it
No lobbying registration naming this bill is loaded.
Stages and dates from LEGISinfo.