Bill C-24 · 41th Parliament · Stephen Harper
Canada–Panama Economic Growth and Prosperity Act
An Act to implement the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the Republic of Panama, the Agreement on the Environment between Canada and the Republic of Panama and the Agreement on Labour Cooperation between Canada and the Republic of Panama
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedNov. 15, 2011
- Debated in principleJune 20, 2012
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberNov. 7, 2012
- Passed the second chamberDec. 10, 2012
- Became lawDec. 13, 2012
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
- Doug FinleySenate · Sponsor in the Senate
- Lois BrownShe focuses on commercial opportunities in Panama and criticizes opponents for blocking new markets.
- Steven Fletcherpresses others to support free trade and notes the bill will pass because it benefits Canadians.
- Kevin Lamoureuxexplicitly rises to support the bill and calls it important legislation for a trading nation.
- Ed HolderThe deal should pass like the Jordan agreement with opposition support.
- Wayne EasterSide agreements on labour and environment are important and the bill should have passed earlier.
- Gerald KeddyPresents the bill as important legislation that creates jobs and encourages opposition support.
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 bills that implement treaties, conventions, agreements or administrative arrangements bills. The following is a short summary: On 15 November 2011, the Minister of International Trade introduced Bill C-24, An Act to implement the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the Republic of Panama, the Agreement on the Environment between Canada and the Republic of Panama and the Agreement on Labour Cooperation between Canada and the Republic of Panama (Canada-Colombia Economic Growth and Prosperity Act), in the House of Commons and it was given first reading. Bill C-24 implements a free trade agreement between Canada and Panama that was signed in May 2010. Among other things, it: • approves the Free Trade Agreement and the related agreements and provides for the payment by Canada of its share of the expenditures associated with the operation of the institutional aspects of the agreements and the power of the Governor in Council to make orders for carrying out the provisions of the enactment; • amends existing laws in order to bring them into conformity with Canada’s obligations under the Free Trade Agreement and the re…
Summary by the Library of Parliament.
Where members stand
That · 2012-06-07 · Passed
How it changed on the way
58% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (18,570 words introduced, 15,752 passed).
substantial changeintent mostly kept
The bill passed with added final clauses on tribunal procedures and assent details, while 58% of the introduced text was removed or replaced. Core approvals, amendments to customs and labour rules, and institutional provisions remained intact with only minor wording and numbering tweaks.
- Updated long title and added royal assent date and chapter number.
Before: “First Session, Forty-first Parliament, 60 Elizabeth II, 2011”
After: “First Session, Forty-first Parliament, 60-61 Elizabeth II, 2011-2012 STATUTES OF CANADA 2012 CHAPTER 26 An Act to implement the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the Republic of Panama, the Agreement on the Environment between Canada and the Republic of Panama and the Agreement on Labour Cooperation between Canada and the Republic of Panama ASSENTED TO 14th DECEMBER, 2012”
How precisely it is written
mostly preciseChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Moderate
The bill relies on defined terms, numbered agreement articles, and objective tests such as the 'principal cause' definition and exact rounding rules for duty rates. Some provisions still use subjective phrases that leave room for argument over scope.
Open to argument
“The Government of Canada is to pay its appropriate share of the aggregate of any expenditures incurred by or on behalf of the Joint Commission.”
The term 'appropriate share' supplies no fixed formula or objective test.“and (d) take any other measure that the Governor in Council considers necessary.”
The phrase 'considers necessary' grants open-ended discretion without defined limits.“a complaint is properly documented if the Tribunal is satisfied that it contains or is accompanied by the information required by section 23.”
Satisfaction of the Tribunal introduces a subjective administrative judgment.
Clear-cut
“In this section, "principal cause" means, in respect of a serious injury or threat of a serious injury, an important cause that is no less important than any other cause of the serious injury or threat.”
Supplies a clear, comparative test that can be applied without further discretion.“If a reduction under subsection (3) or (4) results in a specific rate of customs duty that includes a fraction of one tenth of a cent, the rate shall be rounded down to the nearest one tenth of a cent.”
Provides an exact arithmetic rule leaving no interpretive gap.“"Agreement" means the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the Republic of Panama, done at Ottawa on May 14, 2010.”
Fixes the instrument by title, parties and precise date.
Discretion. Substantial power remains with the Governor in Council to issue orders and regulations deemed necessary to implement agreement provisions, and with ministers to appoint panel members and pay undefined shares of costs.
Challenging the law itself. The Act mainly approves an international agreement and amends tariff statutes, engaging few Charter rights and offering limited grounds for vagueness or overbreadth claims.
Disputing a charge under it. Most obligations are defined by cross-references to agreement articles or exact tariff schedules, but phrases such as 'appropriate share' and 'considers necessary' could be disputed in enforcement proceedings.
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.