Bill C-278 · 41th Parliament · Stephen Harper
Purple Day Act
An Act respecting a day to increase public awareness about epilepsy
Private member’s bill. Became law.
- IntroducedSept. 21, 2011
- Debated in principleFeb. 3, 2012
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberMarch 9, 2012
- Passed the second chamberJune 17, 2012
- Became lawJune 27, 2012
Leading supporters
Ranked by the part each played: who is responsible for the bill, who carried it, and who spoke for it most.
- Terry M. MercerSenate · Sponsor in the Senate
- Geoff Regan11 interventions in debateDescribes widespread support and thanks colleagues for backing the bill.
- Colin Carrie4 interventions in debateSays he is pleased to speak about the bill and grateful to speak in support.
- The Acting Speaker2 interventions in debateSpeaker notes unanimous consent and adjournment after motion carried.
- Bev ShipleyStates directly that the bill will be supported and thanks the sponsor for raising awareness.
- Ted HsuExplicitly rises in support of the bill to raise awareness and reduce stigma around epilepsy.
- Patricia DavidsonThanks the sponsor for the bill and praises the advocacy work behind Purple Day.
- Fin DonnellyStates he rises to speak in support of the bill.
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
62% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (274 words introduced, 290 passed). A committee amended it.
minor changeintent kept
The bill passed with only minor updates to titles, dates, and publication details. The core provisions designating Purple Day on March 26 remained identical.
- Header changed from first-reading details to chapter and assent date.
Before: “FIRST READING, SEPTEMBER 21, 2011 MR. REGAN 411329”
After: “60-61 ELIZABETH II —————— CHAPTER 13 An Act respecting a day to increase public awareness about epilepsy [Assented to 28th June, 2012]”
- Publication footer updated with new contact and chapter reference.
Before: “411329 Published under authority of the Speaker of the House of Commons”
After: “Published under authority of the Speaker of the House of Commons”
How precisely it is written
preciseChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Hard
The Act uses an exact calendar date and a fixed name to designate Purple Day each year while stating that wearing purple is encouraged but not required. It adds an explicit clause confirming the day carries no legal holiday status, eliminating interpretive disputes.
Clear-cut
“the 26th day of March is to be known as "Purple Day".”
Fixes a precise recurring date and defined term with no subjective qualifiers.“For greater certainty, Purple Day is not a legal holiday or a non-juridical day.”
Supplies an objective clarification that removes any possible ambiguity about legal effects.“On the 26th day of March, people are encouraged to wear the colour purple”
Uses permissive language only, creating no duties or prohibitions.
Discretion. The Act grants no authority to ministers, officials or regulations and contains no discretionary standards.
Challenging the law itself. The statute creates only a symbolic designation and voluntary encouragement without restricting any activity, rendering a Charter challenge on expression or equality grounds unlikely to succeed.
Disputing a charge under it. No conduct is prohibited or mandated, so a person cannot be accused of breaching the Act and therefore cannot contest any violation.
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.