Bill C-3 · 41th Parliament · Stephen Harper
Supporting Vulnerable Seniors and Strengthening Canada's Economy Act
An Act to implement certain provisions of the 2011 budget as updated on June 6, 2011
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedJune 14, 2011
- Debated in principleJune 15, 2011
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberJune 21, 2011
- Passed the second chamberJune 22, 2011
- Became lawJune 25, 2011
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
- Irving GersteinSenate · Sponsor in the Senate
- Shelly GloverPraises the bill as implementing key measures from the economic action plan for jobs and growth.
- Jeff Watsonexplicitly rises in support of Bill C-3 and its benefits for the region and Canada.
- Dave Van KesterenHighlights positive budget measures for students as part of the bill.
- David TilsonDefends increased federal health transfers and rejects comparisons to past provincial Liberal cuts.
- Brian Jeandefends the bill's shared services and mortgage provisions as transparent and beneficial.
- Kevin SorensonPraises new budget measures providing extra support to vulnerable seniors and contrasts the approach with the NDP.
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 budget implementation bills. The following is a short summary: On 14 June 2011, the Minister of Finance introduced Bill C-3, the Supporting Vulnerable Seniors and Strengthening Canada's Economy Act, in the House of Commons and it was given first reading. Part 1 implements income tax measures and related measures proposed in the 2011 budget. In particular, it (a) amends the Income Tax Act and related legislation to allow beneficiaries of Registered Disability Savings Plans who have shortened life expectancies to withdraw more of their plan savings by permitting annual withdrawals without triggering the 10-year repayment rule, subject to specified limits and certain conditions; and (b) amends the Income Tax Act to ensure that individuals have the legal authority in all circumstances to appeal a determination concerning their eligibility for the disability tax credit. Part 2 amends the Excise Tax Act to introduce a 100% rebate of the goods and services tax and the harmonized sales tax paid by the Royal Canadian Legion on acquisitions of Remembrance Day poppies and wreaths. It also amends the Excise Act, 2001 and the …
Summary by the Library of Parliament.
Where members stand
That the Bill be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Finance. · 2011-06-15 · Passed
How it changed on the way
54% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (15,137 words introduced, 14,781 passed).
substantial changeintent kept
The core budget measures on disability savings withdrawals, tax credit appeals, and GST rebates for the Legion remained intact from introduction to royal assent. Formatting updates, assent details, and a regulatory reference were added while some page markers and reading notations were removed.
- Replaced first reading notation with assent and chapter details.
Before: “FIRST READING, JUNE 14, 2011 MINISTER OF FINANCE 90613”
After: “STATUTES OF CANADA 2011 CHAPTER 15 An Act to implement certain provisions of the 2011 budget as updated on June 6, 2011 ASSENTED TO 26th JUNE, 2011”
- Added regulatory amendment section at end.
After: “SOR/2008-186 CANADA DISABILITY SAVINGS REGULATIONS 7.”
How precisely it is written
mixedChallenging the law: ModerateDisputing a charge: Moderate
The bill mixes precise elements such as dollar caps, fixed time limits and defined terms with subjective phrases that turn on professional opinions or ministerial views. This creates pockets of clarity alongside areas open to prolonged argument over application.
Open to argument
“in the professional opinion of the medical doctor, the beneficiary is not likely to survive more than five years”
Relies on a predictive medical judgment rather than an objective test.“if he or she considers it appropriate to do so”
Grants the Minister unfettered subjective discretion without statutory criteria.“is not, or is not likely to remain, in compliance”
Uses a forward-looking likelihood standard that invites debate over future conduct.
Clear-cut
“The aggregate outstanding principal amount of the following loans must not at any time exceed $300,000,000,000”
Sets a hard numerical ceiling enforceable without further interpretation.“within four years after the last day of the claim period”
Provides a fixed, calendar-based limitation period.“a fine of not more than $5,000,000”
States a clear maximum penalty amount.
Discretion. Significant power remains with the Minister of Finance to approve conversions, cancel suspensions, allocate insurance limits and make regulations that can alter effective dates or expand coverage.
Challenging the law itself. The repeated use of 'not likely' and 'in the opinion of' could support a vagueness or overbreadth argument under section 7 of the Charter.
Disputing a charge under it. Objective numerical and temporal rules make some breaches straightforward to prove, yet the subjective compliance and medical-likelihood tests allow factual disputes over whether the standard was met.
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.