Bill C-63 · 41th Parliament · Stephen Harper
Déline Final Self-Government Agreement Act
An Act to give effect to the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedJune 3, 2015
- Debated in principleJune 3, 2015
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberJune 3, 2015
- Passed the second chamberJune 10, 2015
- Became lawJune 17, 2015
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
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 4 June 2015, the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development introduced Bill C-63, An Act to give effect to the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts (Déline Final Self-Government Agreement Act), in the House of Commons and it was given first reading. The Déline Final Self-Government Agreement (FSGA) builds upon the Sahtu Dene and Metis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement where it was agreed that self-government negotiations would address the desire of the Sahtu Dene and Metis to have self-government exercised as close to the community level as possible. In1996, Déline became the first Sahtu community to begin self-government negotiations. The groups (the Parties) who have negotiated the Déline FSGA are the Déline First Nation, the Déline Land Corporation, the Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT) and the Government of Canada (Canada). The Parties signed a Process and Schedule Agreement (PSA) in 1998. Th…
Summary by the Library of Parliament.
Where members stand
Votes and debate for this bill have not been read yet.
How it changed on the way
The texts have not been compared yet.
How precisely it is written
mostly preciseChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Moderate
The Act uses exact dates, numbered sections of the Déline Agreement, and clear hierarchy rules to settle most questions of validity and precedence. A few provisions still rely on broad phrases such as 'necessary for the purpose' or point back to the external agreement for core definitions.
Open to argument
“The Governor in Council may make any orders and regulations that are necessary for the purpose of carrying out any of the provisions of the Déline Agreement”
The word 'necessary' supplies a subjective standard that invites argument over what regulations are truly required.“a person shall not use Déline lands without such a permit or authorization if one is required by a Déline law for uses of that type”
The phrase 'for uses of that type' leaves the scope of the prohibition to be determined by future Déline laws rather than the Act itself.
Clear-cut
“be served at least 14 days before the day on which the issue is to be argued, unless the court or tribunal authorizes a shorter period”
A fixed 14-day period plus an explicit exception creates an objective, easily applied test.“Despite subsection 4(1), 2.5.1 and 4.6 of the Déline Agreement, chapter 31 of that Agreement and 2.1, 2.2, 3.3, 5.1 and 5.2 of schedule C to that Agreement are deemed to have effect as of October 1, 2013”
A single calendar date removes any dispute about when those provisions begin to operate.“The Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories has exclusive original jurisdiction to hear and determine applications for judicial review”
The word 'exclusive' and the named court produce a black-and-white forum rule.
Discretion. The Governor in Council holds open-ended power to issue any orders or regulations needed to implement the Déline Agreement or related implementation accords, and several definitions simply incorporate whatever the Déline Agreement or future Déline laws may say.
Challenging the law itself. The Act implements a treaty under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, and its core provisions are tightly tied to the text of that treaty, making a successful vagueness or overbreadth challenge under the Charter difficult.
Disputing a charge under it. A person accused of breaching a Déline law or the permit requirement on Déline lands can readily argue about whether the particular use falls within the type covered by the external Déline law, though the Act's notice and hierarchy rules limit the scope of such disputes.
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.