Parliament AIIndependent · non-official
All bills

Bill S-1001 · 41th Parliament · Stephen Harper

An Act to amend the Eastern Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada Act

Senate bill. Became law.

rural Canadaculture and heritage

  1. IntroducedJune 17, 2014
  2. Debated in principleSept. 29, 2014
  3. Studied by a committeeDone
  4. Passed its first chamberNov. 19, 2014
  5. Passed the second chamberNov. 27, 2014
  6. Became lawDec. 8, 2014

Where members stand

Votes and debate for this bill have not been read yet.

How it changed on the way

85% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (495 words introduced, 442 passed).

substantial changeintent kept

The bill kept its core purpose of amending the Eastern Synod Act to permit meetings despite the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act. Most of the introduced text, including the full preamble and explanatory notes on the old section 12, was removed or replaced with only formal enactment details.

  • Added chapter number, assent date, and statutes formatting for the final act.
    After: “STATUTES OF CANADA 2014 CHAPTER 42 An Act to amend the Eastern Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada Act ASSENTED TO 9th DECEMBER, 2014”

How precisely it is written

95VaguePrecise

preciseChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Hard

The bill makes one narrow, specific change by replacing a single section with a direct exemption from two named subsections of another statute. All language uses exact statutory references and defined corporate terms with no subjective standards.

Clear-cut

  • “Section 12 of the Eastern Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada Act is replaced by the following:”
    Uses a numbered section reference and a precise replacement command.

Discretion. No power is delegated to ministers, officials or regulations; the exemption is enacted directly by Parliament.

Challenging the law itself. The text contains no vague or overbroad language that could engage Charter vagueness or overbreadth doctrines.

Disputing a charge under it. Whether the named subsections apply is settled by the explicit statutory exception with no room for factual dispute.

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.