Bill C-31 · 42th Parliament · Justin Trudeau
Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act
An Act to implement the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and Ukraine
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedNov. 3, 2016
- Debated in principleDec. 13, 2016
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberFeb. 14, 2017
- Passed the second chamberMay 17, 2017
- Became lawMay 31, 2017
Leading supporters
Ranked by the part each played: who is responsible for the bill, who carried it, and who spoke for it most.
- Justin TrudeauPrime 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 3 November 2016, Minister of International Trade introduced Bill C-31, An Act to implement the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and Ukraine (Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act), in the House of Commons and it was given first reading. Bill C-31 implements the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and Ukraine, done at Kyiv on July 11, 2016. The general provisions of the enactment set out rules of interpretation and specify that no recourse may be taken on the basis of sections 9 to 15 or any order made under those sections, or on the basis of the provisions of the Agreement, without the consent of the Attorney General of Canada. Part 1 approves the Agreement, provides for the payment by Canada of its share of the expenditures associated with the operation of the institutional and administrative aspects of the Agreement, and gives the Governor in Council the power to make orders in accordance with the Agreement. Part 2 amends certain Acts to bring them into conformity …
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
16% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (8,899 words introduced, 8,104 passed).
moderate changeintent mostly kept
The core free-trade implementation provisions remained intact while the bill was updated for royal assent in 2017. Minor refinements were made to customs-verification rules and new coordinating amendments were inserted for related statutes.
- New coordinating amendments added after section 52.4.
After: “36 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 52.4:”
How precisely it is written
mostly preciseChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Moderate
The bill relies on defined terms, cross-references to specific Agreement articles, and objective tests such as the principal-cause definition, making most obligations clear. A few phrases still introduce subjective judgment or open-ended power.
Open to argument
“pay its appropriate share of the aggregate of any expenditures”
The word 'appropriate' supplies no objective formula or fixed percentage.“take any other measure that the Governor in Council considers necessary”
The phrase grants open-ended discretion without listed criteria.
Clear-cut
“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”
Supplies a clear comparative test that can be applied without further policy choices.“No person has any cause of action and no proceedings of any kind are to be taken, without the consent of the Attorney General of Canada”
Creates an explicit procedural bar rather than a vague standard.“Ukraine Tariff means the rates of customs duty referred to in section 52.5 of the Customs Tariff”
Points to an existing numbered statutory provision.
Discretion. Ministers may appoint panel members and the Governor in Council may issue orders suspending benefits or modifying federal laws for up to an unspecified period chosen in the order itself.
Challenging the law itself. Section 8 blocks private actions under the Act or Agreement without Attorney General consent, limiting opportunities to raise vagueness or overbreadth claims under s. 7 of the Charter.
Disputing a charge under it. Most operative duties are tied to specific Agreement articles or tariff schedules, but disputes over what constitutes an 'appropriate share' or a 'necessary' order could still be litigated.
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.