Bill C-88 · 42th Parliament · Justin Trudeau
An Act to amend the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act and the Canada Petroleum Resources Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedNov. 8, 2018
- Debated in principleApril 9, 2019
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberJune 17, 2019
- Passed the second chamberJune 19, 2019
- Became lawJune 20, 2019
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
On 8 November 2018, Minister of Intergovernmental and Northern Affairs and Internal Trade introduced Bill C-88, An Act to amend the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act and the Canada Petroleum Resources Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, in the House of Commons and it was given first reading. Part 1 of this enactment amends the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act to establish an administration and enforcement scheme in Part 5 of that Act that includes the issuance of development certificates. It also adds an administrative monetary penalty scheme and a cost recovery scheme, provides regulation-making powers for both schemes and for consultation with Aboriginal peoples and it allows the Minister to establish a committee to conduct regional studies. Finally, it repeals a number of provisions of the Northwest Territories Devolution Act that, among other things, restructure the regional panels of the Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board, but that were not brought into force. Part 2 of the enactment amends the Canada Petroleum Resources Act to allow the Governor in Council to prohibit certain works or activities on frontier lands if the Governor in Counci…
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
66% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (36,457 words introduced, 12,819 passed).
substantial changeintent broadened
The bill gained new repeal provisions and expanded federal order powers on petroleum activities after introduction. Several administrative and enforcement clauses were added or revised during passage.
- Added new federal order power to prohibit petroleum works on national interest grounds.
After: “Orders to prohibit activities in certain circumstances 12 (1) The Governor in Council may, by order, prohibit any interest owner or any other person from commencing or continuing any work or activity authorized under the Canada Oil and Gas Operations Act on the frontier lands, or any portion of them, if the Governor in Council considers that it is in the national interest to do so or that it is necessary in any of the following circumstances:”
- Expanded conformity duties to include development certificates under new sections.
Before: “A first nation, local government, regulatory authority or department or agency of the federal or territorial government affected by a decision made under this section shall act in conformity with the decision to the extent of their respective authorities.”
After: “In addition, a first nation, local government, regulatory authority or department or agency of the federal or territorial government affected by a decision made under this section shall act in conformity with the decision — including by implementing the conditions set out in a development certificate issued under section 131.3, or an amended development certificate issued under subsection 142.21(17), in relation to the proposed development — to the extent of their respective authorities.”
How precisely it is written
mixedChallenging the law: ModerateDisputing a charge: Moderate
The text mixes fixed numbers and defined procedures with repeated reliance on officials' opinions and reasonable-belief tests. This leaves many core powers open to argument over when they apply.
Open to argument
“If the chairperson of a board is of the opinion that it is necessary”
Subjective opinion test replaces an objective standard for extending terms.“reasonable grounds to believe that a development is being carried out”
Inspector discretion turns on an undefined belief threshold rather than listed facts.“in the manner that it considers appropriate in the circumstances”
Broad discretion over procedure invites disputes about what counts as appropriate.“if the Governor in Council considers that it is in the national interest”
Undefined national-interest standard grants wide prohibition power.
Clear-cut
“a fine not exceeding $250,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year, or to both”
Specific monetary and custodial limits are stated without further discretion.“No proceedings in respect of an offence under this Part are to be instituted more than five years after the day on which the federal Minister becomes aware”
Clear five-year limitation period measured from a fixed event.“before the end of 10 days after the day on which the Review Board receives the report”
Fixed waiting period stated in calendar days.
Discretion. Ministers, chairs, inspectors and regulations decide necessity, reasonable grounds, appropriate methods, penalty amounts up to statutory caps, and what constitutes national interest.
Challenging the law itself. Vague opinion-based and reasonable-belief standards could support a vagueness or overbreadth challenge under Charter s. 7.
Disputing a charge under it. Accused can readily dispute whether an official's subjective opinion or reasonable grounds actually existed on the facts.
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.