Conveyance Presentation and Reporting Requirements Modernization Act

How it changed on the way

88% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (1,531 words introduced, 1,447 passed). A committee amended it.

substantial changeintent mostly kept

The bill kept its core aim of exempting certain conveyances and persons from immediate reporting when crossing Canadian waters or airspace without landing or stopping. The final version rewrote the exemptions into a single clause, added separate rules for aircraft, gave officers override power, and expanded the coordinating amendment.

• Exemptions moved from two separate subsections to one combined rule with added detail on aircraft and continuous presence on board.

  Before: “Entry and departure (5) Subject to the regulations, subsections (1) and (3) do not apply to any of the following persons, unless an officer requires them to comply with those subsections : (a) a person who enters and then leaves Canadian waters, including the inland waters, or the airspace over Canada while proceeding directly from one place outside Canada to another place outside Canada ; or (b) a person who enters Canadian waters, including the inland waters, or the airspace over Canada on board a conveyance directly from another country and then returns to that other country on board the conveyance if the person did not disembark, anchor, moor or make contact with another conveyance while in Canadian waters, including the inland waters, or did not moor or tether while in the airspace over Canada.”

  After: “Entry and departure (5) Subject to the regulations, subsections (1) and (3) do not apply to any of the following persons, unless an officer requires them to comply with those subsections: (a) a person who enters Canadian waters, including the inland waters, or the airspace over Canada on board a conveyance directly from outside Canada and then leaves Canada on board the conveyance, as long as the person was continuously on board that conveyance while in Canada and (i) in the case of a conveyance other than an aircraft, the person did not land in Canada and the conveyance did not anchor, moor or make contact with another conveyance while in Canadian waters, including the inland waters, or (ii) in the case of an aircraft, the conveyance did not land while in Canada; and (b) a person who leaves Canadian waters, including the inland waters, or the airspace over Canada on board a conveyance and then re-enters Canada on board the conveyance, as long as the person was continuously on board that conveyance while outside Canada and (i) in the case of a conveyance other than an aircraft, the person did not land outside Canada and the conveyance did not anchor, moor or make contact with another conveyance while outside Canada, or (ii) in the case of an aircraft, the conveyance did not land while outside Canada.”

• Regulations clause dropped references to the second exemption subsection and narrowed the definition power.

  Before: “Regulations 12.01 The Governor in Council may make regulations for the purposes of sections 11 and 12, including regulations (a) prescribing the circumstances under which persons, goods or classes thereof on board a conveyance, or classes thereof, are required to present themselves or to be reported, as the case may be, despite subsection 11(5) or (5.1) or 12(5) or (5.1); or (b) defining the expression "make contact with another conveyance" for the purposes of subsections 11(5) and (5.1) and 12(5) and (5.1) and the circumstances under which a person, a conveyance or a class thereof makes contact with another conveyance.”

  After: “Regulations 12.01 The Governor in Council may make regulations for the purposes of sections 11 and 12, including regulations (a) prescribing the circumstances under which persons, goods or classes thereof on board a conveyance, or classes thereof, are required to present themselves or to be reported, as the case may be, despite subsection 11(5) or 12(5); or (b) defining the expression "make contact with another conveyance" for the purposes of subsections 11(5) and 12(5) and prescribing the circumstances under which a conveyance or a class thereof makes contact with another conveyance.”

• New officer power added to require examination even when regulations grant an exemption.

  After: “Powers of officer (3) Even though a person seeking to enter Canada is not, in accordance with regulations made under subsection 26(2), required to appear for an examination, an officer may require the person to do so.”

How precisely it is written

mixedChallenging the law: ModerateDisputing a charge: Moderate

The bill sets out objective factual tests for exemptions such as continuous presence on board and no landing or anchoring, yet leaves core terms undefined and grants officers power to override the exemptions at will. Regulation-making authority further broadens what the statute itself leaves open.

Open to argument

• “unless an officer requires them to comply with those subsections”

  This allows an officer's subjective judgment to nullify the exemption without stated criteria.

• “unless an officer otherwise requires”

  Reporting exemption is subject to discretionary override rather than fixed conditions.

• “defining the expression “make contact with another conveyance””

  A key operative phrase is left undefined in the Act itself.

Clear-cut

• “the conveyance did not land while in Canada”

  Supplies a clear, observable factual test for aircraft.

• “the person was continuously on board that conveyance while in Canada”

  States an objective, verifiable requirement without subjective standards.

Discretion. Officers hold broad power to demand compliance despite the listed exemptions, and the Governor in Council may prescribe additional circumstances, conditions, and definitions by regulation.

Challenging the law itself. Broad officer discretion and undefined statutory terms could ground a vagueness argument under section 7 of the Charter, though the presence of objective tests narrows overbreadth claims.

Disputing a charge under it. A person could contest whether landing, anchoring or contact occurred under the stated tests, but the officer-override clauses make successful disputes more difficult.

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.