Bill C-51 · 44th Parliament · Justin Trudeau
Self-Government Treaty Recognizing the Whitecap Dakota Nation / Wapaha Ska Dakota Oyate Act
An Act to give effect to the self-government treaty recognizing the Whitecap Dakota Nation / Wapaha Ska Dakota Oyate and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedJune 16, 2023
- Debated in principleJune 16, 2023
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberJune 19, 2023
- Passed the second chamberJune 22, 2023
- Became lawJune 22, 2023
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 16 June 2023, the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations introduced Bill C-51, An Act to give effect to the self-government treaty recognizing the Whitecap Dakota Nation / Wapaha Ska Dakota Oyate and to make consequential amendments to other Acts (Self-Government Treaty Recognizing the Whitecap Dakota Nation / Wapaha Ska Dakota Oyate Act), and it was given first reading. Bill C-51 gives effect to the treaty entitled “A Self-Government Treaty Recognizing the Whitecap Dakota Nation / Wapaha Ska Dakota Oyate” and makes consequential amendments to other Acts.
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
11% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (2,681 words introduced, 2,515 passed).
minor changeintent mostly kept
The bill kept its core purpose of giving effect to the self-government treaty but saw small technical updates to consequential amendments in access, tax and privacy statutes. Eleven percent of the introduced text was altered, mainly by refining cross-references and adding recognition of the Whitecap Dakota Nation in definitions of aboriginal government.
- Updated the definition of aboriginal government in the Access to Information Act to include the new treaty nation.
Before: “(3) The expression aboriginal government in paragraph (1)(e) means R.S., c.”
- Added a new paragraph after 19(1)(e) of the Privacy Act to extend confidentiality rules to the Whitecap Dakota Nation.
Before: “21 Subsection 19(1) of the Act is amended by adding the following after paragraph (e):”
After: “21 Subsection 19(1) of the Act is amended by adding the following after paragraph (e):”
How precisely it is written
mixedChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Moderate
The Act uses defined terms, fixed dates, a 14-day notice rule and explicit judicial-notice provisions that create clear black-and-white rules. At the same time it delegates wide power to the Governor in Council and incorporates an external treaty whose content is not reproduced.
Open to argument
“The Governor in Council may make any orders and regulations that the Governor in Council considers necessary for the purpose of carrying out any of the provisions of the Treaty”
The phrase 'considers necessary' supplies a subjective standard rather than an objective test.“the Governor in Council may make any regulations that the Governor in Council considers necessary, including regulations (a) adapting any provision of that Act”
The power to 'adapt' provisions is open-ended and undefined.
Clear-cut
“the notice must be served at least 14 days before the day on which the issue is to be argued”
A fixed number of days removes argument about timing.“Despite subsection 4(1), Chapter 33 and Schedule B of the Treaty are deemed to have effect as of August 22, 2022”
A specific calendar date fixes the retroactive effect without discretion.
Discretion. Section 17 leaves the Governor in Council free to decide what orders or regulations are 'necessary' and to adapt or restrict the First Nations Fiscal Management Act with no statutory limits stated in the bill.
Challenging the law itself. A challenge would have to attack the incorporation of a section 35 treaty or the breadth of the regulatory power, both of which receive strong deference under the Charter.
Disputing a charge under it. Because many obligations are defined only by reference to the external Treaty or future regulations, a person could argue about the exact scope of what has been incorporated or adapted.
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.