Bill C-27 · 45th Parliament · Mark Carney
Final Self-Government Agreement for the Tlegohli Got’ine Act
An Act to give effect to the Final Self-Government Agreement for the Tlegohli Got’ine and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedMarch 26, 2026
- Debated in principleJune 12, 2026
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberJune 18, 2026
- Passed the second chamberOct. 8, 2026
- Became lawOct. 8, 2026
Leading supporters
Ranked by the part each played: who is responsible for the bill, who carried it, and who spoke for it most.
- Mark CarneyPrime Minister
- Pat DuncanSenate · Sponsor in the Senate
- Pierre MoreauSenate · Government Representative in the Senate
- Rebecca Altypresents and endorses the bill as advancing self-government and reconciliation
- Jamie Schmaleexplicitly backs the bill and wants it sent to committee
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 26 March 2026, the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations introduced Bill C-27, An Act to give effect to the Final Self-Government Agreement for the Tlegohli Got’ine and to make consequential amendments to other Acts (Final Self-Government Agreement for the Tlegohli Got’ine Act) in the House of Commons and it was given first reading. Bill C-27 gives effect to the Final Self-Government Agreement for the Tlego´hli? Got’ine and makes consequential amendments to other Acts.
Summary by the Library of Parliament.
Where members stand
For it 2
Voted for it, or spoke in support
Challenging it 0
Support only with changes, or serious objections raised in debate
Against it 0
Voted against it and argued against it
How it changed on the way
The texts have not been compared yet.
How precisely it is written
mixedChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Moderate
The bill uses many defined terms and cross-references to specific agreement sections for core rules on validity and precedence. It also contains broad discretionary language and relies on external documents whose content is not reproduced here.
Open to argument
“the Governor in Council may make any orders and regulations that the Governor in Council considers necessary”
Subjective standard of necessity leaves scope open to argument.“for the purpose of carrying out the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got'įnę Agreement — including to set the Effective Date and Transition Date”
Broad grant of power without objective limits on what counts as implementation.
Clear-cut
“be served at least 14 days before the day on which the issue is to be argued”
Fixed numerical period removes discretion on timing.“in the event of an inconsistency or conflict between the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got'įnę Agreement and this Act or any other federal law, the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got'įnę Agreement prevails”
Clear hierarchy rule with no subjective qualifiers.
Discretion. Section 18 leaves the Governor in Council free to decide what orders or regulations are needed and when to set the two key dates.
Challenging the law itself. The Act implements a section 35 treaty agreement whose validity is declared by Parliament, limiting vagueness or overbreadth claims under the Charter.
Disputing a charge under it. Many obligations are defined by reference to Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę laws or the agreement itself, requiring external documents to determine breach.
Read by a language model from the as introduced 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.