Bill C-28 · 45th Parliament · Mark Carney
Canadian Space Launch Act
An Act to amend the Aeronautics Act and other Acts
Government bill. Still before Parliament.
- IntroducedApril 21, 2026
- Debated in principleNot reached
- Studied by a committeeNot reached
- Passed its first chamberNot reached
- Passed the second chamberNot reached
- Became lawNot reached
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
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 21 April 2026, the Minister of Transport and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons introduced Bill C-28, An Act to amend the Aeronautics Act and other Acts (Canadian Space Launch Act) in the House of Commons and it was given first reading. Bill C-28 amends the Aeronautics Act to establish a legislative framework for space launch and re-entry activities in Canada. It amends certain definitions to take into account new terms, such as launch vehicles and re-entry vehicles, and authorizes those terms to be defined by regulation. It also removes certain decisions related to launch and re-entry from review by the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada. It expands the regulation-making powers, including in relation to launches and re-entries and the operation of launch and re-entry sites, as well as in relation to the application of certain international agreements and standards. This enactment also introduces new authorities related to liability and indemnification for launch and re-entry activities. It authorizes the Minister of Transport to indemnify owners and operators of launch or re-entry vehicles in certain circumstances, and when it is in the public interest, for …
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
Only laws are compared, introduced against passed.
How precisely it is written
vagueChallenging the law: EasyDisputing a charge: Easy
The bill relies heavily on subjective ministerial opinions and public-interest tests rather than fixed numbers or objective criteria. This leaves most key powers open to prolonged argument over scope and application.
Open to argument
“in the opinion of the Minister, incompatible with the operation of a certified launch site”
Subjective standard that turns on one official's view rather than measurable criteria.“if the exemption, in the opinion of the Minister or officer, as the case may be, is in the public interest and is not likely to adversely affect aviation safety or security”
Combines undefined public-interest test with predictive likelihood standard.“if of the opinion that it is in the public interest to do so”
Purely discretionary trigger for indemnification power.“on any terms and conditions that the Minister or officer, as the case may be, considers necessary”
Unbounded discretion over conditions attached to exemptions or adjustments.
Clear-cut
“launch vehicle means (a) a rocket;”
Provides a concrete starting definition even if later regulations may expand it.“the Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects, which entered into force on September 1, 1972, as amended from time to time”
Incorporates a specific, dated international instrument by reference.
Discretion. Almost every operative power (exemptions, zoning, indemnification, financial adjustments, emergency stops) is conditioned on the Minister's or officer's opinion of public interest, compatibility, or safety, with further detail left to future regulations.
Challenging the law itself. Repeated use of 'in the opinion of the Minister' and 'public interest' without objective limits creates vagueness and overbreadth risks under Charter doctrines.
Disputing a charge under it. A person accused of breaching zoning rules, failing to maintain financial responsibility, or operating without a permit can readily dispute whether the Minister's subjective opinion was properly formed or whether the activity was truly incompatible.
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?
Only laws in force for two years or more are checked.
Who lobbied on it
No lobbying registration naming this bill is loaded.
Stages and dates from LEGISinfo.