Bill S-4 · 45th Parliament · Mark Carney
An Act to amend the Energy Efficiency Act
Government bill, sponsored by Pierre Moreau (Senator). Still before Parliament.
- IntroducedNov. 25, 2025
- Debated in principleMarch 11, 2026
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberJune 2, 2026
- 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
- Pierre MoreauSenator
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.
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
mixedChallenging the law: ModerateDisputing a charge: Moderate
The bill combines concrete numerical limits, time periods and defined terms with repeated reliance on ministerial opinions, reasonable beliefs and broad purposes. This mix leaves many thresholds open to interpretation rather than settling them in black-and-white language.
Open to argument
“if the Minister is of the opinion that immediate action is required”
Subjective ministerial opinion replaces an objective test for triggering exemptions.“the Minister considers to be necessary to verify compliance or prevent non-compliance”
Leaves duration of seizure and scope of testing to the Minister's personal assessment.“in a manner that is false, misleading or deceptive or is likely to create an erroneous impression”
Uses open-ended subjective standards without defined benchmarks for what counts as misleading.“the exemption is in the public interest”
Undefined public-interest criterion grants wide discretion over three-year exemptions.
Clear-cut
“for a period of not more than six months”
Hard cap on short-term exemption length removes discretion over duration.“within 30 days after the day on which the thing or product was seized”
Fixed filing deadline for interest claims eliminates argument over timeliness.
Discretion. Ministers and inspectors hold wide latitude to decide what is necessary, appropriate or in the public interest for testing, entry, exemptions, corrective orders and designations, with many powers exercisable by regulation or order.
Challenging the law itself. Vagueness and overbreadth arguments under section 7 or 8 of the Charter could target the repeated use of 'opinion', 'reasonable grounds' and 'public interest' to define inspection and exemption powers.
Disputing a charge under it. A person accused of breaching labelling or efficiency rules could readily dispute whether an impression was 'erroneous' or whether the Minister's chosen test was truly 'necessary', turning on contested facts and interpretations.
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.