The Senate
Statutes Repeal Act--Motion to Resolve that the Act and the Provisions of Other Acts not be Repealed Adopted
December 10, 2020
Pursuant to notice of December 8, 2020, moved:
That, pursuant to section 3 of the Statutes Repeal Act, S.C. 2008, c. 20, the Senate resolve that the Act and the provisions of the other Acts listed below, which have not come into force in the period since their adoption, not be repealed:
1.Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act, R.S., c. 33(2nd Supp):
-Part II;
2.Contraventions Act, S.C. 1992, c. 47:
-paragraph 8(1)(d), sections 9, 10 and 12 to 16, subsections 17(1) to (3), sections 18 and 19, subsection 21(1) and sections 22, 23, 25, 26, 28 to 38, 40, 41, 44 to 47, 50 to 53, 56, 57, 60 to 62, 84 (in respect of the following sections of the schedule: 2.1, 2.2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 7.1, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 and 16) and 85;
3.Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty Implementation Act, S.C. 1998, c. 32;
4.Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act, S.C. 1999, c. 34:
-sections 155, 157, 158 and 160, subsections 161(1) and (4) and section 168;
5.Modernization of Benefits and Obligations Act, S.C. 2000, c. 12:
-subsections 107(1) and (3) and section 109;
6.Yukon Act, S.C. 2002, c. 7:
-sections 70 to 75 and 77, subsection 117(2) and sections 167, 168, 210, 211, 221, 227, 233 and 283;
7.An Act to amend the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, S.C. 2003, c. 26:
-sections 4 and 5, subsection 13(3), section 21, subsections 26(1) to (3) and sections 30, 32, 34, 36 (with respect to section 81 of the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act), 42 and 43;
8. Budget Implementation Act, 2005, S.C. 2005, c. 30:
-Part 18 other than section 125;
9.An Act to amend certain Acts in relation to financial institutions, S.C. 2005, c. 54:
-subsection 27(2), section 102, subsections 239(2), 322(2) and 392(2);
10.An Act to amend the law governing financial institutions and to provide for related and consequential matters,S.C. 2007, c. 6:
-section 28, subsections 30(1) and (3), 88(1) and (3) and 164(1) and (3) and section 362;
11.Budget Implementation Act, 2008, S.C. 2008, c. 28:
-sections 150 and 162;
12.Budget Implementation Act, 2009, S.C. 2009, c. 2:
-sections 394, 399 and 401 to 404;
13.An Act to amend the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992, S.C. 2009, c. 9:
-section 5;
14.Payment Card Networks Act, S.C. 2010, c. 12, s. 1834:
-sections 6 and 7; and
15.An Act to promote the Efficiency and adaptability of the Canadian economy by regulating certain activities that discourage reliance on electronic means of carrying out commercial activities, and to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act and the Telecommunications Act, 2010, c. 23:
-sections 47 to 51 and 55, 68, subsection 89(2) and section 90.
She said: Honourable senators, I rise today to ask you to support Motion No. 22, that the Senate resolve, before December 31, that an act and the provisions of the 14 other acts listed in the motion not be repealed. I am asking the Senate to ensure that this act and these provisions, which have not come into force since their enactment, are not repealed pursuant to the Statues Repeal Act.
I would like to share some general information about the Statutes Repeal Act.
Bill S-207, the Statutes Repeal Act, received Royal Assent on June 18, 2008, and came into force two years later. The act is an administrative measure that tidies up federal legislation by regularly pruning provisions that have not been brought into force within 10 years.
Section 2 of the Statutes Repeal Act requires that the Minister of Justice table an annual report before both Houses of Parliament on any of the first five sitting days in each calendar year. This report lists the acts of Parliament or provisions of acts of Parliament not yet in force that were enacted nine years or more before December 31 of the previous calendar year. However, these acts and provisions can be saved from automatic repeal if they are brought into force before December 31 or if one of the Houses of Parliament adopts a resolution exempting them from repeal.
This is the tenth year of implementation of the Statutes Repeal Act. The tenth annual report was tabled on January 29, 2020, in the other place and on February 4, 2020, in the Senate.
Since the tabling of the report, the Department of Justice Canada has contacted the departments responsible for the act and provisions listed in the report to verify whether they should be saved from repeal. Eleven ministers have recommended the deferral of repeal of provisions for which they are responsible.
I would like to set out the reasons for the recommended deferrals, as has been the custom in this chamber.
The Minister of Finance recommends deferring the repeal of certain provisions of three acts.
The first recommendation has to do with several provisions of An Act to amend certain Acts in relation to financial institutions. These provisions amend the definition of “solicitation” in the Bank Act, the Insurance Companies Act and the Trust and Loan Companies Act. A deferral of repeal of these provisions is recommended so that the government has time to adopt the proposed legislative amendments.
The second recommendation has to do with several provisions of An Act to amend the law governing financial institutions and to provide for related and consequential matters. Section 28 of this act has to do with the special security regime in the Bank Act. A deferral of repeal of these provisions is recommended so that the Department of Finance can consult stakeholders to assess the need to modernize the special security regime and the potential repercussions of the repeal of this section.
The remaining not-in-force provisions amend the corresponding sections of the Bank Act, the Cooperative Credit Associations Act and the Trust and Loan Companies Act in order to require that financial institutions try to contact the holders of unclaimed balances by e-mail, in addition to the existing requirement that they send a notice to the holder’s address on file. A deferral of repeal of these provisions is recommended until the legislative amendments are implemented, as announced in Budget 2019.
The Minister of Finance’s third recommendation has to do with certain provisions of the Payment Card Networks Act. Sections 6 and 7 of this act authorize the Governor-in-Council to make regulations respecting the operation of payment card networks and the behaviour of their operators in order to promote fair and transparent business practices. It is recommended that the repeal be deferred because more time is needed to complete the work and the consultations on the approach.
Let’s move on to foreign affairs.
The Minister of Foreign Affairs is recommending deferrals of repeal for one act. The deferral recommendation concerns the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty Implementation Act. This act will be brought into force as soon as the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty enters into force. However, before the treaty enters into force, it requires ratification by 44 specific states. Currently, 8 out of these 44 states have not yet ratified the treaty. The act will implement the treaty once its entry into force is achieved.
Next, let’s discuss innovation, science and industry.
The Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry is recommending deferrals of repeal of certain provisions of one act. The deferral recommendation concerns an act better known as Canada’s anti-spam legislation but which is entitled An Act to promote the efficiency and adaptability of the Canadian economy by regulating certain activities that discourage reliance on electronic means of carrying out commercial activities, and to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act, the Competition Act, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act and the Telecommunications Act.
This act prohibits, among other things, sending unsolicited commercial electronic messages, altering transmission data and installing computer programs, such as malware, without consent. The provisions for which a deferral of repeal is requested create a private right of action, allowing any person affected by a violation of the act to apply to the courts for compensation for loss or damage suffered or expenses incurred and for statutory damages.
The coming-into-force of these provisions was suspended by order-in-council pending a review of the act to provide greater legal certainty for the numerous stakeholders, given the uncertainty surrounding the interpretation of several of its provisions. A deferral of repeal is therefore recommended until the government has completed its review of the act.
The Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada recommends the deferral of repeal of certain provisions of three acts.
The first recommendation pertains to the provisions of the Contraventions Act. This act establishes an alternative to summary conviction under the Criminal Code for the prosecution of federal offences that are designated as contraventions. The Department of Justice entered into agreements with every province, with the exception of Alberta and Saskatchewan, to implement the ticketing regime through provincial regimes already in place for criminal matters. The Department of Justice also intends to initiate negotiations for implementation in the territories once the regime is implemented in the two remaining provinces.
In the event that these negotiations do not succeed, the Department of Justice will reassess the need to implement an independent federal regime in these jurisdictions by applying the provisions of the act not yet in force. The deferral of the repeal is therefore being recommended in the event that an independent federal regime must be put in place.
The second recommendation pertains to three provisions of the Modernization of Benefits and Obligations Act, which are not yet in force. These provisions would allow for regulations to expand the categories of parents to whom EI parental benefits are paid, in situations where legal parentage could be denied under provincial or territorial law. Although the initial intention was to have these provisions go into force and to make regulations to deal with these situations, it was instead decided that the provinces and territories would be allowed to remedy this shortcoming, and to have these federal provisions go into force only if necessary. Over the years, many provinces and territories updated their legislation to bring it in line with the Charter, but some have not yet done so.
A deferral of repeal is recommended to allow the Government of Canada to complete the review of the parental benefit provisions in order to determine whether the provincial and territorial legislation has advanced to the point where deferring repeal of the provisions in question would no longer be necessary.
The third recommendation concerns section 399 of the Budget Implementation Act, 2009, which amends the Canadian Human Rights Act to provide that the Canadian Human Rights Commission does not have jurisdiction to deal with pay equity complaints made against an employer within the meaning of the Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act.
The Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act has never come into force. The Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 2, enacts the Pay Equity Act to replace the Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act.
The purpose of section 399 of the Budget Implementation Act, 2009, was to support the implementation of the Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act, and it is null and void if that legislation does not come into force.
A deferral of the repeal of section 399 is recommended so that it can be done at the same time as the repeal of the Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act.
The Minister of National Defence is recommending a deferral of repeal for certain provisions of two acts.
The first recommendation concerns certain provisions of An Act to amend the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts. These provisions amend the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act and relate to supplementary death benefits and elective service rules. They cannot be brought into force before the accompanying regulations are made.
A deferral of repeal is recommended since additional time is required to complete the regulations and obtain the necessary approvals to bring them into force.
The second recommendation concerns section 150 of the Budget Implementation Act, 2008. This provision amends the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act to provide authority for the Governor-in-Council to make regulations for the payment of interest, when refunding amounts paid by a contributor, that are in excess of amounts required under this act. This provision cannot be brought into force before the supporting regulations are made. A deferral of repeal is recommended to allow time to complete the regulatory process.
The Minister of Northern Affairs is recommending deferral of repeal of certain provisions of one act.
The deferral recommendation concerns sections 70 to 75 of the Yukon Act. These provisions allow the Yukon government to appoint its own auditor general and cease to use the services of Canada’s Auditor General. The Government of Yukon needs to establish a position of auditor general before these provisions can be brought into force.
The other provisions of the Yukon Act for which a deferral of repeal is recommended are consequential amendments to other acts that should be brought into force when the federal Yukon Surface Rights Board Act is repealed and the Yukon Legislative Assembly enacts legislation in its place.
Senator Gagné, your time has expired. Are you asking for five more minutes?
Yes, please.
Is it agreed to grant five more minutes?
I will speak quickly.
A deferral of the repeal of these provisions is recommended to enable the Government of Canada to continue its dialogue with the Government of Yukon and Yukon First Nations to implement the negotiated terms of the devolution agreement.
The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness is recommending a deferral of repeal for one provision of one act.
The deferral recommendation concerns section 162 of the Budget Implementation Act, 2008. This provision amends the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Act to allow for the payment of interest on the refund of an amount overpaid by a contributor into the RCMP pension plan and to provide authority for the Governor-in-Council to make regulations for the payment of interest. This provision cannot be brought into force before regulations are made.
Deferral of repeal would allow the RCMP and the Department of National Defence to finalize all policy decisions through departmental and stakeholder consultations.
The Minister of Public Services and Procurement is recommending a deferral of repeal for certain provisions of two acts.
The first recommendation concerns Part 18 of the Budget Implementation Act, 2005. This part amends several provisions of the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act and gives the Minister of Public Services and Procurement the exclusive authority for contracting for services, as the minister currently has for goods.
Granting the deferral of repeal for Part 18 of the Budget Implementation Act, 2005 would provide time to fulfill the procurement modernization mandate.
The second recommendation concerns sections 401 to 404 of the Budget Implementation Act, 2009, which amend the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act to include references to the Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act.
Sections 401 to 404 of the Budget Implementation Act, 2009, were meant to support the implementation of the Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act, but the Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 2, enacted the Pay Equity Act as a replacement to the Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act. Sections 401 to 404 will have no purpose or effect without the coming into force of the Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act.
A deferral of repeal of sections 401 to 404 of the Budget Implementation Act, 2009 is recommended until the Pay Equity Act comes into force and the Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act is repealed.
The President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada is recommending a deferral of repeal for certain provisions of one act. The requested deferral of repeal pertains to Part II of the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act. Part II of that act implements the standards of Part III of the Canada Labour Code for parliamentary employers and also refers to the section of the code that deals with wrongful dismissal.
A deferral of the repeal of Part II of the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act is recommended in order to allow the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada, in close partnership with the Minister of Labour, to continue to assess the timelines for implementation.
The Minister of Transport recommends deferring the repeal of a single provision of one act. The requested deferral of repeal pertains to Section 5 of An Act to amend the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992.
Treasury Board is recommending a deferral of repeal for provisions in two acts. The first recommendation has to do with certain provisions of the Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act that address supplementary death benefits for the Canadian Armed Forces. These provisions amend the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act to permit regulations to be made prescribing the amount of supplementary death benefits payable and the amount of premiums.
The second recommendation pertains to section 394 of the Budget Implementation Act, 2009, which refers to the Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act. In addition to enacting the Pay Equity Act, the Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 2, also includes provisions to repeal the Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act. This act will only be repealed once all pay equity complaints filed under section 11 of the Canadian Human Rights Act have been referred to the Federal—
Senator Gagné, would you like a few more minutes?
Yes, please.
Would senators grant a few more minutes?
Thank you. In addition to enacting the Pay Equity Act, the Budget Implementation Act, 2018, includes provisions to repeal the Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act. This act will be repealed once all pay equity complaints filed under section 11 of the Canadian Human Rights Act that have been referred to the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board have been fully dealt with.
The Statutes Repeal Act provides that deferrals of repeal last one year, and any legislation for which a deferral of repeal is obtained this year will appear again in next year’s annual report.
It is important that this motion be adopted before December 31, 2020. Otherwise, the act and provisions of other acts listed in the motion will be repealed on December 31, 2020, by operation of the Statutes Repeal Act. If the resolution is not adopted in time, the repeal of the act and the provisions listed in the motion could lead to inconsistencies in federal legislation.
Therefore, colleagues, I urge you to support the motion and vote in favour of a resolution that the act and provisions of other acts listed in the motion not be repealed on December 31 of this year by application of the Statutes Repeal Act.
Will the senator accept a question? I’m sorry I don’t have the answer to this. Has this gone through the other place yet?
I will make inquiries and get back to you.
You don’t have much time.
I’ve just been informed that it only needs a resolution in one of the two houses.
Honourable senators, I’m grateful to live and work and to be speaking to you from the traditional territory of the Kawnlin Dün First Nation and the Ta’an Kwäch’än Council. This evening, I rise to speak to government Motion No. 22.
Dear colleagues, throughout the chamber I appreciate that most, if not everyone, considers Motion No. 22 a routine matter and not requiring a great deal of debate or attention. My remarks will be brief.
I thank you for the time to provide an argument as to why we do need to provide careful consideration representing all voices in my region, and why this annual motion requires careful deliberation and review.
Colleagues, you’ve heard me state before in this chamber that I believe our individual signatures — although we don’t sign documents in person as often as we used to and in today’s tech-savvy world sometimes it’s an electronic signature — that act of signing, even an electronic signature, expresses our commitment or approval. It’s among our most valuable possessions and we don’t give it lightly.
Voting on matters in this chamber is to my mind akin to signing a document. We do not vote lightly or without considerable second thought.
Careful consideration of this motion will reveal that there are several clauses, as Senator Gagné has stated, with reference to the Yukon Act and the Yukon Surface Rights Board Act.
Honourable senators, it is not my wish to begin a constitutional debate about provincial status in Canada, the provinces, territories and Indigenous governments. All of us, quite frankly, have other matters that warrant our immediate and undivided attention.
Nevertheless, the Yukon Act is my region’s “constitution,” and while the matters in this motion are routine and similar to other amendments that we see in, for example, the Miscellaneous Statute Law Amendment legislation that we see in other jurisdictions, they do warrant a comment, and if you’ll allow me, a little briefing.
Prior to 1985, the Yukon and the Northwest Territories’ duly elected representatives would travel each year to Ottawa, reminiscent of Oliver Twist, cap in hand, seeking an annual budget from Ottawa. Thanks to the quiet work of our member of Parliament and deputy prime minister at the time, Erik Nielsen, in the mid-1980s the territories received a formula finance funding arrangement, similar to provincial equalization formula and payments. It was a major step forward for both territories.
Another major milestone occurred in 2001, with the Devolution Transfer Agreement, the bill referenced in this Motion No. 22. For senators who weren’t in the chamber at the time, the devolution agreement between Canada and Yukon was the transfer of care and control over land and resources to the Yukon. I travelled to Ottawa in my capacity as leader of the third party in the Yukon legislature, part of a Yukon all-party effort to persuade members of Parliament to approve the Devolution Transfer Agreement, Bill C-39. I do not recall any one of us seeking an audience with senators. Now I know better.
It was my great honour and privilege, as Yukon’s premier, to sign that final Devolution Transfer Agreement. We truly became the masters and mistresses of our own house.
Some of the specific provisions addressed today are to do with the Auditor General of Canada. As Senator Gagné noted, until such time as Yukon appoints an auditor general, the Auditor General of Canada maintains responsibility. Quite frankly, as I mentioned earlier, Yukon, Canada and territorial, provincial and Indigenous governments have other priorities than appointing an auditor general, and we remain truly appreciative of the Auditor General of Canada’s work on our behalf. The work, Senator Marshall, is still underway, and close scrutiny is offered to financial expenditures in the territories.
I would like to address the Yukon Surface Rights Board Act provisions, which are also contained in this motion.
Honourable senators, Canada’s Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, Ministers Freeland, Bennett, Vandal, Monsef, Joly, her parliamentary secretary and our Member of Parliament Larry Bagnell, to name a few, Premier Sandy Silver and his cabinet and caucus, Grand Chief Peter Johnston and Yukon First Nations chiefs with self-government agreements and those without, work diligently with one another to ensure the best government for all citizens. The strong government — Canada to Yukon, government to government, Canada to Yukon and to First Nation government relations, that government to government to government relations that exists in the Yukon — sets a gold standard for our fellow Canadians.
For these reasons, and knowing that these provisions on the Yukon Surface Rights Board would not have been brought forward without this strong relationship and the strong consultative process it includes, I’m quite comfortable in commending this motion to the chamber.
Honourable senators, I appreciate that the air time in this chamber is much in demand and I thank you for your time and consideration in allowing me to make these remarks and to express my support for Motion No. 22.
Thank you, gùnáłchîsh, mahsi’cho.
Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
(Motion agreed to.)
