An Act to amend the Interpretation Act and to make related amendments to other Acts

Status

Second reading (House), as of Feb. 26, 2024

Subscribe to a feed (what's a feed?) of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill S-13.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

This enactment amends the Interpretation Act to provide that Acts of Parliament and regulations are to be construed as upholding the Aboriginal and treaty rights of Indigenous peoples recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 , and not as abrogating or derogating from them. It also amends or repeals similar provisions in other Acts known as non-derogation clauses.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Interpretation ActRoutine Proceedings

February 26th, 2024 / 3:30 p.m.
See context

Parkdale—High Park Ontario

Liberal

Arif Virani LiberalMinister of Justice

moved that Bill S-13, An Act to amend the Interpretation Act and to make related amendments to other Acts be now read the first time and printed.

(Motion deemed adopted and bill read the first time)

Message from the SenateGovernment Orders

December 14th, 2023 / 5:30 p.m.
See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I have the honour to inform the House that messages have been received from the Senate informing the House that the Senate has passed the following bills, to which the concurrence of the House is desired: Bill S-13, an act to amend the Interpretation Act and to make related amendments to other acts, and Bill S-14, an act to amend the Canada National Parks Act, the Canada National Marine Conservation Areas Act, the Rouge National Urban Park Act and the National Parks of Canada Fishing Regulations.

December 13th, 2023 / 11:30 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Jamie Schmale Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I would like to move the amendment. I think this is more housekeeping than anything.

We're asking that Bill C-53 be amended by adding after line 17 on page 10 the following new clause:

26 If Bill S-13, introduced in the 1st session of the 44th Parliament and entitled An Act to amend the Interpretation Act and to make related amendments to other Acts, receives royal assent, then, on the first day on which both section 1 of that Act and section 3.1 of this Act are in force, that section 3.1 is repealed.

This is something I believe we all agreed on. It's more of a housekeeping issue than anything.

December 5th, 2023 / 4:10 p.m.
See context

Legal Counsel, Department of Justice

Julia Redmond

I am saying that given ongoing work on another legislative initiative with S-13

December 5th, 2023 / 4:05 p.m.
See context

Legal Counsel, Department of Justice

Julia Redmond

Yes, you understood my point correctly.

There are, among the amendments before the committee, certain ones that concern a more universal non-derogation clause and others that appear to be more specific. As I'm sure you're already aware, there is a legislative initiative dealing with a universal non-derogation clause—that's Bill S-13—that would apply to all federal statutes. This would be included within that, of course. Including a non-derogation clause in this bill is not strictly necessary, assuming Bill S-13 becomes law, because it would already be covered by that.

A broader non-derogation clause would cover everything that CPC-1.1 and NDP-4.2 are trying to cover. Those are a narrower statement of the same idea, which is not to abrogate or derogate from the rights of other indigenous peoples.

November 28th, 2023 / 5:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Jaime Battiste Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS

I have only five minutes to ask questions.

Would the legal counsel be comfortable...? We have legislation that's currently going through, Bill S-13, which reads:

Every enactment is to be construed as upholding the Aboriginal and treaty rights of Indigenous peoples recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, and not as abrogating or derogating from them.

Would AFN be more comfortable if we inserted that exact language within this legislation to ensure that nothing in this act could abrogate or derogate from first nations' recognized rights?