Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  That's the way I read it, that this act refers to the MVFCSA. It comes into force 30 days after the bill, which has three components, receives royal assent. For royal assent, you have to go through the House and the Senate, then royal assent. So 30 days after the royal assent of

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  It has been in existence since 1982, but has not been proclaimed. It was passed, but has never been proclaimed.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  There is--

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  What I can say is that there are various ways to have an act come into force. There is proclamation. That is the way it is in the current legislation. Right now, in modern days, the way to draft doesn't refer to proclamation. It more often refers to coming into force by order in

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I'm just reading it. It says that after the bill is introduced, this act comes into force 30 days after the bill receives royal assent. So let's say Bill C-30 goes through the House, it through the Senate, and it receives royal assent; 30 days after royal assent the act would com

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  It depends on the receipt of royal assent. You have to go through all the steps--the House of Commons, the Senate, receive royal assent--and then the act would come into force. I think that's the intent of the amendment here.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Maybe I should just clarify the plan for the regulations under the MVFCSA, just to give some clarification. As the government has indicated, the plan is to have regulations in force after the expiry of the MOU for model year 2011. To arrive there, the plan is to have regulations

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Well, I would think it's open to interpretation: what is an international best practice? Somebody could say, this is this one and that is this one. This preamble is to guide the standard a bit. It would be really difficult, by regulation, to guide a standard with a broad statemen

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Well, I don't know what a court would do. Certainly in terms of public servants working on the regulation, to have such a standard, where do you go? Where do you start? I don't know what a court would do, but I guess the first thing would be, what is an international best practic

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I think in that case you would have to say, as you said, it's guidance to the establishment of a standard. My understanding is that the message here from the government is that it wants to do two things. It wants to make sure a standard is ambitious or is going in the right dire

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Actually, this is one of the questions we had when we reviewed the motion. How do you define “international best practices” in that industry? Japan has some standards; the EU is moving with some standards; we know about California. But how do you define “international best practi

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  It's a complex formula. It's not by company. If we go with the formula, it's by the size of the vehicle. It's the wheelbased size of the vehicle, it's not by company.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  For light-duty trucks.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I'll let Catherine answer that question. She's the expert on that.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  This is more a policy question, really, than a question for officials.