Bill S-3 explained in plain English
An Act to amend the Indian Act in response to the Superior Court of Quebec decision in Descheneaux c. Canada (Procureur général)
Federal Parliament bill summary, status, timeline, sponsor, votes, and official sources.
At a glance
Official Parliament of Canada snapshot for 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. MP vote breakdowns appear when the House of Commons publishes a recorded division export for that bill. Senate and House stage details include official debate/sitting links when LEGISinfo publishes them.
Our plain-language take, written for civic education.
Source: By PoliticalData.ca
Bill S-3 amends the Indian Act to expand registration and band membership eligibility in response to a 2015 Quebec court decision that found registration rules discriminated against women and their descendants, and requires ministerial reviews and consultations on related issues.
Bill S-3 amends the Indian Act to address a 2015 Quebec court decision that found certain registration rules discriminated against women and their descendants. The bill expands who can be registered in the Indian Register and have their names entered in Band Lists. The changes respond to the Superior Court of Quebec decision in Descheneaux c. Canada (Procureur général) from August 3, 2015, which declared that parts of the Indian Act's registration rules were inoperative because they violated equality rights. The main changes are: 1. **New registration categories**: The bill creates new eligibility criteria for people to be registered as Indians, including people whose ancestors were removed from the Indian Register due to marriage, women born between September 4, 1951 and April 16, 1985 in certain circumstances, and their descendants. 2. **Handling unknown or unstated parentage**: If a person's parent, grandparent, or other ancestor is unknown or not named on a birth certificate, the Registrar (the person who manages the Indian Register) can decide whether that ancestor was entitled to be registered, based on credible evidence and reasonable inferences in favour of the applicant. 3. **Band membership**: People who become newly entitled to registration also get the right to have their names entered in Band Lists (the membership lists of First Nations bands). 4. **No compensation**: The bill includes protections so the federal government, its employees, and band councils cannot be sued for compensation for decisions made in good faith during the transition period. 5. **Reviews and consultations**: The Minister must review whether all sex-based inequities in registration rules have been eliminated within three years. The Minister must also consult with First Nations and interested parties within six months about issues like adoption, the 1951 cut-off date, and First Nations' role in determining membership. 6. **Timing**: Most of the bill comes into force on a date to be set by the Governor in Council, which must be when a court suspension ends. Some sections (2.1, 3.1, 3.2, and 10.1) come into force on a later date to be set by the Governor in Council.
- Adds new eligibility criteria to Section 6 of the Indian Act for registration in the Indian Register, including people whose ancestors were removed from the Register because of marriage, women born in a specific period under certain family circumstances, and their descendants
- Modifies Section 5 of the Indian Act to allow the Registrar to determine entitlement to registration based on credible evidence when a parent, grandparent, or other ancestor is unknown or unstated on a birth certificate, without needing to establish their identity
- Expands Section 11 of the Indian Act to provide Band List membership rights (the right to have one's name entered in a First Nations band's membership list) to people newly entitled to registration
- Adds a provision that people who would have been entitled to registration or band membership but died before the changes took effect are deemed to have been entitled, allowing their descendants to potentially register
- Prohibits claims for compensation or damages against Canada or band councils for decisions made in good faith regarding registration or band membership before the bill's changes take effect
- Requires the Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs to initiate consultations with First Nations and interested parties within six months on issues including adoption, the 1951 cut-off date, the second-generation cut-off rule, unknown or unstated paternity, enfranchisement, and the federal government's role in determining Indian status
- Requires the Minister to report to Parliament within five months on the design of the consultation process and within 12 months on the progress and results of consultations
- Requires the Minister to review within three years whether sex-based inequities in registration provisions have been eliminated and to report to Parliament with any recommended changes to the Indian Act
- Directs the Minister to publish all reports on the Department's website immediately after they are tabled in Parliament
- Provides that amended provisions are to be liberally construed and interpreted to remedy disadvantages to women and their descendants born before April 17, 1985, and to enhance equal treatment of women and men
- Women born before April 17, 1985 who were not eligible to register or pass registration status to their children under the old rules
- Descendants of women who were removed from the Indian Register because their mothers, grandmothers, or other ancestors married and lost status
- Descendants of women whose fathers were entitled to be registered but whose mothers were not, in cases where the parents were unmarried at birth
- Descendants of people who were omitted or deleted from the Indian Register before September 4, 1951 under certain old provisions
- People whose parents or ancestors' identities are unknown or unstated on birth certificates
- First Nations bands and their councils who will have new members added to their membership lists
- The federal government and the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs, which must conduct reviews and consultations
- The federal government, its employees, and band councils, who are protected from compensation claims for decisions made in good faith
- Individuals who received capital moneys when they lost band membership, whose future distributions may be affected
- The Registrar has the obligation to determine whether a person with an unknown or unstated parent, grandparent, or ancestor was entitled to registration, based on credible evidence and drawing reasonable inferences in favour of the applicant
- The Registrar must recognize entitlements to registration that existed under the old rules during the transition period after the court order suspends but before the bill officially comes into force
- The Minister must initiate consultations with First Nations and interested parties within six months after the bill receives royal assent on issues including adoption, the 1951 cut-off date, second-generation cut-off, unknown paternity, enfranchisement, and First Nations' authority to determine membership
- The Minister must report to Parliament within five months on the design of the consultation process
- The Minister must report to Parliament within 12 months on the progress and results of consultations
- The Minister must review within three years whether sex-based inequities in Section 6 of the Indian Act have been eliminated
- The Minister must recommend any changes to the Indian Act needed to reduce or eliminate remaining sex-based inequities
- The Minister must publish all reports on the Department's website immediately after tabling
- People newly entitled to registration have the right to have their names entered in their Band List under specific circumstances related to where their ancestors' names were removed
- No person or body (including Canada, its employees, or band councils) has the right to claim compensation from the federal government for decisions made in good faith regarding registration or band membership before this bill's changes take effect
- August 3, 2015: The date of the Superior Court of Quebec decision in Descheneaux c. Canada (Procureur général) that found certain registration rules inoperative
- April 17, 1985: A key date used throughout the bill as a threshold for when discrimination in the Indian Act changed; many eligibility criteria depend on birth before or after this date, or on events before April 17, 1985
- September 4, 1951: Another key historical date referenced for removal provisions; many eligibility criteria look back to this date
- Six months after royal assent: The deadline for the Minister to initiate consultations with First Nations and interested parties
- Five months after royal assent: The deadline for the Minister to report to Parliament on the consultation process design
- 12 months after consultations begin: The deadline for the Minister to report to Parliament on consultation progress and results
- Three years after royal assent: The deadline for the Minister to complete reviews of sex-based inequities and report to Parliament
- The bill (except for sections 2.1, 3.1, 3.2, and 10.1) comes into force on a day to be set by Governor in Council, which must be the day the court suspension of the declaration expires
- Sections 2.1, 3.1, 3.2, and 10.1 come into force on a later day to be set by Governor in Council after the main commencement date
- Capital moneys previously paid to people who lost band membership may be recovered from future per capita distributions under modified rules in Section 64.1, with exceptions based on the amount and whether a band has enacted relevant by-laws
- First Nations bands may incur administrative costs for adding newly entitled members to their membership lists and managing their affairs with a larger membership
- The federal government will incur costs for the Registrar to process new registration applications and make determinations based on credible evidence
- The bill does not impose penalties or criminal sanctions. It is primarily a corrective statute clarifying registration and membership rights.
- Section 10 and 10.1 provide protection against liability: no person or body can claim compensation or damages from Canada or band councils for anything done or omitted in good faith in the exercise of their powers or duties regarding registration or band membership decisions
- The bill text does not specify the exact date when the court suspension of the Descheneaux declaration expires, which is the trigger for when most of this bill comes into force. This date was to be determined by Governor in Council.
- The bill does not define what counts as 'credible evidence' for determining entitlement when parentage is unknown, leaving this to Registrar discretion
- The scope and results of the required ministerial consultations are not predetermined; the bill sets the topics but not the outcomes
- The bill directs the Minister to review sex-based inequities in registration provisions but does not specify what additional changes, if any, will be made based on the review results
- The bill provides for people 'deemed to be entitled' to registration even if deceased, but the practical mechanism for recognizing their descendants' entitlements depends on implementation details not specified in the bill
New subsection added (subsections 6 and 7) allowing the Registrar to determine whether a parent, grandparent, or other ancestor was entitled to registration based on credible evidence when their identity is unknown or unstated on a birth certificate, without requiring the Registrar to establish their actual identity
Replaced and added new criteria for who is entitled to be registered in the Indian Register, including people whose ancestors were deleted from the Register due to marriage or other removal provisions, women born between September 4, 1951 and April 16, 1985 in certain family circumstances, and direct descendants of people entitled under these new criteria
Clarified that a person is entitled to be registered if one parent is entitled, or was entitled at the time of their death
Added deeming provisions so that people who would have qualified for registration under new categories but died before the bill came into force are deemed to have been entitled, allowing their descendants to potentially qualify
Provides that people entitled to registration under the new categories also have the right to have their name entered in the Band List of the band, with specific rules based on which new eligibility category applies and the circumstances of their ancestor's removal from the Register or band
Adjusts rules about how capital moneys distributed to people who lost band membership due to the old removal provisions are recovered when those people become newly entitled to band membership
Generated using AI from official bill text. Not legal advice. It is written by PoliticalData.ca for civic education, automatically checked and spot-reviewed before publishing.
Official textThe official summary published alongside the bill, shown exactly as written.
Source: Parliament of Canada (LEGISinfo)
The pre-release version of this Legislative Summary is now available. Parliamentarians and their staff can obtain a copy by submitting a request or contacting the Library of Parliament. Members of the public can obtain a copy by the contacting the Information Service at the Library of Parliament. On 25 October 2016, the Hon. Peter Harder introduced Bill S-3, An Act to amend the Indian Act (elimination of sex-based inequities in registration), in the Senate and it was given first reading. Bill S-3 amends the Indian Act to provide new entitlements to registration in the Indian Register in response to the decision in Descheneaux c. Canada (Procureur général) that was rendered by the Superior Court of Quebec on August 3, 2015, and to provide that the persons who become so entitled also have the right to have their name entered in a Band List maintained by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.
This is the official summary published by the Parliament of Canada, shown verbatim. Not legal advice. PoliticalData.ca did not write or edit this text.
View on LEGISinfoParliamentary Process
Bill S-3 completed its first reading in the Senate on October 25, 2016.
This record describes the "First reading" stage of Bill S-3 in the Senate on October 25, 2016. This is a procedural step where the bill is introduced to the Senate.
On October 25, 2016, Bill S-3, an Act to amend the Indian Act, was introduced in the Senate for its first reading, with the rest of the sitting focused on other matters and debates.
This artifact records the proceedings of the Senate on October 25, 2016. The Senate introduced Bill S-3, An Act to amend the Indian Act (elimination of sex-based inequities in registration), for its first reading. The majority of the sitting was dedicated to Senators' Statements on various topics, routine proceedings, Question Period where the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness appeared, and continued debate on several other bills including the Citizenship Act and the Canada Border Services Agency Act. The introduction of Bill S-3 itself was a brief procedural step.
This artifact tracks Bill S-3's journey through the Senate, including its second reading on November 17, 2016, and its eventual progression to Royal Assent.
This record details the progress of Bill S-3 through the Senate. It shows that the bill completed its second reading stage on November 17, 2016. The artifact lists various dates for subsequent stages, including committee study, report stage, and third reading, and also notes the bill's progression through the House of Commons and reconciliation of amendments. The bill ultimately received Royal Assent on December 12, 2017, becoming chapter 25 of the Statutes of Canada, 2017.
The Senate began the second reading debate on Bill S-3, aiming to address sex-based inequities in Indian Act registration as required by a court decision, with plans for further consultations on broader issues.
On November 1, 2016, the Senate began the second reading debate on Bill S-3, An Act to amend the Indian Act in response to the Superior Court of Quebec decision in Descheneaux c. Canada (Procureur général). Senator Frances Lankin sponsored the bill and explained its purpose, which is to eliminate residual sex-based inequities in the Indian Act related to registration. She noted that these inequities stem from issues left over from the 1985 amendments and are a response to a Quebec Superior Court decision that found certain provisions of the Indian Act to be non-compliant with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The bill proposes to address these inequities in three areas: the "cousins provision," the "siblings issue" for children born out of wedlock, and the "removal of minor children." Senator Lankin explained that while the bill addresses these specific issues, broader systemic issues related to registration under the Indian Act, such as the "second-generation cut-off," will be addressed in a subsequent stage. The government intends to engage First Nations leadership and communities in this broader discussion. Senator Lankin emphasized the urgency of passing the bill before the court's February 3, 2017 deadline. The debate was suspended to allow for Question Period and then continued. Other Senators participated in the debate, including Senator George Baker and Senator Joan Fraser, who congratulated Senator Lankin on her presentation and discussed the process and timeline for the bill. Senator Serge Joyal inquired about the specifics of consultations with Aboriginal peoples, and Senator Lankin committed to providing that information later. The debate was adjourned.
During the Senate's second reading debate on Bill S-3, the sponsor explained that the bill aims to eliminate remaining sex-based inequities in the Indian Act's registration provisions, as required by a court decision, and outlined a plan for future broader consultations.
This artifact is a record of the Senate's second reading debate on Bill S-3, An Act to amend the Indian Act. The sponsor of the bill, Senator Frances Lankin, delivered a speech explaining the bill's purpose. The bill aims to address remaining sex-based inequities in the Indian Act's registration provisions, stemming from the 1985 amendments and a 2015 Superior Court of Quebec decision in Descheneaux v. Canada. Senator Lankin detailed three specific areas of inequity the bill seeks to correct: differential rights for cousins, different treatment for siblings born out of wedlock, and issues related to the removal of minor children. She explained that these are residual issues not fully resolved by previous amendments. The bill is presented as a two-stage process, with this bill addressing the immediate court-ordered changes, and a second stage planned for broader consultations on other related issues. The debate also touched upon the historical context of the Indian Act, the importance of First Nations consultation, and the timeline for legislative action given the court's deadline.
During a Senate sitting on November 15, 2016, new senators were introduced, discussions on various topics occurred, and debates on Bills S-4 and S-3 took place, alongside Question Period and ongoing discussions about Senate modernization.
This artifact is a record of a Senate sitting that took place on November 15, 2016. The sitting included the introduction of six new senators, statements on various topics including the passing of Leonard Cohen and a distinction awarded to Senator Serge Joyal, and routine proceedings such as the tabling of committee reports. A significant portion of the sitting involved debate on two bills: Bill S-4 (Tax Convention and Arrangement Implementation Bill, 2016) and Bill S-3 (An Act to amend the Indian Act). The debate on Bill S-4 was adjourned, while the debate on Bill S-3 was suspended and later continued, with a focus on the consultation process with Indigenous peoples. The sitting also included Question Period, where the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour answered questions on various labour and employment issues. Finally, there was ongoing debate on Senate Modernization reports.
During the second reading debate of Bill S-3, Senator Serge Joyal raised concerns about the consultation process with Indigenous peoples, noting that consultations were still ongoing while the bill was being debated in the Senate.
This Senate debate record from November 15, 2016, focuses on the second reading of Bill S-3, an Act to amend the Indian Act. Senator Serge Joyal expressed concerns regarding the consultation process with Indigenous peoples before debating legislation that affects them, referencing a 2004 Supreme Court of Canada decision on the Crown's duty to consult. He noted that consultations for Bill S-3 were ongoing even as the bill was being debated and that the bill aims to address sex-based inequities in registration stemming from a 2015 court decision. While Senator Joyal stated he did not dispute the bill's substance at first sight, he emphasized the importance of completing consultations. Other parts of the Senate proceedings included the introduction of new senators, discussions on various other bills and committee reports, and Question Period with the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour.
During a Senate sitting on November 17, 2016, senators debated and approved the second reading of Bill S-3, aimed at removing sex-based inequities in Indian registration, and referred it to committee.
On November 17, 2016, the Senate convened for a sitting that included Routine Proceedings, Question Period, and Orders of the Day. A significant portion of the Orders of the Day was dedicated to Bill S-3, "An Act to amend the Indian Act (elimination of sex-based inequities in registration)". The Senate debated the second reading of this bill, heard speeches from senators on its provisions and implications, and ultimately voted to approve the second reading. Following this, the bill was referred to the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples for further study. Other business included discussions on various bills and motions related to different policy areas.
The Senate completed its committee review of Bill S-3 on May 30, 2017, as part of the legislative process that led to Royal Assent.
This artifact details the "Senate Consideration in committee" stage for Bill S-3, which took place on May 30, 2017. This stage is part of the legislative process where a bill is examined in detail by a committee. The record shows that this stage was completed on that date. The bill ultimately received Royal Assent on December 12, 2017, becoming a statute of Canada.
On May 30, 2017, the Senate adopted the sixth report of the Aboriginal Peoples Committee on Bill S-3, which proposed amendments to address sex-based inequities in the Indian Act, following a court ruling.
On May 30, 2017, the Senate convened. During the sitting, the sixth report from the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples concerning Bill S-3, an Act to amend the Indian Act, was presented and subsequently adopted. The report included eight amendments to the bill, aimed at addressing sex-based inequities in Indian registration, stemming from a Quebec Superior Court decision. Senators also engaged in debates on other legislative matters, including Bills C-4, C-16, and C-22, and discussed various committee reports and motions. Several senators made statements on topics such as the Senate's Symposium 150, the election of a new leader for the Conservative Party, and the observance of Ramadan. Visitors were also welcomed in the gallery.
The Senate completed the Report stage for Bill S-3 on May 30, 2017, as part of its legislative journey through Parliament which concluded with Royal Assent.
On May 30, 2017, the Senate completed the Report stage for Bill S-3. This stage involves reviewing the bill after it has been considered in committee. The process outlined shows the bill moving through various stages in both the Senate and the House of Commons, with amendments being considered and messages exchanged between the chambers, ultimately leading to Royal Assent on December 12, 2017.
On May 30, 2017, the Senate adopted a report on Bill S-3 concerning amendments to the Indian Act, following debates on various other legislative matters and committee reports.
The Senate proceedings on May 30, 2017, included the adoption of the sixth report from the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples concerning Bill S-3, which aims to amend the Indian Act to address sex-based inequities in registration. The Senate also debated other bills, including those related to the Canada Labour Code, the Canadian Human Rights Act, the Criminal Code, the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians, and the National Anthem Act. Discussions also covered broader topics such as the 150th anniversary of Canadian Confederation, the election of a new party leader, national defence, balanced budgets, refugee resettlement, and Arctic policy. The report on Bill S-3 included eight amendments, some of which were supported by the government and others proposed by witnesses or senators. The committee's observations highlighted concerns about the bill addressing sex-based discrimination in a piecemeal manner and under a court-imposed deadline.
This record marks the Senate's completion of the third reading stage for Bill S-3 on June 1, 2017, after which it proceeded through further parliamentary steps and received Royal Assent.
This artifact details the procedural steps for Bill S-3 in the Senate. It shows the bill moved through first, second, and third readings, followed by committee consideration and report stage. The Senate then considered messages and amendments from the House of Commons. On June 1, 2017, the Senate completed its third reading stage. The bill ultimately received Royal Assent on December 12, 2017.
During the third reading debate of Bill S-3 in the Senate, senators discussed amendments to the Indian Act aimed at eliminating sex-based registration inequities, debating the scope of reforms, consultation processes, and the urgency of meeting a court deadline.
This document details the third reading debate of Bill S-3 in the Senate on May 31, 2017. The debate focused on amendments to the Indian Act to address sex-based inequities in registration. Senators discussed the government's two-stage approach to reform, the complexities of extending registration rights, and the importance of consultation with First Nations. Concerns were raised about the bill's scope, the potential impact of amendments, and the urgency of meeting a court-imposed deadline. The debate also included routine proceedings, questions from senators on various government matters, and congratulations for the retirement of the Senate's Mace Bearer.
During the third reading debate for Bill S-3, the Senate agreed to a technical amendment and then engaged in a broad discussion about the history of sex-based discrimination in the Indian Act and the bill's effectiveness in addressing these issues, ultimately passing the amended bill.
On June 1, 2017, the Senate held its third reading debate for Bill S-3, which aimed to amend the Indian Act to address sex-based inequities in registration following a Quebec Superior Court decision. During this stage, an amendment proposed by Senator Murray Sinclair was agreed to. This amendment, related to the identity of ancestors on birth certificates, was described as a technical clarification to align the bill with a court decision. The subsequent debate focused heavily on the history of sex-based discrimination within the Indian Act, previous attempts to address it through legislation like Bill C-31 and Bill C-3, and the ongoing challenges and perceived shortcomings of Bill S-3 in fully eliminating such discrimination, particularly concerning individuals affected before 1951. Several senators spoke, highlighting the importance of gender equality and the harms caused by historical discrimination, while also discussing the government's position on further consultation and financial implications. The debate concluded with the passage of the bill, as amended.
Bill S-3, an act to amend the Indian Act, completed its first reading in the House of Commons on June 2, 2017, and eventually received Royal Assent on December 12, 2017, after undergoing amendments.
This artifact describes the first reading of Bill S-3 in the House of Commons on June 2, 2017. First reading is a procedural step where a bill is formally introduced. The bill was later amended by the House of Commons and the Senate, with the final version receiving Royal Assent on December 12, 2017.
This House of Commons Hansard record shows that Bill S-3, concerning amendments to the Indian Act, was formally introduced and read for the first time on June 2, 2017, with the majority of the sitting's proceedings focused on other legislative matters.
This artifact is a record of the first reading debate in the House of Commons for Bill S-3, An Act to amend the Indian Act in response to the Superior Court of Quebec decision in Descheneaux c. Canada (Procureur général). The debate record does not contain the text of the bill itself, but rather a transcript of the proceedings in the House on June 2, 2017. The record shows that Bill S-3 was introduced and read for the first time. The majority of the Hansard record for this sitting pertains to debates on other bills (Bill C-44 and Bill C-45) and various statements by members, oral questions, and routine proceedings. The specific debate or discussion concerning Bill S-3 at this first reading stage is not detailed in the provided text beyond its formal introduction.
The House of Commons completed its second reading of Bill S-3 on June 14, 2017, as part of a legislative process that concluded with Royal Assent on December 12, 2017.
This artifact describes the House of Commons' second reading stage for Bill S-3 on June 14, 2017. It notes that this stage was completed. The bill ultimately received Royal Assent on December 12, 2017, becoming chapter 25 of the Statutes of Canada 2017. The provided text outlines the progression of the bill through various stages in both the Senate and the House of Commons, including first reading, second reading, committee study, report stage, and third reading in both chambers, as well as the consideration of amendments between the chambers. It also lists the dates and sittings where these events occurred and identifies the sponsors of key speeches during the Senate's second reading.
On June 13, 2017, the House of Commons debated an opposition motion on the appointments process for officers of Parliament, and proceeded with the second reading of Bill S-3, an act to amend the Indian Act.
This document is a record of a sitting of the House of Commons on June 13, 2017. It details the proceedings of the day, including the presentation of petitions, government orders, statements by members, oral questions, and private members' business. Specifically, it records the debate and a recorded division on an opposition motion concerning the appointments process for officers of Parliament, as well as the second reading and referral to committee of Bill S-3, An Act to amend the Indian Act in response to the Superior Court of Quebec decision in Descheneaux c. Canada (Procureur général).
During a House of Commons debate on June 13, 2017, members discussed Bill S-3, which aims to amend the Indian Act to eliminate sex-based registration inequities, with discussions focusing on the adequacy of proposed amendments, consultation processes with Indigenous communities, and the broader context of reconciliation.
This artifact is a record of a debate in the House of Commons on June 13, 2017, concerning Bill S-3. The debate focused on proposed amendments to the Indian Act to address sex-based inequities in registration, stemming from a Quebec Superior Court decision. The discussion included arguments for and against the amendments, particularly concerning the "6(1)(a) all the way" approach and the process of consultation with Indigenous communities. The Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs explained the government's rationale for supporting some amendments while opposing others, emphasizing the need for careful consideration and broader consultation for certain changes. Opposition members raised concerns about the adequacy of the consultation process and the potential for unintended consequences, while also acknowledging the need to address discrimination within the Indian Act. The debate highlighted the complexity of reforming the Act and the ongoing efforts towards reconciliation with Indigenous peoples.
In the House of Commons on June 13, 2017, the second reading debate on Bill S-3, an act to amend the Indian Act to address sex-based inequities in registration, focused on the bill's scope, the adequacy of consultations with Indigenous communities, and the implications of proposed Senate amendments.
During the second reading debate in the House of Commons on June 13, 2017, members discussed Bill S-3, which aims to amend the Indian Act to address sex-based inequities in registration, following a 2015 Quebec Superior Court decision. The debate highlighted concerns about the bill's scope and the consultation process with Indigenous communities. The government indicated that while the bill addresses known sex-based inequities, further reforms would be part of a subsequent, collaborative process with First Nations. Amendments made in the Senate were discussed, with the government expressing reservations about one amendment that would have broadly extended status based on "6(1)(a) all the way," citing potential ambiguity, unintended consequences, and insufficient consultation. The government emphasized its commitment to a collaborative, rights-based approach for future reforms.
In the House of Commons, during the second reading debate of Bill S-3, Members discussed the proposed amendments to the Indian Act concerning sex-based inequities in registration and the procedural steps for reform.
During a House of Commons debate on Bill S-3, Members discussed proposed amendments to the Indian Act aimed at addressing sex-based inequities in registration, in response to a 2015 Quebec Superior Court decision. The debate focused on the procedural aspects of the bill and the consultation process.
This artifact records the completed stage of the House of Commons Consideration in committee for Bill S-3, outlining its progression through various legislative stages in both chambers and its eventual Royal Assent.
This artifact details the legislative journey of Bill S-3 in the House of Commons. It specifically focuses on the 'Consideration in committee' stage, indicating that this phase of the bill's process in the House of Commons has been completed. The provided text lists various dates when the bill was considered by committees in the House of Commons, spanning from November 2016 to June 2017. It also shows the bill's progression through other stages in both the House of Commons and the Senate, including readings, report stage, and third reading, as well as the consideration of amendments between the two chambers, culminating in Royal Assent on December 12, 2017. This specific artifact pertains to the committee review phase in the House of Commons.
During a House of Commons sitting on June 16, 2017, Members of Parliament debated various aspects of Bill C-49, the Transportation Modernization Act, raising concerns about its omnibus nature, proposed changes to transportation regulations, and the time allocated for debate.
On June 16, 2017, the House of Commons debated and considered Bill C-49, the Transportation Modernization Act. The artifact is a record of the sitting, specifically the debate that took place. While the bill's ultimate fate (Royal Assent) is noted in the metadata, this particular sitting focused on discussions and arguments surrounding the bill's various components, including air passenger rights, railway safety, and interprovincial trade. Several members raised concerns about the bill being an omnibus bill, meaning it covers many different topics under one piece of legislation, making thorough debate challenging. Opposition members frequently voiced their disagreements with the government's approach and the bill's content, while government members defended it. Discussions also touched upon the process of debate itself, with concerns raised about time allocation limiting opportunities for members to speak.
The House of Commons completed its Report stage for Bill S-3 on June 21, 2017, before moving to third reading.
The House of Commons Report stage for Bill S-3 was completed on June 21, 2017. This stage involves reviewing and potentially amending a bill after it has been considered by a committee. The artifact indicates the report stage was completed on this date, and the bill proceeded to third reading on the same day.
On June 20, 2017, the House of Commons debated changes to its Standing Orders, addressed Bill S-3 concerning the Indian Act, Bill C-36 on the Statistics Act, and Bill S-232 on Canadian Jewish Heritage Month.
This artifact is a record of a sitting of the House of Commons on June 20, 2017. The sitting included routine proceedings, government orders, statements by members, and oral questions. A significant portion of the debate focused on proposed changes to the House of Commons' Standing Orders (Motion No. 18), with various members from different parties expressing their views on the proposed amendments related to prorogation, omnibus bills, the estimates process, and committee procedures. The sitting also addressed other government orders, including Bill S-3 concerning amendments to the Indian Act and Bill C-36 amending the Statistics Act. Additionally, private members' business was discussed, including Bill S-232, an act respecting Canadian Jewish Heritage Month. The sitting concluded with adjournment proceedings.
The House of Commons debated and ultimately passed Bill S-3, which amends the Indian Act, during the report stage on June 21, 2017.
On June 21, 2017, the House of Commons considered Bill S-3, An Act to amend the Indian Act in response to the Superior Court of Quebec decision in Descheneaux c. Canada (Procureur général). This artifact is a record of the debate and proceedings during the report stage of the bill. During this stage, various motions were debated and voted upon. Ultimately, the bill, as amended, was read the third time and passed by the House of Commons.
This artifact documents the House of Commons' completion of Third Reading for Bill S-3 on June 21, 2017, and subsequent consideration of Senate amendments, culminating in Royal Assent.
The House of Commons completed the Third Reading stage for Bill S-3 on June 21, 2017. This stage is a final review and opportunity for debate before a bill moves forward. Following this, the House of Commons considered amendments from the Senate on November 7, 8, and 9, 2017. They then considered amendments from the Senate again on November 29, 30, and December 4, 2017, ultimately agreeing to the motion regarding the Senate amendments on December 4, 2017. The bill ultimately received Royal Assent on December 12, 2017.
The House of Commons debated and passed Bill S-3 at its third reading stage on June 21, 2017.
On June 21, 2017, the House of Commons debated and passed Bill S-3, an act to amend the Indian Act in response to the Superior Court of Quebec decision in Descheneaux c. Canada (Procureur général). This debate occurred at the third reading stage of the bill's passage through the House of Commons. The artifact provided is a record of the debate, not the full text of the bill or its final legal effect. The debate included discussions on various topics, as is typical for a sitting of the House, with specific mention of "Indian Act" under Government Orders near the end of the record, indicating the procedural step of the bill being read the third time and passed.
We don't have a plain-language summary for Debates of the Senate yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
Debate and sitting links point to official parliamentary sources when LEGISinfo publishes them. Any plain-language discussion summaries should be generated from those official texts and reviewed before public display.
Vote Summary
Representative Voting Breakdown
Vote badges include text labels so the table stays readable for everyone, even without color cues alone.
| Representative | Role | Riding | Party | Vote | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MP | Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Cowichan—Malahat—Langford | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Salaberry—Suroît | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Windsor West | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Timmins—James Bay | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Windsor—Tecumseh | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Abitibi—Témiscamingue | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Elmwood—Transcona | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Vancouver Kingsway | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Saanich—Gulf Islands | Green Party | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Regina—Lewvan | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Port Moody—Coquitlam | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Courtenay—Alberni | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Laurier—Sainte-Marie | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | London—Fanshawe | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Burnaby South | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Edmonton Strathcona | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Beloeil—Chambly | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Victoria | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Skeena—Bulkley Valley | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | New Westminster—Burnaby | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Longueuil—Saint-Hubert | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Sherbrooke | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | North Island—Powell River | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Trois-Rivières | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Berthier—Maskinongé | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Hamilton Mountain | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Nanaimo—Ladysmith | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Saskatoon West | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Essex | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Kootenay—Columbia | NDP | Yes | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Spadina—Fort York | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Richmond—Arthabaska | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Fundy Royal | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Willowdale | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Beauport—Limoilou | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Edmonton Mill Woods | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Orléans | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Halifax | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Alfred-Pellan | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Ottawa West—Nepean | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Mount Royal | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Nipissing—Timiskaming | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Parkdale—High Park | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Peace River—Westlock | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
MP | MP | Huron—Bruce | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. |
| MP | South Shore—St. Margarets | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Lambton—Kent—Middlesex | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Scarborough Southwest | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Cumberland—Colchester | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Toronto Centre | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Red Deer—Lacombe | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Banff—Airdrie | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Calgary Heritage | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Hamilton East—Stoney Creek | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Markham—Unionville | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Etobicoke Centre | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Saskatoon—University | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Châteauguay—Lacolle | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Simcoe North | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Cambridge | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Portage—Lisgar | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Delta | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Toronto—St. Paul's | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Whitby | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Nepean | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | St. Catharines | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Grande Prairie—Mackenzie | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Oshawa | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | West Nova | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Saint Boniface—Saint Vital | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Sturgeon River—Parkland | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Dartmouth—Cole Harbour | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Calgary Skyview | Independent | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Oxford | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Chatham-Kent—Leamington | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Cypress Hills—Grasslands | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Laurentides—Labelle | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | LaSalle—Émard—Verdun | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Ottawa South | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Flamborough—Glanbrook | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Dufferin—Caledon | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Fort McMurray—Cold Lake | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Niagara West | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | King—Vaughan | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Haldimand—Norfolk | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Beauséjour | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Thunder Bay—Rainy River | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Red Deer—Mountain View | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Bourassa | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Saint-Laurent | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Vimy | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Laval—Les Îles | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Vaughan—Woodbridge | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Glengarry—Prescott—Russell | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Lac-Saint-Louis | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Pierrefonds—Dollard | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Joliette | Bloc Québécois | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Mississauga—Streetsville | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Scarborough—Rouge Park | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
MP | MP | Don Valley North | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. |
| MP | Louis-Saint-Laurent | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Hull—Aylmer | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Long Range Mountains | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Vancouver South | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Kitchener—Conestoga | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
MP | MP | Vancouver Centre | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. |
| MP | Nunavut | Independent | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Mississauga—Erin Mills | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Etobicoke—Lakeshore | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Markham—Stouffville | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Saint-Jean | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | La Prairie | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Québec | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Pickering—Uxbridge | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
MP | MP | Winnipeg South Centre | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. |
| MP | Yellowhead | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Vancouver Granville | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Steveston—Richmond East | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Louis-Hébert | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Cloverdale—Langley City | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Foothills | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Barrie—Innisfil | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Scarborough—Guildwood | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Perth—Wellington | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Oakville | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | North Vancouver | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Vancouver Quadra | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Humber River—Black Creek | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Toronto—Danforth | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Davenport | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Simcoe—Grey | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Brampton West | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | New Brunswick Southwest | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Kanata—Carleton | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Elgin—Middlesex—London | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Burlington | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | London West | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Fleetwood—Port Kells | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Avalon | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Calgary Centre | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Edmonton Griesbach | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Winnipeg North | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
MP | MP | Northumberland—Peterborough South | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. |
| MP | Etobicoke North | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Newmarket—Aurora | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Yukon | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Brandon—Souris | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Cardigan | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Calgary Confederation | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Rivière-des-Mille-Îles | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Milton | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Guelph | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Bécancour—Nicolet—Saurel | Bloc Québécois | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Mégantic—L'Érable | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Montcalm | Bloc Québécois | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Richmond Hill | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Nickel Belt | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Eglinton—Lawrence | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Compton—Stanstead | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Manicouagan | Bloc Québécois | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Sarnia—Lambton | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | La Pointe-de-l'Île | Bloc Québécois | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Kingston and the Islands | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Ajax | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Bow River | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Kitchener South—Hespeler | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Peterborough—Kawartha | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Kildonan—St. Paul | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Fredericton | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Edmonton Riverbend | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Beauce | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | North Okanagan—Shuswap | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Ahuntsic-Cartierville | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Wellington—Halton Hills | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | St. Albert—Edmonton | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Northwest Territories | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Terrebonne | Bloc Québécois | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Montarville | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Hastings—Lennox and Addington | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Edmonton—Wetaskiwin | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Ottawa—Vanier | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Repentigny | Bloc Québécois | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Beaches—East York | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Bay of Quinte | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | St. John's East | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Mississauga Centre | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Honoré-Mercier | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Oakville North—Burlington | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Miramichi—Grand Lake | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Calgary Rocky Ridge | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Thunder Bay—Superior North | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Sudbury | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Mississauga East—Cooksville | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | London North Centre | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Thornhill | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Vaudreuil—Soulanges | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | York—Simcoe | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Brantford—Brant | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Shefford | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Carleton | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Lethbridge | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Brampton East | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Regina—Wascana | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Brampton Centre | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Surrey Centre | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Edmonton Centre | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Prince Albert | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Madawaska—Restigouche | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Rivière-du-Nord | Bloc Québécois | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Lac-Saint-Jean | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Niagara Falls | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Souris—Moose Mountain | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Egmont | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Don Valley West | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Cape Breton—Canso | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Calgary Signal Hill | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Brampton North | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Scarborough Centre | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Kings—Hants | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | St. John's South—Mount Pearl | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Charlottetown | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Central Nova | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Acadie—Bathurst | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Lakeland | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Mirabel | Bloc Québécois | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Brampton South | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Calgary Midnapore | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Kelowna—Lake Country | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Gatineau | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Surrey—Newton | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Mississauga—Lakeshore | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d'Orléans—Charlevoix | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Tobique—Mactaquac | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
MP | MP | Provencher | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. |
| MP | Burnaby North—Seymour | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Winnipeg South | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Sault Ste. Marie | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Cariboo—Prince George | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Parry Sound—Muskoka | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Niagara Centre | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Malpeque | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Saint John—Rothesay | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Pontiac | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères | Bloc Québécois | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Don Valley East | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Marc-Aurèle-Fortin | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Labrador | Liberal | No | Recorded without an additional note. | |
| MP | Edmonton Manning | Conservative | No | Recorded without an additional note. |
Official sources
Status, sponsor, votes, and timeline on this page are drawn from these official legislative sources and public records. Each summary above is attributed to its own source.
How this data is sourced