Build Canada LogoBuilder MP
← Back to bills

Canada Enacts New Transparency Rules for International Treaties

An Act to amend the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act (prior review of treaties by Parliament)

Summary

  • Requires the Minister of Foreign Affairs to table any treaty, plus an explanatory memorandum, in the House of Commons at least 21 sitting days before ratification, including for treaty amendments and modifications.
  • For major treaties (those involving legislation, taxes, significant finances, territory, sanctions, jurisdiction, trade/investment, or international institutions), mandates House committee review and the Minister obtaining the House's advice before ratification.
  • Specifies detailed content for memoranda and letters, including obligations, costs, required implementing legislation, reservations, withdrawal provisions, and records of consultations.
  • Allows an exceptional-circumstances exemption by order-in-council with post-ratification tabling and written reasons, and requires publication in the Canada Gazette (within 21 days), on the Department’s website (within 7 days), and in the Canada Treaty Series (within 3 months).

Builder Assessment

Vote No

The measure enhances transparency and parliamentary oversight but introduces new procedural delays and administrative requirements that can slow beneficial deals and increase costs. Given the uncertain economic upside and added friction, it does not advance prosperity or efficiency enough to justify the burden.

  • Transparency and democratic review are positives, but the 21 sitting-day wait and committee process can slow trade, investment, and sanctions decisions that support jobs and safety.
  • New reporting and publication duties increase costs and staff time without clear productivity gains.
  • Keep Canadians safe: retain a robust emergency exemption for urgent sanctions, defence, and disaster-response treaties, with rapid post hoc disclosure.
  • Streamline: time-box committee review and advice, adopt standardized templates for memoranda, and exempt technical or routine treaty updates.
  • Narrow scope: limit “major treaties” to those that change domestic law, impose taxes, or create significant fiscal or territorial obligations to avoid sweeping in routine trade administration.
  • Digital-first publication and deemed advice if timelines lapse would reduce red tape and decision lag.

Question Period Cards

How will the minister ensure the 21 sitting-day tabling period and committee review for major trade and investment treaties do not cause Canada to miss time-sensitive market openings and cost exporters opportunities?

Share on

What clear, objective criteria will trigger the 'exceptional circumstances' exemption, and will the government commit to publishing the order and reasons within 24 hours to protect national security while preserving accountability?

Share on

What is the estimated annual cost and staffing burden to produce the mandated memoranda, letters, and publications, and what efficiencies will offset these costs so taxpayers aren't paying more for slower decisions?

Share on

Principles Analysis

—

Canada should aim to be the world's most prosperous country.

Improves transparency and legitimacy of treaties but may introduce delays; net impact on prosperity is uncertain.

✗

Promote economic freedom, ambition, and breaking from bureaucratic inertia (reduce red tape).

Creates new mandatory timelines, documentation, and committee steps that add procedural friction rather than reducing it.

—

Drive national productivity and global competitiveness.

Could slow ratification of productivity-enhancing agreements, yet may yield better-designed treaties; overall effect is unclear.

—

Grow exports of Canadian products and resources.

Covers trade and investment treaties but does not directly expand market access; potential for delay could hinder export growth.

—

Encourage investment, innovation, and resource development.

Transparency might aid investor confidence, but added process may slow investment-related agreements; net effects are ambiguous.

✗

Deliver better public services at lower cost (government efficiency).

Imposes new tabling, reporting, and publication duties that increase administrative workload and costs.

—

Reform taxes to incentivize work, risk-taking, and innovation.

No tax changes are proposed.

—

Focus on large-scale prosperity, not incrementalism.

A procedural reform that does not deliver large-scale economic gains.

Did we get the builder vote wrong?

Email [email protected]

C-228

PartyBloc Québécois
StatusOutside the Order of Precedence
Last updatedSep 18, 2025
TopicsForeign Affairs
Parliament45