# Hansard and Extrinsic Aids Sources beyond the statute itself, and how to use them. --- ## The Basic Position Extrinsic aids are admissible in Canadian statutory interpretation. The rule against consulting legislative history has been substantially relaxed since *Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes* 1998 SCC. But extrinsic aids are not equal in weight. Knowing which sources carry weight, and how much, matters. --- ## Hansard / Legislative Debates ### What It Is The official record of parliamentary or legislative debate. Includes speeches, questions, and comments during the passage of the bill. ### How to Access - **Federal Hansard** — available online at parl.ca (House of Commons and Senate) - **BC Hansard** — available at leg.bc.ca (Hansard Services) - Similar resources for other provinces - Historical Hansard may require library access ### What Carries Weight **Higher weight:** - Statements by the sponsoring minister or bill's sponsor - Statements specifically addressing the provision at issue - Statements addressing the purpose of the bill - Statements not contradicted in subsequent debate - Committee reports on the bill **Lower weight:** - Statements by opposition members (they didn't draft the bill) - Broad political statements not addressing the specific provision - Statements that fail to address the interpretive question - Statements contradicted by other members ### The Traditional Cautions Even under the modern relaxed approach, courts note: - Legislative history is one input, not decisive - Individual statements may not reflect legislative intent - Ambiguity in debate doesn't necessarily resolve ambiguity in statute - Reliance on Hansard should be transparent ### The Argument Technique If arguing based on Hansard: 1. Cite the specific Hansard reference (date, page/column) 2. Quote the relevant passage 3. Identify the speaker (was this the sponsor?) 4. Explain why this statement bears on the interpretation 5. Address whether the statement was contradicted or qualified Bad Hansard argument: "In debate, [opposition MP] said X, so the provision means X." Better Hansard argument: "The Minister of [X], introducing the bill, stated at [reference] that the provision was designed to [purpose]. This is consistent with the purposive interpretation urged here." --- ## Committee Reports ### What They Are Reports from legislative committees studying the bill. May include: - Background research - Explanations of specific provisions - Amendments proposed - Reasons for or against amendments - Testimony from witnesses ### Weight Often more detailed and considered than debates. Weight can be significant where the committee report is contemporaneous with the bill and addresses the specific issue. Committee reports from bodies of experts (e.g. Law Reform Commissions) whose recommendations were adopted also carry weight. --- ## Prior Enactments ### The Concept Where a statute replaces or amends earlier legislation, comparing the old text to the new can illuminate. - If the change is dramatic, purpose likely differs - If wording is preserved, prior case law interpreting that wording is presumptively still relevant - If wording is changed subtly, the legislature may have intended a specific change ### The Argument Technique - Identify the predecessor provision - Show the specific change - Consider what that change signals about legislative intent ### Cautions - Not every change signals a substantive shift — some are cosmetic - The absence of a change is also informative (silence may be intentional) --- ## Related Legislation ### Statutes on the Same Subject Where multiple statutes address related subjects, they may be read together. Examples: - RTA read with Manufactured Home Park Tenancy Act - ATA read with individual tribunal governing statutes - Provincial Interpretation Act applied to any provincial statute ### The In Pari Materia Rule Statutes dealing with the same subject matter are to be read together (*in pari materia*). Consistent interpretation across related statutes is preferred. ### Cautions - The connection must be genuine, not merely thematic - Amendments to one statute don't automatically affect another - Distinct legislative purposes may still support distinct interpretations --- ## International Agreements ### When Relevant Where a statute: - Implements an international agreement - Is designed to give effect to an international obligation - Addresses subject matter also covered by international agreements Canada has entered ...the agreement may be an interpretive aid. ### Weight - Higher for statutes explicitly implementing agreements - Lower for statutes tangentially touching international obligations ### Application For federal statutes implementing treaties, the treaty text often governs. For provincial statutes, the connection may be less direct. --- ## Case Law Interpreting Predecessor Legislation ### The Rule Case law interpreting predecessor provisions may inform current interpretation, particularly where the current provision preserves the prior language. ### The Legislative Response Where the legislature has amended a provision after a court's interpretation: - If the amendment adopts the interpretation, it is codified - If the amendment changes the wording, the legislature may have intended to displace the interpretation - If the amendment leaves the provision untouched despite the interpretation, the interpretation is often reinforced ### Cautions - Case law becomes less relevant as statutory language diverges - The framework of interpretation may have shifted (e.g. pre-Rizzo cases interpret under different principles) --- ## Academic Commentary ### When Cited Textbooks and articles may be cited to support an interpretation. Canadian authorities frequently cited for interpretation: - Ruth Sullivan, *The Construction of Statutes* (widely regarded as the leading text) - Pierre-André Côté, *The Interpretation of Legislation in Canada* - Elmer Driedger, *The Construction of Statutes* (the classic original) ### Weight Depends on: - Authority of the author - Whether the work addresses the specific question - Whether the court has cited it in similar contexts ### Cautions Academic commentary is persuasive, not binding. It complements but does not replace analysis of text, context, and purpose. --- ## Regulatory Impact Analysis Statements For federal regulations, Regulatory Impact Analysis Statements (RIAS) are published in the Canada Gazette and explain the regulatory intent. RIAS can be used to identify the purpose of regulations. --- ## Practical Advice ### Where to Start For most interpretation questions, the modern approach analysis (text, context, purpose) will resolve the question. Extrinsic aids are: - A supplement, not a substitute - Useful where genuine ambiguity remains - Persuasive where the aid clearly addresses the interpretive question ### When Extrinsic Aids Are Most Useful - The provision is genuinely ambiguous - The context and purpose don't fully resolve the question - The extrinsic source directly addresses the interpretive point - The source is authoritative (Minister's statement, committee report) ### When Extrinsic Aids Add Little - The text is clear - The extrinsic source is silent or ambiguous - The source is from someone whose views weren't determinative - The court is likely to resolve the question on text, context, and purpose alone ### The Argument Structure If using extrinsic aids: 1. Complete the modern approach analysis first 2. Note the residual ambiguity or uncertainty 3. Introduce the extrinsic aid as supplementary 4. Explain what it adds 5. Reach the interpretation Do not lead with extrinsic aids. Do not treat them as decisive. Use them as they should be used — to inform, not to control.