Bill broadens affidavits eligibility

Summary#

Bill 12 would amend New Brunswick’s Commissioners for Taking Affidavits Act. It replaces one eligibility condition with wording that includes Canadian citizens, permanent residents, and people holding a work permit that authorizes them to work in New Brunswick. The bill gives no stated goal, and the supplied text is a first-reading version, so it is not yet law and may not pass.

  • The new wording makes those three immigration or citizenship categories eligible under this specific condition for a commissioner for taking affidavits.
  • The bill changes one part of the existing Act; it does not create a new organization or program.
  • The parent Act was not supplied, so the previous wording and the rest of the appointment rules could not be checked.

What it means for you#

  • People seeking to be commissioners: If enacted, the replacement wording would set out the citizenship, residency, or work-permit status that meets this condition. The bill does not set out an application or appointment process.
  • People who use commissioners: The supplied text does not change the rules for taking affidavits or create a new service.

Money#

No cost information is in the available material.

  • The bill does not state a budget, staffing requirement, fee, or cost estimate.

What is unclear#

  • The previous wording is not included, so it is not possible to say whether the change expands or narrows eligibility compared with current law.
  • The parent Act was not supplied, so other eligibility conditions and who appoints commissioners could not be verified.
  • The bill does not explain how eligibility would be checked or whether any other rules apply to the listed categories.
  • The bill does not give a start date. Its passage is uncertain.

Case for#

  • A possible argument for the bill is that it expressly includes permanent residents and people with work permits authorizing work in New Brunswick, as well as Canadian citizens.
  • The wording gives a specific test for the status required under this part of the Act.

Case against#

  • The bill does not explain why these status categories are the right test for eligibility.
  • Without the previous wording or the rest of the Act, readers cannot assess how the change would affect the full set of eligibility rules.
  • The bill does not explain how the required status would be verified.