Bill 58 revises the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act to modernize how the legislature governs its own office, holds members to account and pays office-holders. It clarifies who manages the Office of the Legislative Assembly, adjusts the Board of Management’s makeup and authorities, updates the oath language to reflect the change in sovereign, and replaces Schedule C with new indemnities and allowances.
The changes matter because they alter internal checks, the investigatory tools available to the Integrity Commissioner, and the financial entitlements of members and office-holders — all of which affect how the Assembly operates day-to-day and how it enforces member conduct internally rather than through external statutes alone.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill sets out procedural rules for investigations of members, permits the Integrity Commissioner to refer conduct complaints to mediation, and creates a prescribed fine for late disclosure statements. It gives the Speaker explicit management authority over the Assembly’s Office and enables the Board of Management to vary application of public service rules to that office.
Who It Affects
MLAs (their disclosure obligations, potential fines and indemnities), the Integrity Commissioner and any Sole Adjudicator, members of the Board of Management and staff of the Office of the Legislative Assembly, and the Financial Management Board as it incorporates Assembly estimates into government budgeting.
Why It Matters
The bill shifts important internal governance and accountability powers from informal practice into statute, clarifies administrative control over the legislative office, and fixes concrete pay and allowance levels — operational changes compliance officers, assembly administrators and fiscal planners need to absorb.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
Bill 58 rewrites several operational and accountability elements of the Legislative Assembly’s governing statute. It tightens definitions (for example, what counts as a sitting), updates oath language to reflect the new sovereign, and replaces Schedule C so that member and office-holder pay and allowances are expressed in statute with explicit dollar amounts.
That replacement is a practical change: entitlements that were previously embedded in the schedule are now the controlling figures for indemnities, allowances and transition top-ups.
On governance, the bill recasts the Board of Management’s composition and substitutes a clear process for selecting an acting chairperson when the Speaker is absent: the board chooses one of its members. It also expressly grants the Board power to order that regulations, orders or policies under the Financial Administration Act or Public Service Act be varied or inapplicable to the Office of the Legislative Assembly.
Closely connected, the Speaker is given statutory authority to manage and direct the Office and to exercise ministerial powers under the Public Service Act with respect to that Office, subject to any variance ordered by the Board.The bill creates a more structured integrity framework. It gives the Integrity Commissioner powers equivalent to a public inquiry board (including relaxed technical rules of evidence), requires notice to the parties before an investigation, and mandates that a complained-of member cannot refuse to give evidence.
After investigation the Commissioner must choose among dismissal, referral to an alternative dispute resolution process (including mediation), recommending punishments, or directing an inquiry before a Sole Adjudicator. The Commissioner must produce a report explaining the chosen option and deliver it to the Speaker and to affected parties; the Assembly is then required to consider such reports within 15 sitting days.
The bill also permits the Commissioner or a Sole Adjudicator to hear submissions on costs either before or after filing a report and to submit a supplemental report on costs if needed.Procedural and timing tweaks appear throughout: the deadline to take certain actions is extended (for example, a one-year reference was changed to 18 months in a specific provision), the Speaker must transmit estimates to the Financial Management Board for inclusion in government estimates, and the bill formalizes that the Integrity Commissioner may impose a prescribed fine when a member fails to file required disclosure statements on time. Several drafting cleanups and English-version wording fixes are included as well.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The Board of Management’s statutory composition is now: the Speaker; one Executive Council member appointed on the Premier’s recommendation; the Minister of Finance ex officio; and two other members who are neither the Speaker, Premier nor a Minister.
The Integrity Commissioner has the powers of a Board under the Public Inquiries Act, is not bound by technical rules of evidence, and the member complained of “shall not refuse to give evidence” during an investigation.
If a member misses the disclosure filing deadline, the Integrity Commissioner may impose a fine in a prescribed amount (the amount is set by regulation rather than in the Act).
Reports from the Integrity Commissioner or a Sole Adjudicator must be submitted to the Speaker and laid before the Assembly; the Assembly must consider those reports within 15 sitting days after deposit.
Schedule C is replaced with explicit indemnities and allowances: the base indemnity for every member is $110,527 per fiscal year and a $4,000 augmentation to the transition allowance is added.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Definitions and oaths updated
The bill updates core definitions for clarity — notably 'member' and 'sitting' — and alters the Act’s oath provisions to permit either an oath or affirmation in the prescribed forms. Schedule B’s Form 2 is changed to replace reference to Queen Elizabeth II with King Charles III. These are drafting and continuity changes that remove ambiguity around who must swear what and modernize the oath language after the change in sovereign.
Board of Management composition and acting chair
The Board’s membership is re-specified in statute to include the Speaker, a single Executive Council representative chosen on the Premier’s recommendation, the Minister of Finance, and two other MLAs who are not the Speaker, Premier or a Minister. The bill also creates two alternate members to act for the two non-ex officio members. Where the Speaker is absent or the office is vacant, the Board members choose an acting chair from among themselves — a self-appointing interim mechanism that removes the need for external appointment in short-term vacancies.
Speaker’s management authority over the Legislative Office
The Speaker is expressly vested with overall management and direction of the Office of the Legislative Assembly despite the Public Service Act. The Speaker may exercise ministerial powers under the Public Service Act concerning those employees and must act on Board of Management recommendations where the Public Service Act would otherwise require a minister to follow a Financial Management Board recommendation. At the same time, the Board can direct variances to Financial Administration Act and Public Service Act instruments with respect to the Office, creating a statutory pathway to tailor public service policies for the legislative office.
Integrity Commissioner powers, procedures and cost submissions
The bill lays out the Commissioner’s investigation process: after reasonable notice the Commissioner conducts an investigation, may rely on disclosure filings, has public-inquiry powers and is not bound by technical rules of evidence. After investigation the Commissioner must dismiss, refer to ADR, recommend punishment, or order a Sole Adjudicator inquiry. The Commissioner must prepare and distribute a report explaining the choice, deliver copies to parties and the Clerk, and the Speaker must lay the report before the Assembly. Both the Commissioner and a Sole Adjudicator may invite submissions about costs either before or after filing their disposition report and, if costs are heard after the initial report, must file a supplemental report recommending costs.
Fine for late disclosure filings
The Act now authorizes the Integrity Commissioner to impose a prescribed fine when a member fails to file a required disclosure statement or supplementary disclosure on time. The statute delegates the specific amount to regulation rather than setting it in the Act, leaving the numerical penalty to be prescribed later.
Assembly consideration and possible sanctions
Once a report about a member is laid before the Assembly, the Legislature is required to consider it within 15 sitting days. The Assembly may order imposition of the punishments recommended by the Commissioner or Sole Adjudicator, or it may reject those recommendations — preserving the Legislature’s final say on sanctions while statutory timelines create an expectation of prompt consideration.
Indemnities, allowances and transition top-up
Schedule C is replaced with a new schedule that sets specific dollar values for member indemnities and office-holder pay. The base indemnity for members is fixed at $110,527 per fiscal year; the Premier, Ministers, Speaker and committee chairs have distinct amounts; an $8,253 annual expense allowance is codified; northern allowances follow a collective agreement reference; and the transition allowance is augmented by $4,000. Moving these figures into the Schedule makes pay visible in the statute and simplifies future adjustments by replacing the former text.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Members of the Legislative Assembly — receive statutory clarity on indemnities and allowances (a fixed base indemnity and explicit chair/ministry rates) and clearer rules on transition payments.
- Speaker and Assembly administrative leadership — gain explicit statutory authority to manage the Office of the Legislative Assembly and to exercise specified ministerial powers over its employees, reducing ambiguity about operational control.
- Integrity Commissioner’s office — receives clearer investigatory powers (Public Inquiries Act powers, relaxed evidence rules), an express route to ADR, and an explicit mechanism to impose fines for late disclosure filings.
- Public and transparency advocates — gain clearer procedures for complaint handling (written reports, distribution rules and mandatory Assembly consideration within a set window), improving traceability of misconduct processes.
Who Bears the Cost
- Members (financial and reputational) — face possible fines for late disclosure, mandatory evidence-giving in investigations and the practical risk of public reports and Assembly consideration of complaints.
- Office of the Integrity Commissioner — must absorb the administrative and resource demands of expanded investigatory powers, ADR referrals, inquiries and supplemental cost reporting without a funding vehicle specified in the Act.
- Board of Management and Assembly administration — will need to manage variances to public service instruments, coordinate acting-chair selections, and handle new procedural steps for cost submissions and report distributions.
- Territorial taxpayers — bear the fiscal impact of the new statutory indemnities, allowances and the $4,000 transition augmentation now expressed in Schedule C, along with potential costs of investigations or Sole Adjudicator inquiries.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill’s central tension is between strengthening accountability (clear investigatory powers, an ability to fine late disclosure, and formal reporting to the Assembly) and preserving parliamentary independence and fair procedural protections for members (parliamentary privilege, due process, and non-politicized sanctioning). Enhancing internal oversight risks intruding on member rights and administrative autonomy; preserving broad Assembly control risks diluting effective, timely accountability.
The bill centralizes several operational authorities inside the Assembly but leaves consequential choices to regulation or to internal practice. For example, the power to impose a fine for late disclosure is in the Act but the amount is prescribed elsewhere; that regulatory step will determine whether the fine is a meaningful deterrent.
The Integrity Commissioner’s expanded powers (including the ability to compel evidence and operate without technical rules of evidence) streamline investigations but raise procedural safeguards questions — the Act does not add a separate statutory appeal route from Commissioner findings, leaving remedy and review to existing Assembly mechanisms or a Sole Adjudicator proceeding.
Granting the Speaker managerial and ministerial-type powers over legislative staff while allowing the Board to authorize variances from the Public Service Act creates a dual-control environment that can be efficient but risks inconsistent employee protections and HR practice across departments. Similarly, delegating the final decision on recommended sanctions to the Assembly preserves parliamentary supremacy but may politicize what are otherwise investigatory findings; the 15-sitting-day consideration window creates pressure for quick decisions but does not prescribe deliberative procedures.
Finally, shifting explicit pay figures into Schedule C clarifies compensation but ties public expenditures to statutory language that still depends on future commencement orders and administrative budgeting processes — the Act fixes numbers but not the budgetary treatment or transitional funding details.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.