Bill C-339: Godfrey–Milliken Act

Bill C-339: Godfrey–Milliken Act
Parliament of Canada
  • Bill C-339: An Act to permit descendants of United Empire Loyalists who fled the land that later became the United States of America after the 1776 American Revolution to establish a claim to the property they or their ancestors owned in the United States that was confiscated without compensation, and claim compensation for it in the Canadian courts, and to exclude from Canada any foreign person trafficking in such property
Considered byHouse of Commons of Canada
Legislative history
Bill citationBill C-339, House of Commons Bills, 35th Parliament, Second Session
Introduced by
First readingOctober 22, 1996
Related legislation
Helms–Burton Act
Status: Not passed

Bill C-339: Godfrey–Milliken Act (French: Projet de loi C-330: Loi de Godfrey–Milliken) was a private member's bill introduced in the Parliament of Canada by Liberal MPs John Godfrey and Peter Milliken. The bill was intended as a parody of the American Helms–Burton Act.[1]

The Helms–Burton Act set up stringent punishments on any business or person that profited from property of American businesses and people that had been seized in the Cuban Revolution. The bill included a policy of punishing foreign nations and companies who had profited from this seized property (which in practice means trading with Cuba at all, since everything in Cuba is in some way connected to such property). This included a number of Canadian companies.

The 1996 bill responded by calling for descendants of United Empire Loyalists who fled the American Revolution to be able to reclaim land and property that had been confiscated during the revolution. The bill would have also allowed the Canadian government to exclude corporate officers, or controlling shareholders of companies that possess property formerly owned by Loyalists, as well as the spouse and minor children of such persons from entering Canada.[2]

In total some three million Canadians are descendants of United Empire Loyalists, including Godfrey and Milliken. The current value of the land and property seized during the American Revolution is many billions of dollars.

The bill received widespread attention in Canada and also some publicity in the United States,[1] including a feature on 60 Minutes. In some cases it was also called the American Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (Loyalty) Act.[3]

The Godfrey–Milliken Bill was not enacted by Parliament.[4] Godfrey later supported Bill C-54, a government bill which amended the Foreign Extraterritorial Measures Act.[5][6] The amendments neutralized any attempt to enforce the Helms–Burton Act against Canadians or Canadian companies.[7] The amendments blocked access to Canadian records for the prosecution of any case under the Helms–Burton Act, allowed the Attorney General of Canada to block Canadian courts from enforcing judgments emanating from US jurisdictions against Canadian defendants, and permitted Canadian defendants to counter-sue in Canadian courts. It also imposed a fine of up to $1.5 million on any Canadian entity that aided any prosecution under Helms–Burton, and a fine of up to $150,000 on any individual Canadian who did so.[6][7][8][a]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ Equivalent to $2,765,886 and $275,587, respectively, in 2025: Bank of Canada Inflation Calculator.

References

  1. ^ a b Farnsworth, Clyde H. (July 28, 1996). "In Canadians' Retort on Trade, Politics of the Absurd". New York Times. Retrieved December 11, 2017.
  2. ^ C-339: Godfrey–Milliken Act, 35th Parliament, 2nd Session (accessed on Wayback Machine, January 10, 2026).
  3. ^ Craig, William (2012). Yankee come home: On the road from San Juan Hill to Guantánamo. New York: Walker & Company. p. 148. ISBN 9780802777928. Canada's Parliament even considered a parody bill, the American Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (Loyalty) Act
  4. ^ Wylie, Lana (2010). Perceptions of Cuba: Canadian and American policies in comparative perspective. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. ISBN 9781442685826. The Godfrey–Milliken Bill, though never passed, was written in retaliation for an American measure designed to hamper other countries from investing in Cuba.
  5. ^ Parliamentary record of John Godfrey's co-sponsorship of C-54.
  6. ^ a b An Act to amend the Foreign Extraterritorial Measures Act, SC 1996, c. 28.
  7. ^ a b Arreola, Antroy A. (1998). "Who's isolating whom? Title III of the Helms-Burton Act and compliance with international law" (PDF). Houston Journal of International Law. 20 (2): 353–378. Archived from the original (PDF) on September 24, 2015. Retrieved November 1, 2014.
  8. ^ Deonandan, Kalowatie (2005). "The Helms-Burton Bill and Canada's Cuba policy: Convergences with the US". Policy and Society. 24 (1): 124–149. doi:10.1016/S1449-4035(05)70052-7. S2CID 153413999.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 unless otherwise noted. Additional terms may apply for the media files.