Members of the 39th Canadian Parliament and same-sex marriage

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

This article lists the members of the 39th Parliament of Canada and their voting records in regards to the Civil Marriage Act. Bill C-38 amended the Marriage Act of Canada to recognize same-sex marriage (SSM). The 39th Parliament was elected at the federal election of January 23, 2006. The Conservative leader, Stephen Harper, who was then leader of the opposition campaigned on holding another free vote on the issue, after one was held in the 38th Parliament to approve the Act. Although Harper expressed a hope to reinstate the opposite-sex only definition of marriage, he promised not to use the notwithstanding clause. A number of legal experts contend the clause would need to be invoked if parliament was to ban or restrict same-sex marriage in light of provincial court decisions on the matter, which have all handed down the same decision: barring same-sex marriage is inconsistent with the guarantees contained in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, a part of the Constitution of Canada.

The Conservatives won enough seats to form a government following the election but Harper, who became Prime Minister, only had enough seats to form a minority government meaning the opposition parties had enough seats to defeat a government motion on same-sex marriage. However, a motion could pass if it could attract enough support from individual opposition MPs in a free vote. The government announced that it would introduce a motion before the end of 2006.

On 7 December 2006, the Canadian House of Commons voted on a motion that read as follows: "That this House call on the government to introduce legislation to restore the traditional definition of marriage without affecting civil unions and while respecting existing same-sex marriages." The motion was defeated by a vote of 123 to 175.[1] Liberal and Conservative parties gave their members permission to vote freely. Thirteen Conservatives voted against the motion, and the same number of Liberals voted in favour. The Bloc Québécois and NDP caucuses were expected to oppose the motion, all NDP MPs did so as did all BQ MPs except for two who were paired and two who were absent.

Following the vote, Harper announced that the issue was now settled and that his government would not revisit the matter even if it won a majority government in the next election, held October 14, 2008.

Votes[edit]

House of Commons Vote, December 7, 2006

  Group For* Against* Absent Total
     Conservative Cabinet 19 6 0 25
     Conservative Backbench 91 7 1 99
     Liberal 13 85 3 101
     Bloc Québécois 0 47 4 51
     NDP 0 29 0 29
     Independents 0 1 1 2
     Totals 123 175 9 307
     House Speaker* n/a n/a 1 1

A majority of votes 154 were needed to ensure the motion passed, although the only formal requirement for passing one is the assent of a majority of members in attendance for the vote.

  • Note: For and Against mean "for restoring traditional marriage" and "against restoring traditional marriage".
  • Note: The Speaker of the House of Commons, Peter Milliken, a Liberal, could only vote in the unlikely event of a tie.

Background[edit]

Same-sex marriage became legal in Canada in 2003 when a series of court decisions declared that denying the privilege to homosexuals was unconstitutional. The Civil Marriage Act was approved by the Canadian House of Commons on June 28, 2005 by a margin of 158 to 133 and was subsequently passed by the Canadian Senate on July 19, 2005, before being given Royal Assent on July 20, 2005. This law brought the two provinces where such court challenges had not been resolved, Alberta and Prince Edward Island, in line with the rest of the country. The issue remained controversial and Conservative leader Stephen Harper pledged to revisit the issue with a free vote should the Conservatives form a government. Harper's party won the greatest number of seats in the 2006 federal election. Harper said that he would address this issue by means of a simple motion to the House as to whether or not the matter should be revisited. If the motion were to pass his government would introduce legislation to change the legal definition of marriage to two opposite sex couples, while creating civil unions for same-sex couples; should the motion be defeated, the government will take no further action.

House of Commons[edit]

Conservative Cabinet[edit]

Name 2003 Alliance motion Bill C-38 (2005) Dec 2006 motion to restore Riding
Rona Ambrose n/a No Yes Edmonton—Spruce Grove, AB
February 18, 2005: In 2nd reading debate of bill C-38, she stated that the position of the Conservative party is reasonable—enshrining marriage as between a man and a woman, and creating civil unions for other relationships.
John Baird n/a n/a No Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
Maxime Bernier n/a n/a Yes Beauce, QC
Jean-Pierre Blackburn n/a n/a Yes Jonquière—Alma, QC
Lawrence Cannon n/a n/a No Pontiac, QC
Tony Clement n/a n/a Yes Parry Sound-Muskoka, ON
May 30, 2006: In an e-mail: "The fact remains that I made a specific commitment during the campaign, & I'm not one to say one thing and do another. I know it's a divisive issue in my riding, but I feel compelled to keep my word."
Stockwell Day Yes No Yes Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC
March 24, 2005: While in 2nd reading debate, he said that "marriage is not an absolute right either. I cannot marry my sister, or my brother for that matter." Said the media is not reporting the Supreme Court didn't say the traditional definition was unconstitutional.
May 3, 2005: Made another speech in the House, this time focusing more on the legal aspects of marriage. Said that the Supreme Court of Canada did not require Parliament redefining marriage.
David Emerson n/a Yes No Vancouver—Kingsway, BC
May 31, 2006: CTV News Report: "Candidly, I'm not excited about reopening the issue," Emerson said. "Even in the last election, when I ran as a Liberal, it was not a big issue that I was confronted with at the doorstep.
Diane Finley n/a No Yes Haldimand—Norfolk, ON
April 4, 2005: During 2nd reading debate, she said that opposite sex and same-sex relationships need to be differentiated and thus she would be voting against. Also said the continuation of society would be threatened.
Jim Flaherty n/a n/a Yes Whitby-Oshawa, ON
Stephen Harper Yes No Yes Calgary Southwest, AB
February 16, 2005: During debate, he stated that the PM does not decide or define rights, and that the Prime Minister "does not interpret the Charter of Rights". Believes the Supreme Court didn't answer question #4 as per Martin hoping for an answer that would have supported his position. Harper introduced an amendment which was defeated on April 12, 2005 by 164-132.

September 17, 2003: Comment on the Alliance Motion to reaffirm traditional marriage, which failed 137-132. "They have chosen to make change without social consensus, and in doing so they have articulated a position which I believe is wrong in law, universally insulting, and very dangerous as far as real rights are concerned."

Loyola Hearn Absent No Yes St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
June 3, 2006: Globe & Mail: "Several Conservatives, most recently Fisheries Minister Loyola Hearn, who originally said no to same-sex unions, now say they would not vote to reopen the issue, arguing that Canada has moved on." LINK

May 31, 2006: CTV News Report: "At this stage, we've debated it pretty thoroughly. Once you've reached the optimum, nobody is really happy, but if it's the best that you can do, then it's probably best to just leave it alone."

Gary Lunn Yes No Yes Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Peter MacKay Yes No No Central Nova, NS
May 31, 2006: CTV News Report: "I haven't had a single person come up to me to talk about it. It certainly isn't in line with the five priorities that we've set out."
Rob Nicholson n/a No Yes Niagara Falls, ON
Gordon O'Connor n/a No Yes Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON
Bev Oda n/a No Yes Durham, ON
Jim Prentice n/a Yes No Calgary Centre-North, AB
February 2, 2005: Released a statement: For me, the marriage question is one of individual liberty - of constitutional liberty. Let's be clear. I have been married to the same woman for 21 years, reflecting my own personal definition of what marriage is. It is also the definition of my own church, the Presbyterian Church of Canada".

April 19, 2005: In a speech in the House, he stated the vast majority of his constituents don't want to see SSM as an issue that divides Canadians. Said he is a Christian and that there are strong disagreements among his riding filled with religious communities. "Bill C-38 is limited to civil marriage. It has no bearing upon religious marriage or its solemnization." Noted that the Supreme Court's reference noting that any religious official forced to perform a marriage against their belief is a violation of the Charter, and "in my opinion, this observation by the Supreme Court sufficiently clarifies the distinction between religious marriage and civil marriage under federal legislation. What right do we have, as a society, to deny homosexual Canadians something the rest of us are entitled to, namely a civil marriage licence?".

Carol Skelton Yes No Yes Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK
March 21, 2005: In the House of Commons, Skelton stated she believes gays and lesbians deserve exactly the same rights as heterosexuals - in a form of civil unions. She voted "no" citing opposition from her constituents as well as personal beliefs.
Monte Solberg Yes No Yes Medicine Hat, AB
April 5, 2005: While C-38 was in 2nd reading, he stated that his constituents are overwhelmingly opposed to SSM. Said traditional marriage brings order to society, and is the best environment for the raising of children. Said gays and lesbians have the right to form a relationship, but "do not have a right to rip open the institution of marriage and call it their own."
Chuck Strahl Yes No Yes Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC
Greg Thompson Yes No Yes New Brunswick Southwest, NB
May 3, 2005: Made a speech in the House of Commons that his constituents and himself are against the bill. Said "the churches are afraid of prosecution under the act because the government has not taken the time to provide them with adequate protection. That is an argument that we are hearing from all religions and all denominations."
Vic Toews Yes No Yes Provencher, MB
Peter Van Loan n/a No Yes York—Simcoe, ON
Josée Verner n/a n/a No Louis-St-Laurent, QC
19 6 0

Conservative backbench[edit]

Name 2003 Alliance motion Bill C-38 (2005) Dec 2006 motion to restore Riding
Jim Abbott Yes No Yes Kootenay—Columbia, BC
April 5, 2005: C-38 2nd reading speech: Said that the majority of his constituents are in favour for Harper's amendment for civil unions, and he would vote that way. Said that some laws are customized for the protection of children. He said this doesn't mean we're not equal, it just means we're not the same.
Diane Ablonczy Yes No Yes Calgary—Nose Hill, AB
April 4, 2005: While C-38 was in 2nd reading, Diane said that the majority of Canadians are against and that changing the definition would change the effectiveness of marriage as the underpinning of society.
Harold Albrecht n/a n/a Yes Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
May 3, 2006: "Albrecht said to him it's clear the traditional family is the foundation of a strong society. He said it provides a stable atmosphere for children, and looks out for their well-being. Albrecht said he has benefited from his own family's structure, and wants to see that tradition carried on." (Novopress North America)
Michael Allen n/a n/a Yes Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
Dean Allison n/a No Yes Niagara West—Glanbrook, ON
March 24, 2005: During 2nd reading debate, Allison confirmed his opposition and stated that he believes in 2 things: marriage between a man and a woman, and openness and accountability for a person's vote. He also indicated opposition to SSM in December 9 Hamilton Spectator
Rob Anders Yes No Yes Calgary West, AB
February 21, 2005: Presented a petition in the House against equal marriage. Said heterosexual marriage "just works so well".
April 5, 2005: During debate, he said: "There are things we can learn from history. I only wish that my colleagues across the way, rather than referring to modernity and some of the modern philosophies, would instead refer to 6,000 years of written human history and observe closely what ramifications changes to law have had."
David L. Anderson Yes No Yes Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
March 24, 2005: Made a speech in the house of common blasting MPs for changing their stance on the issue. Said that "marriage has from time immemorial been firmly grounded in our legal tradition, one that is itself a reflection of long-standing philosophical and religious traditions."
May 3, 2005: Made a speech criticizing PM Paul Martin for being against the traditional marriage and seeing it as a charter right. Said " If it is an issue of human rights it is interesting that the Prime Minister has chosen not to force his caucus to vote for it. How can this be a charter right when the Prime Minister has told half the caucus they can vote how they want and the other half to vote the way he wants them to vote?"
Dave Batters n/a No Yes Palliser, SK
April 5, 2005: While C-38 was in 2nd reading, he said he supports the conservative party amendment for civil unions. Said his constituents have told him "time and time again" they want to preserve the traditional definition while providing the same benefits for same-sex couples.
Leon Benoit Yes No Yes Vegreville—Wainwright, AB
February 16, 2005: During 2nd reading debate in the House, he said that his constituents feel that it is wrong that the courts have been involved in defining marriage.
May 3: Referenced expert Eugene Meehan, former executive legal officer of the Supreme Court of Canada and his recent declaration that the traditional definition of marriage can be restored and that the Supreme Court's decision was advisory only, and non-binding. Said that in the past the Supreme Court has recognized the importance of protecting children's best interest. Stated that the Supreme Court ruled protection over how marriages are performed lies within provincial jurisdiction, and therefore, religious freedom cannot be fully protected. (February 1, 2006)
James Bezan n/a No Yes Selkirk—Interlake, MB
Steven Blaney n/a n/a Yes Lévis—Bellechasse, QC
Sylvie Boucher n/a n/a Yes Beauport—Limoilou, QC
Garry Breitkreuz Yes No Yes Yorkton—Melville, SK
Gord Brown n/a No Yes Leeds—Grenville, ON
Patrick Brown n/a n/a Yes Barrie, ON
Rod Bruinooge n/a n/a Yes Winnipeg South, MB
Blaine Calkins n/a n/a Yes Wetaskiwin, AB
May 17, 2005: An article by The Lacombe Globe discussing Calkin stated: "Protecting marriage, boosting the justice system and improving Canada’s response to the BSE crisis were other issues Calkins said he felt strongly about."
Ron Cannan n/a n/a Yes Kelowna—Lake Country, BC
Colin Carrie n/a No Yes Oshawa, ON
Bill Casey Yes No No Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS
Rick Casson Yes No Yes Lethbridge, AB
February 21, 2005: During 2nd reading debate, Casson thanked his colleagues thoughts against SSM. He said the definition of marriage has been one that has kept his staff, e-mails and Internet connections very busy.
Michael Chong n/a No No Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
John Cummins Yes No Yes Delta—Richmond East, BC
Pat Davidson n/a n/a Yes Sarnia—Lambton, ON
Dean Del Mastro n/a n/a Yes Peterborough, ON
Barry Devolin n/a No Yes Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON
Norman Doyle Yes No Yes St. John's East, NL
April 5, 2005: During 2nd reading debate, he said he believes an institution like marriage is at the cornerstone of society. Said the Liberal government cannot "without a shadow of a doubt" ensure that churches will not be forced to perform same-sex marriages against their will. Believes one day they will be forced to do so.
Rick Dykstra n/a n/a Yes St. Catharines, ON
Ken Epp Yes No Yes Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB
Edward Fast n/a n/a Yes Abbotsford, BC
Brian Fitzpatrick Yes No Yes Prince Albert, SK
April 4, 2005: In 2nd reading, she stated that certain people should go back to school or the institutions that they did attend and reexamine some of the papers they wrote about where we got important principles from. Said Parliament is not a threat to democracy.
Steven Fletcher n/a No Yes Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia, MB
April 5, 2005: Said his constituents and the majority of Canadians believe that marriage is a basic institution and that gays and lesbians deserve equality, but in the form of a civil union
Royal Galipeau n/a n/a Absent Ottawa—Orléans, ON
Cheryl Gallant Yes No Yes Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
Peter Goldring Yes No Yes Edmonton East, AB
May 2: Referenced Bishop Henry and his stance on opposing gay marriage. Said a healthy Canadian society is best assured through the "traditional family".
Gary Goodyear n/a No Yes Cambridge, ON
February 16, 2005: In 2nd reading, he stated that while he hopes "one day a word will come to mean as much to same sex couples as the word marriage has come to mean to heterosexual couples", he is against that word being 'marriage'.
April 21, 2005: Said no human rights international tribunal has ever declared same-sex marriage a right. Said the notwithstanding clause does not have to be used to preserve the traditional definition of marriage.
Jacques Gourde n/a n/a Yes Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
Nina Grewal n/a No Yes Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
March 24, 2005: When C-38 was in 2nd reading, she made a speech criticizing Paul Martin for not allowing a free vote of his cabinet ministers. Said Anne McLellan and the Prime Minister broke their promise to preserve the traditional definition when they voted with the alliance motion to do so in 1999.
Helena Guergis n/a No Yes Simcoe—Grey, ON
May 3, 2005: Said in the House of Commons that the majority of Canadians are seeking middle ground on this issue. "They believe that marriage is a basically heterosexual institution, but that same sex couples also have rights to equality within society that should be recognized and protected."
Art Hanger Yes No Yes Calgary Northeast, AB
April 5, 2005: While in 2nd reading, he stated that never in his wildest dreams did he think parliament would be here today redefining the union of 1 man and 1 woman. Said marriage pre-dates the existence of Canada, and said we have to solve this issue via a national referendum.
Richard Harris Yes No Yes Cariboo—Prince George, BC
April 21, 2005: While C-38 was in 2nd reading, he made a speech in the House expressing his proud stance of "defending marriage". Made reference to the some 15,000 protesters that gathered on Parliament Hill on April 9, 2006 citing opposition to the bill.
Luc Harvey n/a n/a Yes Louis-Hébert, QC
Laurie Hawn n/a n/a Yes Edmonton Centre, AB
Russ Hiebert n/a No Yes South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
March 24, 2005: During 2nd reading debate in the House of Commons, Hiebert said the Liberal Government is misleading Canadians, and he intends to go against the bill.
Jay Hill Yes No Yes Prince George—Peace River, BC
February 18, 2005: Commented during 2nd reading debate by saying "the Prime Minister has chosen to relegate the historical, ages-old, traditional definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, to the exclusion of all others, to the scrap heap of history."
April 4, 2005: Said it would abolish the norm of a father/mother relationship.
Betty Hinton Yes No Yes Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
Rahim Jaffer Yes No Yes Edmonton—Strathcona, AB
Brian Jean n/a No Yes Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Randy Kamp n/a No Yes Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC
Gerald Keddy Yes Yes No South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS
March 20, 2005: Mr. Keddy confirms to The Halifax Herald once again that he's willing to take the risk of voting for C-38 "because this is an issue of civil rights".
Jason Kenney Yes No Yes Calgary Southeast, AB
Said homosexuals in fact marry all the time, and nothing is preventing them from doing so. Essentially, they can still enter into marriage if they found an accepting woman. Some house members criticized these remarks.
Ed Komarnicki n/a No Yes Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Daryl Kramp n/a No Yes Prince Edward—Hastings, ON
Michael Lake n/a n/a Yes Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
Guy Lauzon n/a No Yes Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
While C-38 was in 2nd reading, he said it is contrary to his religious beliefs and his faith. Believes human rights have nothing to do with the word "marriage".
Pierre Lemieux n/a n/a Yes Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Tom Lukiwski n/a No Yes Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
James Lunney Yes No Yes Nanaimo—Alberni, BC
Said that he's sure most of his constituents would want to retain the traditional definition of marriage. Said 500 people showed up outside his office in 2004 to support traditional marriage. Said the Supreme Court did not demand the parliament must redefinition marriage, only that they could do so if they chose to.
Dave MacKenzie n/a No Yes Oxford, ON
Fabian Manning n/a n/a No Avalon, NL
Inky Mark Yes No Yes Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB
Colin Mayes n/a n/a Yes Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
Ted Menzies n/a No Yes Macleod, AB
May 3, 2005: While C-38 was in 2nd reading, he stated that "opposing Bill C-38 is not about denying rights. It is not about jeopardizing the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as the Prime Minister would like us to believe. It is a complex public policy issue and one that would have an impact on every Canadian."
Rob Merrifield Yes No Yes Yellowhead, AB
Larry Miller n/a No Yes Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
April 4, 2005: C-38 in second reading: Said that traditional marriage must be protected. Said that he agrees with his constituents that there are many other issues that are more important like health care, and that biased-judges should not be redefining marriage.
Bob Mills Yes No Yes Red Deer, AB
James Moore Yes Yes No Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
December 18, 2004: In an e-mail to his constituents, he stated "Canada's constitution mandates that the federal government define the word 'marriage', and that definition must respect the Charter principle that all Canadians must be treated equally under the law. In a perfect world, the two principles of equality and respecting the origins of the word 'marriage' would be met with registered domestic partnerships or civil unions for all couples. However, this compromise is not possible given Canada's current legal framework. The equality right to marriage for same-sex and opposite-sex couples is a right in British Columbia that can only be taken away by invoking the notwithstanding clause, or amending the Constitution. Polls have consistently showed that Canadians overwhelmingly do not support either such action."(Inkless Wells)
Rob Moore n/a No Yes Fundy Royal, NB
Rick Norlock n/a n/a Yes Northumberland—Quinte West, ON
Deepak Obhrai Yes No Yes Calgary East, AB
Brian Pallister Yes No Yes Portage—Lisgar, MB
Christian Paradis n/a n/a No Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
Daniel Petit n/a n/a Yes Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Pierre Poilievre n/a No Yes Nepean—Carleton, ON
Joe Preston n/a No Yes Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
May 3, 2005: Made a speech in the House of Commons citing no internationally recognized human rights document has ever suggested that same-sex marriage is a right. Said his constituents feel that unelected court judges should not be become the lawmakers of the land. Said that duty is "ours and we should endeavour to do it to the best of our ability."
James Rajotte Yes No Yes Edmonton—Leduc, AB
May 31, 2006: CTV News Report: Said some of his constituents who are committed to the traditional definition of marriage might now feel it's a "done debate."

"Personally, I have mixed feelings on that ... I recognize that same-sex marriage has been the law in Canada for some time now, and I also recognize the difficulty in reversing it to the point where traditional marriage is the only legal union in Canada. For that reason I would say I'm undecided about it, but I'm thinking seriously about it now."

Scott Reid Yes No Yes Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
May 3, 2005: Said "I cannot support a bill that fails to provide adequate protection for religious freedom when such protection could easily have been included in the text of the bill."
Lee Richardson n/a No No Calgary Centre, AB
Gerry Ritz Yes No Yes Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
Andrew Scheer n/a No Yes Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK
May 3, 2005: Made a speech saying "there is also a huge problem in this bill regarding the protection of religious institutions. I had to point out to those members that question number four was never answered, and I think I also have to point out to them that the one area that was ruled ultra vires of this House was the issue of protecting religious institutions, since that fell under provincial jurisdiction."
Gary Schellenberger Yes No Yes Perth—Wellington, ON
Bev Shipley n/a n/a Yes Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
Joy Smith n/a No Yes Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
Kevin Sorenson Yes No Yes Crowfoot, AB
February 21, 2005: Said he doesn't believe religious officials will be protected from refusing to perform marriages contrary to their belief. Said homophobia "needs to be fought vigorously" and same-sex couples should be legally recognized via same-sex unions. Said he is speaking on behalf of his constituents.
April 4: Said that the union of one man and one woman is at the "root of all humanity".
Bruce Stanton n/a n/a Yes Simcoe North, ON
Brian Storseth n/a n/a Yes Westlock—St. Paul, AB
David Sweet n/a n/a Yes Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON
Former head of Promise Keepers in Canada, which strongly opposes SSM.
Myron Thompson Yes No Yes Wild Rose, AB
February 16, 2005: In 2nd reading debate, he said that many parents believe certain issues should be left out of the school system, and that this would only continue a pro-gay agenda.
David Tilson n/a No Yes Dufferin—Caledon, ON
Bradley Trost n/a No Yes Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK
April 4, 2005: In 2nd reading, he said that Bill C-38 is an attack on the Canadian family.
Merv Tweed n/a No Yes Brandon—Souris, MB
Dave Van Kesteren n/a n/a Yes Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON
Maurice Vellacott Yes No Yes Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK
February 16, 2005: Upon 2nd reading, Vellacott stated that "when bringing a new group in to have those particular rights, one does not need to call them the same thing in order to give them the equal benefits and rights".
Mike Wallace n/a n/a Yes Burlington, ON
September 6, 2006: "The results came back tied." "Results have 52% in favour of marriage and 49% wanting to reopen the debate. I will be voting to reopen but with the purpose of getting the government out of the business of marriage altogehter. I want to leave it to churches and the government provide everyone a civil union for everyone. United Church does marry gay couples in some churches in Burlington and I am not wantimng to stop this"
Mark Warawa n/a No Yes Langley, BC
Chris Warkentin n/a n/a Yes Peace River, AB
Jeff Watson n/a No Yes Essex, ON
John G. Williams Yes No Yes Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
October 5, 2006: Told CTV news: "Religion has been under attack in this country and around the world for many years, so something that perhaps Canadians should be thinking about is the moral fabric of the country."
Lynne Yelich Yes No Yes Blackstrap, SK
April 5, 2005: Said C-38 will dramatically change the institution of marriage that has remained constant across history and cultures. Said we must seek a position that balances both sides equally. Said we cannot ignore the history of natural law.
91 7 1

Liberal Party[edit]

Name 2003 Alliance motion Bill C-38 (2005) Dec 2006 motion to restore Riding
Omar Alghabra n/a n/a No Mississauga—Erindale, ON
Larry Bagnell No Yes No Yukon, YT
Navdeep Bains n/a Yes No Mississauga—Brampton South, ON
March 21, 2005: In the House, he made a speech saying he would support C-38 based on the premise that it is a Charter issue. He also made reference to a secular society.
Sue Barnes No Yes Absent London West, ON
Colleen Beaumier No Yes No Brampton West, ON
Mauril Bélanger No Yes No Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Don Bell n/a Yes No North Vancouver, BC
Carolyn Bennett No Yes No St. Paul's, ON
April 5, 2005: Minister of State (Public Health) - Said you cannot dismiss same-sex couples wanting to enter into and celebrate one of the most significant events in life.
Maurizio Bevilacqua No Yes No Vaughan, ON
Ray Bonin Yes No Yes Nickel Belt, ON
Ken Boshcoff n/a No No Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
Scott Brison No Yes No Kings—Hants, NS
Bonnie Brown No Yes No Oakville, ON
Gerry Byrne No Absent Yes Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL
John Cannis Yes No Absent Scarborough Centre, ON
November 12, 2006: Told the Toronto Star: "If it meant to rescind the legislation, I'd vote to support it." "But this initiative is nothing but a tease. It's political posturing."
Brenda Chamberlain Yes No No Guelph, ON
April 12, 2005: Voted in favour of Harper's amendment.

November 12, 2006: "It's fundamentally dishonest. If Mr. Harper wants to repeal the marriages that have already gone through, then put that on the table. If he wants to change the law, put that on the table."

Raymond Chan n/a Yes No Richmond, BC
Denis Coderre No Yes No Bourassa, QC
Joe Comuzzi Absent No No Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON
June 28, 2005: Resigned from cabinet rather than vote for the bill. He will still seek re-election as a Liberal MP, and remains a member of the Liberal caucus.
Irwin Cotler Absent Yes No Mount Royal, QC
April 21: Stated the Conservatives know they cannot enact a civil union system since that is up to the provinces, and not the federal government. Stated "the fourth question was included in the reference as to whether the traditional definition of marriage was compatible with the charter. It was included to allow those who wished to argue that position to do so. As to the question we put and supported, whether extending civil marriage to gays and lesbians was compatible with the charter, the court answered that same sex marriage was not only consistent with the charter, but flowed from it."
Roy Cullen No Paired Yes Etobicoke North, ON
Rodger Cuzner No No No Cape Breton—Canso, NS
Jean-Claude D'Amours n/a Yes No Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Ruby Dhalla n/a Yes No Brampton—Springdale, ON
Sukh Dhaliwal n/a n/a No Newton—North Delta, BC
Stéphane Dion No Yes No Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
Ujjal Dosanjh n/a Yes No Vancouver South, BC
Ken Dryden n/a Yes No York Centre, ON
June 24, 2005: Told "The Toronto Star": "Life is hard enough when we live on the majority side of things — of race, language, culture, religion, sexuality. Our biggest challenge as human beings, I think, is to get along. To learn about each other, to accept difference, to give the same chance to others to live their lives as we would like them to give to us. To allow others to share fully and completely in the world. To me, man and woman, man and man, or woman and woman, marriage is for two people who love each other, who want to be with each other and who privately and publicly commit to each other."
Wayne Easter No Yes No Malpeque, PE
March 8, 2005: Told the CBC: "I've always said I would support it if, and only if, the rights of churches to make their own decisions on marriage within their churches were also protected. One right shouldn't outweigh the other."(CBC)
Mark Eyking Yes Yes No Sydney—Victoria, NS
Raymonde Folco No Yes Absent Laval—Les Îles, QC
Hedy Fry No Yes No Vancouver Centre, BC
March 24, 2005: Commented during debate on C-38: "The charter was written so that the legal component of marriage could be extended as part of our equality rights for minority groups in this country while still allowing religions to continue to have their own law, their own dogma and their own decision to do so."
John Godfrey No Yes No Don Valley West, ON
March 21, 2005: During 2nd reading of the bill, he cited years ago having changed his mind on the issue after reading a court decision on equal rights. He said there's a distinction between religious and civil marriage.
Ralph Goodale No Yes No Wascana, SK
Bill Graham No Yes No Toronto Centre, ON
February 16, 2005: During 2nd reading debate, he stated gays and lesbians contribute to society and this will strengthen Canada's rights. Believes the religion of one, should not become the religion for all.
Albina Guarnieri Yes Yes No Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON
Mark Holland n/a Yes No Ajax—Pickering, ON
March 21, 2005: On 2nd reading of the bill in the House, Holland said he believes in 2 things: the protection of religious freedoms, and equality for all Canadians in the Charter.
Charles Hubbard Yes No No Miramichi, NB
February 21, 2005: While in debate, he stated that for 2,000 years, marriage has certain connotations. He said "in most people's thinking over past generations, marriage has been a relationship between a man and a woman."
Michael Ignatieff n/a n/a No Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
Marlene Jennings No Yes No Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
March 24, 2005: Parliamentary Secretary Marlene Jennings talked about her interracial marriage during 2nd reading debate. She urged all members of parliament to support C-38 in order to "let Canadians know that civil marriage is as open to them as heterosexual couples".
Susan Kadis n/a Yes No Thornhill, ON
Nancy Karetak-Lindell No Yes No Nunavut, NU
April 22, 2005: Told Nunatsiaq News: "Individual liberty and religious freedom are protected by the charter. If I decide not to defend this right by gay couples to marry, how will I defend other rights that are threatened, like our aboriginal rights?."
Jim Karygiannis Yes No Yes Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
November 12, 2006: Told the Toronto Star "We'll defeat the motion and then he'll go back to them saying, `We tried,'". "It's the coward's way out." Despite Karygiannis's misgivings over the motivations of the Harper government, he says he will vote in the spirit he always has: against same-sex marriage.
Tina Keeper n/a n/a No Churchill, MB
Wajid Khan n/a No Yes Mississauga—Streetsville, ON
Jean Lapierre n/a Yes No Outremont, QC
Dominic LeBlanc No Yes No Beauséjour, NB
Derek Lee Yes No Yes Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
April 21, 2005: In the House, he said he wished the bill actually dealt with civil marriage, but said it deals with "straight, simple marriage". Said in the actual bill, the word "civil marriage" doesn't show up, it's only in the title.
Lawrence MacAulay Absent No No Cardigan, PE
Gurbax Malhi Yes No Yes Bramalea—Gore—Malton, ON
May 3, 2005: Stated that "for more than 6,000 years traditional marriage, defined as the union of a man and a woman, has allowed us to preserve and protect the strength of our families." Said that "children deserve, where possible, the opportunity to receive the warmth and comfort of a mother as well as the protection of a father."
John Maloney Yes No No Welland, ON
Diane Marleau No Yes No Sudbury, ON
Keith Martin Yes Yes No Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
June 2, 2006: Told Reuters: "I think he (Harper) is doing it as a sop to his far-right neoconservatives that still want to ban same-sex marriage. This issue is dead. It’s over."

February 1, 2005: Globe And Mail indicates vote for
June 23: While debating Mo.17 to extend the sitting of the House, Martin stated those who are opposed should move on. Said "the horse left the barn" a long time ago and that none of the parties in the House have offered to use the Notwithstanding clause to override the Courts.

Paul Martin No Yes No LaSalle—Émard, QC
June 2, 2006: "What the government ought to be doing is building on the foundation of previous governments as opposed to essentially trying to tear down foundations that have been built."

February 16: During 2nd reading debate in Martin's speech, he said he will stand up for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to protect minority rights. Referred back to when women weren't allowed to vote, and when interracial marriages were illegal. Said society has evolved and that while he supported the traditional definition 6 years ago, he has totally come around to supporting same-sex marriage.

Bill Matthews Absent No No Random—Burin—St. George's, NL
John McCallum No Yes No Markham—Unionville, ON
David McGuinty n/a Yes No Ottawa South, ON
Joe McGuire Yes Yes No Egmont, PE
John McKay Yes No Yes Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Dan McTeague Yes No Yes Pickering—Scarborough East, ON
Gary Merasty n/a n/a No Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
Maria Minna No Yes No Beaches—East York, ON
Brian Murphy n/a n/a No Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
Shawn Murphy Yes Yes No Charlottetown, PE
March 8, 2005: Told the CBC: "There's a lot of people on P.E.I. who hold opposing views, but again at the end of the day I believe we have to separate the church and the state from these discussions on the legislation. It's very clear that all organizations can deal with marriage in their own beliefs." (CBC)
Anita Neville No Yes No Winnipeg South Centre, MB
Stephen Owen Absent Yes No Vancouver Quadra, BC
Massimo Pacetti Absent No No Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
Bernard Patry No Paired No Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC
Glen Pearson N/A N/A No London North Centre, ON
Jim Peterson No Yes No Willowdale, ON
Marcel Proulx No Yes No Hull—Aylmer, QC
Yasmin Ratansi n/a Yes No Don Valley East, ON
Karen Redman No Yes No Kitchener Centre, ON
April 4, 2005: While C-38 was in 2nd reading: States that C-38 is about equal rights, and that it is consistent with the Supreme Court's ruling. Said she is proud to defend the Charter and expanding a fundamental institution.
Geoff Regan No Yes No Halifax West, NS
Lucienne Robillard No Yes No Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC
Pablo Rodriguez n/a Yes No Honoré—Mercier, QC
Anthony Rota n/a Yes No Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON
Todd Russell n/a Yes No Labrador, NL
Michael Savage n/a Yes No Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
March 21, 2005: Made a speech saying Canadians are 'justly proud' of the Charter of Rights, and that C-38 follows this. Believes that anything less than marriage is unacceptable; describes it as "a law whose time has come." Also said "it feels comfortably in my heart and mind."
Francis Scarpaleggia n/a No Yes Lac-Saint-Louis, QC
Andy Scott No Yes No Fredericton, NB
Judy Sgro Yes Yes No York West, ON
Mario Silva n/a Yes No Davenport, ON
March 21, 2005: Said he believes the country has embraced "this new way of thinking" of equal treatment for all.
Raymond Simard No No No Saint Boniface, MB
November 12, 2006: Told the Toronto Star: "It was a terribly tough debate, heart wrenching. I can't see us bringing it back. I think several of our members feel the same way." Simard says despite this he still opposes gay marriage.[1]
Scott Simms n/a No No Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
April 1, 2005: Told CEM that although he truly wants to support it, and actually personally supports gay marriage, the majority of his constituents do not.
Lloyd St. Amand n/a Yes No Brant, ON
Brent St. Denis No Yes No Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON
Paul Steckle Yes No Yes Huron—Bruce, ON
March 21, 2005: While in debate in the House, Steckle stated while he does support the charter, he personally does not believe C-38 flows within it—thus he would be voting against.
Belinda Stronach n/a Yes No Newmarket—Aurora, ON
June 2, 2006: "I think it's a political tactic that the prime minister will use to bring about division. It is a very sensitive issue for many people as we saw when the debate occurred last time. But I think we moved through that"
Paul Szabo Yes No No Mississauga South, ON
Dec 05, 2006: "Paul Szabo says he will vote against the Conservative motion to re-open the same-sex marriage debate because it does not call for using the notwithstanding clause." [2]
Andrew Telegdi No Yes No Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
February 21, 2005: Said that if C-38 becomes law, Canada will join two other nations in leading the world in inclusiveness. Believes strongly that we are talking about inclusiveness and the kind of country Canadians want.
Lui Temelkovski n/a Yes No Oak Ridges—Markham, ON
Robert G. Thibault No Yes No West Nova, NS
March 21, 2005: 2nd reading of the bill, Parliamentary Secretary of Health, Thibault said he has a responsibility to uphold the Charter of Rights and Freedoms: that every Canadian is equal before the law.
Alan Tonks Yes No Yes York South—Weston, ON
March 21, 2005: Said he believes most of his constituents are against; his personal beliefs are the same. Tonks does, however, support the concept of civil unions.
Roger Valley n/a Yes No Kenora, ON
Joe Volpe Yes Yes No Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
Tom Wappel Yes No Yes Scarborough Southwest, ON
February 18, 2005: While C-38 was being debated in its 2nd reading, said same-sex marriage is not a right and that no country in the world has declared it so. Said he would vote against.
Blair Wilson n/a n/a No West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
Bryon Wilfert Yes No No Richmond Hill, ON
November 12, 2006: Told the Toronto Star: Attempting to reopen debate "is a sham, it's intellectually dishonest." "It's disingenuous of this Prime Minister to suggest a free vote that will lead to an overturning of the legislation, especially considering the fact that the Supreme Court has ruled on this, and it's pretty much been ruled on in every province and territory." "The world hasn't collapsed. It's the law of the land, and I think we waste far too much time consumed with an issue the courts have already ruled on when we should be talking about more important issues, such as the environment." [3]
Borys Wrzesnewskyj n/a Yes No Etobicoke Centre, ON
Paul Zed n/a No No Saint John, NB
Said issue was settled and didn't want to see it revisited (comments in the 2006 election). (CEM)
13 85 3

Bloc Québécois[edit]

Leader Gilles Duceppe announced on February 10, 2006 that he would force the caucus to vote against Harper's motion.

Name 2003 Alliance motion Bill C-38 (2005) Dec 2006 motion to restore Riding
Guy André n/a Yes No Berthier—Maskinongé, QC
Gérard Asselin Yes Absent No Manicouagan, QC
February 16, 2005: During 2nd reading debate, Asselin said because you're born with a mother and father, it is questionable how family values can develop from a married gay couple.
Claude Bachand No Yes No Saint-Jean QC
April 21, 2005: Said when he was a citizen, he had the reputation of being fairly open. Said certain rights are being given to people in society and taken away from others. Believes we have to be brave on issues like these where we have to consider what constituents think, but you can't go against their inner feelings. Said courts have intervened unanimously because the issue has taken too long for parliament, and thus the definition has been changed. Said it's the easy to thing to do to override the courts, and that his constituents will favour his vote for.
Vivian Barbot n/a n/a No Papineau, QC
André Bellavance n/a Yes No Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
Bernard Bigras No Yes No Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
Raynald Blais n/a Yes No Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
France Bonsant n/a Yes No Compton—Stanstead, QC
Robert Bouchard n/a No No Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
Diane Bourgeois No Yes No Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
Paule Brunelle n/a Yes No Trois-Rivières, QC
Serge Cardin Absent No Absent Sherbrooke, QC
Robert Carrier n/a Yes No Alfred-Pellan, QC
Paul Crête No Yes No Montmagny—L'Islet— Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
Claude Debellefeuille n/a n/a No Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC
Nicole Demers n/a Yes No Laval, QC
Johanne Deschamps n/a Yes No Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Gilles Duceppe No Yes No Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
February 16, 2005: During 2nd reading debate, he presented a speech saying there is no reason why gays and lesbians should not be allowed to get married. Said that in another 100 years, no one will be challenging the right of two persons of the same sex to get married.
Meili Faille n/a Yes No Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC
Carole Freeman n/a n/a No Châteauguay, QC
Christiane Gagnon No Yes No Québec, QC
Roger Gaudet Yes No No Montcalm, QC
Michel Gauthier No Yes No Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Raymond Gravel n/a n/a Absent Repentigny, QC
Nov 27, 2006: "If the question is directly asked: 'Are you for or against gay marriage?' then as a Catholic priest I would simply abstain from voting."
Monique Guay No Yes No Rivière-du-Nord, QC
Michel Guimond No Yes No Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
Maka Kotto n/a Absent No Saint-Lambert, QC
Jean-Yves Laforest n/a n/a No Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
Mario Laframboise Absent Yes No Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Francine Lalonde No Yes No Mercier, QC
Carole Lavallée n/a Yes No Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
April 21: While C-38 was in 2nd reading, she stated that if you take away a right from a minority group, who is to say who is next?. Said 8 courts have stated the traditional definition is in violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Said a civil union is not civil marriage and is discrimination and not in compliance with the Charter. Said the Supreme Court of Canada stated a uniform stance on this issue is the best thing, which is what C-38 is all about. Said homosexuals are not lesser beings, and happiness can be found for all, through marriage.
Marc Lemay n/a Yes No Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Yves Lessard n/a Yes No Chambly—Borduas, QC
Yvon Lévesque n/a Yes No Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC
Yvan Loubier No Yes Absent (Paired) Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
Marcel Lussier n/a n/a No Brossard—La Prairie, QC
Luc Malo n/a n/a No Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC
Réal Ménard No Yes No Hochelaga, QC
Serge Ménard n/a Yes No Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
Maria Mourani n/a n/a No Ahuntsic, QC
Richard Nadeau n/a n/a No Gatineau, QC
Christian Ouellet n/a n/a No Brome—Missisquoi, QC
Pierre Paquette No Paired No Joliette, QC
April 21: Said courts in 8 jurisdictions have found the traditional definition of marriage not in compliance with the Charter. Said this is a matter of equality, and that C-38 expands the right to all Canadians.
Gilles-A. Perron Absent No No Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Pauline Picard No Yes No Drummond, QC
Louis Plamondon No Yes No Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, QC
Jean-Yves Roy No Yes No Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Thierry St-Cyr n/a n/a No Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
Caroline St-Hilaire No Absent No Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC
Louise Thibault n/a No Absent (Paired) Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
May 24, 2006: CEM indicates that Louise Thibault is the lone BQ MP who opposed C-38 in 2005, but is against re-opening the debate.

April 4: Said one could oppose the bill, and oppose discrimination.

Robert Vincent n/a Yes No Shefford, QC
0 47 4

New Democratic Party[edit]

The NDP caucus did not allow a free vote so MPs were obliged to vote against the Conservative motion.

Name 2003 Alliance motion Bill C-38 (2005) Dec 2006 motion to restore Riding
Charlie Angus n/a Yes No Timmins—James Bay, ON
June 2, 2006: "It's very dangerous to start taking away minority rights."

September 14, 2006: "For me it is not an issue of whether I agree with them or not, it is an issue that these are minority rights that have been guaranteed by the courts. The biggest danger of a slippery slope is allowing the principle that "majority" rights could vote away court guarantees for minorities."

Alex Atamanenko n/a n/a No British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
Catherine J. Bell n/a n/a No Vancouver Island North, BC
Dennis Bevington n/a n/a No Western Arctic
Dawn Black n/a n/a No New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC
Bill Blaikie No Yes No Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Chris Charlton n/a n/a No Hamilton Mountain, ON
Olivia Chow n/a n/a No Trinity—Spadina, ON
David Christopherson n/a Yes No Hamilton Centre, ON
April 5, 2005: While in 2nd reading debate, he said members must be prepared to stand up for what matters, and defend rights. Referred to different clauses in the Charter of Rights to say that no matter what direction a person's life takes, every individual deserves the same right. Said's there "no nice safe place" when it comes to rights; said you either have rights or you don't, and Bill C-38 will allow all Canadians to say they have theirs. Blasted the Conservatives "compromise" position.
Joe Comartin No Yes No Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
Jean Crowder n/a Yes No Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC
Nathan Cullen n/a Yes No Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Libby Davies No Yes No Vancouver East, BC
February 21, 2005: Said that this debate and this bill are "about actually strengthening the institution of civil marriage. This is about strengthening people's commitment to one another."
Paul Dewar n/a n/a No Ottawa Centre, ON
Yvon Godin No Yes No Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Peter Julian n/a Yes No Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Jack Layton n/a Yes No Toronto—Danforth, ON
June 2, 2006: "We don't really see why there needs to be a vote. After all, the courts have decided, the Parliament has decided, couples are getting married and the idea that we would go into the House of Commons and roll the clock back on an issue of human rights makes no sense to me. I don’t frankly understand why you would whip the country into frenzy over something that has been decided"

April 5, 2005: In the house, he stood up and said C-38 allows for him to make a choice that "celebrates more of our rich diversity and extends that fundamental Canadian value of equality." Said the debate is "about our capacity in a world with too little love to recognize love and celebrate it and by consequence to salute the equality that is the most enduring Canadian value. This debate is and should be about people." Also said "I do not subscribe to the view that human rights are a buffet from which one can selectively choose."

Wayne Marston n/a n/a No Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON
Pat Martin No Yes No Winnipeg Centre, MB
Tony Martin n/a Yes No Sault Ste. Marie, ON
Brian Masse No Yes No Windsor West, ON
February 16, 2005: Stated that civil marriage between gays and lesbians are already happening in Ontario, and their rights should never be taken away.
Irene Mathyssen n/a n/a No London—Fanshawe, ON
Alexa McDonough No Yes No Halifax, NS
Peggy Nash n/a n/a No Parkdale-High Park, ON
Penny Priddy n/a n/a No Surrey North, BC
Denise Savoie n/a n/a No Victoria, BC
Bill Siksay n/a Yes No Burnaby—Douglas, BC
June 2, 2006: "There's no need for another vote on this. There's no crisis around marriage. People who support the institution of marriage are able to go out and get married."

February 21: In a speech in the House of Commons, he stated how difficult it is for a teen when he/she realizes they are gay, and that they often suffer from depression. Siksay believes C-38 will help to reduce prejudice.

Peter Stoffer Absent Yes No Sackville——Eastern Shore, NS
Judy Wasylycia-Leis No Absent No Winnipeg North, MB
June 20, 2005: On "Countdown: With Mike Duffy", she stated that C-38 must pass so that Canadian's cry for equality will be heard. Said it is a matter of equality rights, and that her office this past weekend has received over 8,000 e-mails from Canadians calling on the Government to pass C-38 before Parliament breaks for the summer.

Judy was absent on the final vote because of her daughter's graduation. Outside a private party, it was said that if the vote was obviously going to be by a razor thin margin, she would have been there to vote in favour.

0 29 0

Independents[edit]

Name 2003 Alliance motion Bill C-38 (2005) Dec 2006 motion to restore Riding
André Arthur n/a n/a Absent Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, Quebec
Garth Turner n/a n/a No Halton, ON
0 1 1

Speaker[edit]

The Speaker of the House of Commons votes only in the event of a tie. Milliken is a Liberal.

Name 2003 Alliance motion Bill C-38 (2005) Dec 2006 motion to restore Riding
Peter Milliken No tie; could not vote. No tie; could not vote. No tie; could not vote. Kingston and the Islands, ON
Unable to vote as Speaker, because it was not a tie.
0 0 1

References[edit]

  1. ^ Government motion on same-sex marriage is defeated. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved on 7 December 2006.

External links[edit]

  • www.marriagevote.ca — has been tracking this House of Commons vote in detail since August 2003.
  • www.howdtheyvote.ca — has the complete voting history of the 38th Parliament, including Bill C-38.