Civil Marriage Act
| Civil Marriage Act | ||
|---|---|---|
 | ||
| Parliament of Canada | ||
Long title
| ||
| Citation | S.C. 2005, c. 33 | |
| Territorial extent | Bill title Bill C-38, 38th Parliament, 1st Session | |
| Introduced by | Irwin Cotler, Minister of Justice | |
| First reading | 1 February 2005 | |
| Second reading | 4 May 2005 | |
| Considered in committee | 16 June 2005 | |
| Third reading | 28 June 2005 | |
| Second chamber: Senate | ||
| First reading | 29 June 2005 | |
| Second reading | 6 July 2005 | |
| Considered in committee | 18 July 2005 | |
| Third reading | 19 July 2005 | |
| Keywords | ||
| Same-sex marriage | ||
| Status: In force | ||
The Civil Marriage Act (French: Loi sur le mariage civil) is a federal statute legalizing same-sex marriage across Canada. At the time it became law, same-sex marriage had already been legalized by court decisions in all Canadian jurisdictions except Alberta, Prince Edward Island, the Northwest Territories, and Nunavut.
It was introduced as Bill C-38 in the first session of the
Royal Assent
on July 20, 2005.
Outline of the Act
This is the Act's official legislative summary:
- This enactment extends the legal capacity for marriage for civil purposes to same-sex couples in order to reflect values of tolerance, respect and equality, consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It also makes consequential amendments to other Acts to ensure equal access for same-sex couples to the civil effects of marriage and divorce.[1]
The
committee stage
and was subsequently adopted by the House of Commons.
- Marriage - certain aspects of capacity
- 2. Marriage, for civil purposes, is the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others.
- Religious officials
- 3. It is recognized that officials of religious groups are free to refuse to perform marriages that are not in accordance with their religious beliefs.
- Freedom of conscience and religion and expression of beliefs
- 3.1 For greater certainty, no person or organization shall be deprived of any benefit, or be subject to any obligation or sanction, under any law of the Parliament of Canada solely by reason of their exercise, in respect of marriage between persons of the same sex, of the freedom of conscience and religion guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms or the expression of their beliefs in respect of marriage as the union of a man and woman to the exclusion of all others based on that guaranteed freedom.
- Marriage not void or voidable
- 4. For greater certainty, a marriage is not void or voidable by reason only that the spouses are of the same sex.
The remaining sections are "consequential amendments" that simply adjust the wording of existing acts to conform to this one.
Politics
 | This section needs additional citations for verification. (July 2017) |
As a government bill, C-38 represented the official position of Paul Martin's Liberal government and the cabinet were thus bound to vote in its favour. Liberal backbenchers and members of the Conservative Party and Bloc Québécois had a free vote. In accordance with its party policy on LGBT rights, the New Democratic Party (NDP) whipped its members in favour. Bev Desjarlais defied the whip and was removed from her critic position. (She was not nominated for the next election by her riding association, and subsequently chose to sit as an independent for the remainder of the session.) Conservatives tended to vote against the Act, while Bloquistes tended to vote in favour. At least two cabinet ministers stepped down to vote against the bill. Joe Comuzzi resigned just hours before the final vote on the Act, and Martin lamented his leaving. As expected, Comuzzi voted against the Act.
The composition of Parliament was such that the prevailing opinion among political commentators indicated the
bill would likely pass the House (see a detailed analysis at members of the 38th Canadian Parliament and same-sex marriage). Although there was some challenge to it, this opinion was verified with a 158–133 vote at third reading in the House of Commons on June 28. The bill passed in the Senate
on July 19, with a 47–21 vote, with three abstentions.
The legislative process
The bill was given its
Re: Same-Sex Marriage
.
Due to the government's tenuous minority position, there was a strong possibility that the government could have fallen on a
motion of confidence
through the budget bills, causing the bill to die on the order paper. It would then have been up to a new post-election government to re-introduce the bill affirming same-sex marriage (or to introduce a bill, of uncertain constitutionality, defining marriage as one man and one woman). However, the government survived the last of the budget votes on June 23, 2005, and successfully passed a motion to extend the current sitting of Parliament. In order to pass the motion extending the session, the Liberals provided a written promise to the Bloc Québécois that they would bring C-38 to a vote before the end of the current session.
Finally, on June 28, the Act was passed on third reading by the House of Commons; 158 voting in favour, 133 voting against. On July 19, it passed the Senate by a 47–21 vote with three abstentions and received royal assent (thereby becoming law) on July 20.
A summary of the legislation's progress is given below.[2]
| Stage | House of Commons | Senate |
|---|---|---|
| Introduction and First Reading | 1 February 2005 | June 29 |
| Second Reading Debate | February 16 to May 4 | July 4 to 6 |
| Second Reading | May 4 | July 6 |
| Committee Name | Special Committee on Bill C-38 | Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs |
| Committee Stage | May 5 to June 15 | July 11 to 14 |
| Committee Report | June 16 | July 18 |
| Debates at Report Stage | June 27 | – |
| Report Stage Vote | June 28 | – |
| Third Reading Debate | June 28 | July 19 |
| Third Reading and Passage | June 28 | July 19 |
| Royal Assent | July 20 | |
Chronology
House of Commons
- February 1, 2005 – Cotler introduces the bill and the House grants first reading. Accordingly, it is designated Bill C-38 and published.
- February 2, 2005 – Conservative support for the bill doubles to four MPs as former Progressive Conservatives Jim Prentice and Gerald Keddy announce they will vote in favour. Belinda Stronach (who later became a Liberal cabinet minister) and James Moore were already on record as being in favour.
- February 8, 2005 – The MPs to say they support same-sex marriage. They refused to buy an ad when they learn it was paid for by Salah Bachir on behalf of Canadians for Equal Marriage.[failed verification]
- February 16, 2005 – human rights critic Bill Siksay.[4]
- April 12, 2005 – The motionagainst the bill is defeated 164–132 against.
- May 4, 2005 – Bill C-38 passes second readingin the House of Commons with a final vote of 164–137 for.
- May 5, 2005 – Bill C-38 has its 1st special legislative committee meeting to study the bill, to listen from witnesses both against and for the bill, as well as propose amendments.
- May 19, 2005 – Paul Martin's motion of confidence; with the Liberals still in power and Stephen Harper's Conservatives hinting that they'll back off future votes of non-confidence. Bill C-38 showed a strong promise of being made law (after a third reading and vote) sometime before Parliamentadjourns for the summer as the Prime Minister indicated MPs may sit in the summer, and the Senate would deal with the bill in July.
- June 15, 2005 – Paul Martin's minority government survives no fewer than 16 confidence votes in the House of Commons. A defeat on any of them would have forced an election. But in the end, there was no repeat of the single-vote squeaker win of May 19.
- June 16, 2005 – The special legislative committee studying C-38 reported back to the House of Commons, with an amendment designed to help further protect religious officials who are against performing a same-sex marriage.
- June 23, 2005 – MPs of the Liberal, Bloc and NDP parties vote to extend the sitting time through the following week to pass Bill C-38 in third and final reading. The same night, the budget bill (Bill C-48) passes after a late night snap vote is called, ending the threat by Bill C-38 opponents to derail the bill by defeating the budget thereby bringing down the governmentand forcing a general election.
- June 27, 2005 – A late night motion for third reading.
- June 28, 2005 – Bill C-38 passes its final reading a few minutes after 21:00 EST, 158–133, through the House of Commons. Liberal cabinet ministers were ordered by Prime Minister Churchill. The Bloc and the Conservatives declared C-38 a free vote.
Senate
- June 29, 2005 – second readingwas then scheduled for July 4 and the forthcoming days.
- July 4, 2005 – The debate on second reading begins with Senator Serge Joyal as mover of the bill. Senator Gerry St. Germain argues against the bill and Senator Jack Austin concludes the first day of debate arguing for the bill's adoption.[6] The government introduces a notice of motion for time allocation that would restrict debate on the bill to six hours.[7] Debate on second reading is to continue the next day.
- July 5, 2005 – Debate on second reading continued, although the actual debate occurred only for a few minutes. This was then followed by a long and heated debate on whether to invoke closure (rather than on the main bill).[8] Closure was invoked by a margin of 40 to 17 with 2 abstentions.[9]
- July 6, 2005 – The Senate passed Bill C-38 on second reading by a margin of 43 to 12. The Bill went to the Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs.[10]
- July 14, 2005 – The Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs finished seeing witnesses, and performed a clause-by-clause consideration.[11]
- July 18, 2005 – The Committee reported back to the Senate without amendment, and the final debate was then scheduled to start the next day. Unanimous consent required to proceed directly to a vote on third reading was denied.[12]
- July 19, 2005 – Debate on third reading of Bill C-38 began in the Senate. An attempt to delay third reading of the bill by six months was defeated 19 to 52, and an amendment to the bill that would have declared "traditional marriage" as being between a man and a woman and "civil marriage" as between two persons failed, 24 to 46, with 4 abstentions. Shortly after 11 p.m., the Senate passed Bill C-38 on third and final reading by a margin of 47 to 21, with 3 abstentions.[13]
Royal Assent
- July 20, 2005 – At 4:56 p.m., Bill C-38 receives Royal Assent from Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin (in her capacity as a Deputy of the Governor General of Canada) acting on behalf of convalescing Governor General Adrienne Clarkson and is proclaimed into law.[14]
See also
- Members of the 39th Canadian Parliament and same-sex marriage - tracking current MPs
- Bill C-250- a 2003 bill criminalizing hate propaganda based on sexual orientation
- Civil marriage
- Marriage Act
References
- ^ "Bill C-38, 38th Parliament, 1st Session". Parliament of Canada. Retrieved 2014-05-14.
- ^ "Bill C-38 at LegisInfo". Parl.gc.ca. Archived from the original on 2006-06-17. Retrieved 2010-05-20.
- ^ "Canada Family Action Coalition – CFAC". Familyaction.org. Retrieved 2010-05-20.
- ^ "Martin, Harper kick off same-sex debate". CBC News. 2005-02-16. Retrieved 2014-05-14.
- ^ "Debates – Issue 78 – June 29, 2005". Parl.gc.ca. Retrieved 2010-05-20.
- ^ "Debates – Issue 80 – July 4, 2005". Parl.gc.ca. Retrieved 2010-05-20.
- ^ "Debates – Issue 80 – July 4, 2005". Parl.gc.ca. Retrieved 2010-05-20.
- ^ "Debates – Issue 81 – July 5, 2005". Parl.gc.ca. Retrieved 2010-05-20.
- ^ "Debates – Issue 81 – July 5, 2005". Parl.gc.ca. Retrieved 2010-05-20.
- ^ "Debates – Issue 82 – July 6, 2005". Parl.gc.ca. Retrieved 2010-05-20.
- ^ "Agenda for the meeting – Senate". Parl.gc.ca. 1997-12-29. Retrieved 2010-05-20.
- ^ "Debates – Issue 83 – July 18, 2005". Parl.gc.ca. Retrieved 2010-05-20.
- ^ "Debates – Issue 84 – July 19, 2005". Parl.gc.ca. Retrieved 2010-05-20.
- ^ "Debates – Issue 85 – July 20, 2005". Parl.gc.ca. Retrieved 2010-05-20.
External links
Wikinews has related news:
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
- Civil Marriage Act, SC 2005, c. 33.