Mr. Speaker, my position on this has been clear, even before the nomination for candidate process. During last year's election my position continued to be consistently and concisely stated.
I believe in retaining the traditional definition of marriage. I also believe that constitutional guarantees of religious freedom must be protected. That is why, simply and basically, I will support those who wish to retain those traditional values.
My support for this comes from the past 27 years of elected office. As a ward alderman, as a councillor at large and as mayor I was witness to many hundreds of anniversaries celebrating the institution of marriage. It is impossible not to share those values.
In representing the wishes of my constituents who live in Thunder Bay--Rainy River, a riding that stretches from the Manitoba border in the west to the Minnesota border in the southeast, I am representing their concerns and feelings.
The recent amendments enhancing religious freedoms, I believe, would go a long way to conciliation in recognizing the issues presented by churches and spiritual groups.
Clause 3 states:
It is recognized that officials of religious groups are free to refuse to perform marriages that are not in accordance with their religious beliefs.
Clause 3.1 states:
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.
I feel that is good legislation.
Over the past many months my four offices in Fort Francis, Atikokan, Thunder Bay and Ottawa have received thousands of communications. Cases of fax paper have been used and boxes of letterhead paper and envelopes have been used to reply to the constituents of Thunder Bay--Rainy River.
I do not possess the resources to personally reply to the innumerable amount of communications from those who do not reside in my riding but over the past few months I have presented three petitions to the Clerk of the House of Commons reading into the record that two were against civil marriage and one was in favour, reflecting what I believe is the general trend of a two-third split in people's feelings in my riding and generally across the country.
My offices average 1,500 e-mail a week, the largest percentage of course coming from outside my riding. I have received thousands of letters from all over the country and have personally replied to everyone in my riding, whether they are for or against the bill.
I regret not having a chance to speak to this bill previously but when I was ready to speak prior to second reading my time was preempted by international events. The vast majority of people, of course, understand that. I appreciate the opportunity now to go on the record.
I have had numerous scheduled meetings and of course thousands of opinions offered as I encounter my constituents. The one thing that is certain is that there are few yet undecided on this issue.
With eight provinces and one territory having made their legal decisions, there does not seem to be any argument left in anybody's mind that could possibly change someone else's mind.
From a federal perspective, my constituents would like to see this matter decided openly, democratically, fairly and, within reason, promptly. They have heard the debates but, more important, they have had a chance to convey their expressions to me, their elected representative.
Not everyone will be pleased but in my riding we have numerous other issues, mostly economic, that require their turn at the podium.
On paper, the numbers I have received in hard copy, that is, paper, such as letters, petitions, faxes or email, are as follows: against, 2,425, totalling 96% against; and for, 90, or 4%.
In reality, telephone calls, meetings and personal expressions from face to face encounters would even the numbers, I believe, to something closer to the Defend Marriage Canada's national marriage referendum.
Regarding that referendum, as of today, June 27, 141,229 votes have been cast with 62% opposed to the bill. My personal feeling is that in Thunder Bay—Rainy River we are close to this 60-40 split. After all these tens of thousands of Canadians letting me know how they feel, I am ready to cast my vote in democratic representation.
Although my position has been deemed worthy of public recording and most of my constituents who follow media recording are aware of my position, for some who hold extreme points of view that may never be enough.
I will take this vote and the responsibility it carries very seriously. I cannot, however, carry it with any phobic or hateful reaction. I am for the traditional definition and I do so to represent my constituents. I am for the protection of religious freedoms and believe the bill, with its enhanced amendments, would do that.
This topic has divided our country. Whether the legislation passes or fails in the forthcoming vote, there will remain some serious rifts on this volatile subject. The outcome of the vote is not a foregone conclusion, as third readings cannot be predicted absolutely.
As legislators, it will be our role to be the peacemakers, to build the bridges and restore the values of tolerance and respect for the opinions of others. The passion of these debates confirms that civil marriage will continue to spark considerable discussion for many years to come. As a rights issue, there seems to be a considerable desire to reach an understanding.