Last year, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Ontario's definition of spouse violated the Charter of Rights and Freedoms because it excluded same-sex partners. Eric Lowther, Reform's social affairs critic, said the same could happen to the definition of marriage. The same sort of questioning came from the Liberal ranks. I really can't understand why you didn't use this opportunity to clear up that legislative ambiguity. McLellan repeatedly said the move wasn't necessary because marriage is defined by common law, which is administered by the courts.
Marriage is clear.
It is clearly defined in the law of this country. The common law in this country is equally authoritative with legislation. The courts have said that over and over again. Therefore there's no need to try and make it any clearer, because I don't think they can make it any clearer. They have said it's the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.