Local MP Scott Reid Releases C-45 Riding Referendum ResultsNovember 27, 2017
This afternoon, after receiving almost 3,100 votes from his constituents responding to his C-45 riding referendum mail-out, local MP Scott Reid (Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston) announced that 55% of his responding constituents instructed him to vote YES on Bill C-45, the Cannabis Act, at third reading in the House of Commons. This vote is in accordance with Reid’s commitment to respect the decision of his constituents and vote according to the majority of ballots he received prior to the vote. Bill C-45 would amend Canada’s laws to legalize and regulate the recreational use of marijuana (also known as cannabis).
The C-45 riding referendum was Reid’s ninth such exercise since he was elected in 2000, and the eighth which determined his vote on a piece of parliamentary business. Reid has always voted according to the will of the majority of votes cast – even if it has meant voting against many of his caucus colleagues, or against his own preference. The results of each previous riding referendum can be found at: www.scottreid.ca/category/constituency-referenda/.
Reid re-stated his position from his June 8, 2017 vote: “This is the same manner in which I have dealt with statutes of a profoundly moral nature in the past. For example, Bill C-36, The Anti-Terrorism Act, in 2001, Bill C-38, The Civil Marriage Act (ie. same-sex marriage), in 2005, and Bill C-14, The Medical Assistance in Dying Act, in 2016.
“The people that I represent in the House of Commons have consciences of their own, which are just as good as those of the politicians; and they face none of the incentives to vote against their judgment or conscience that can face a politician. For this reason, it has always been my practice to defer to the judgment of the people who elected me, when voting on such crucial matters.”
This referendum’s first question was “Should Scott Reid, MP vote for Bill C-45, the Cannabis Act?” 3,087 votes were received, consisting of 1,707 (55.3%) Yes votes, and 1,347 (43.6%) No votes. Every ballot received before 3:00pm today, November 27, was counted, prior to the scheduled vote in the House of Commons later this evening.
This referendum’s second question was “Ontario’s Government plans to make it lawful to consume cannabis at age 19. Question #2: Is 19 the right age?” 2,954 votes were received, consisting of 79 (2.7%) votes for “No, younger (18)”, 863 (29.2%) votes for “Yes, 19 is good”, and 2,025 (68.6%) votes for “No, older (e.g. 21)”. Reid will pass the aggregate results of this question on to the local MPP so that his constituents’ views will be heard at Queen’s Park in Toronto.
Reid laid out the outlines of a marijuana legalization program of his own, which he thinks is superior to the one contemplated in Bill C-45. In particular, he recommended the following amendments:
- Bill C-45 proposes that the age of majority, for the purposes of cannabis consumption, be set at 18; Ontario’s government has proposed the age be set at 19, in line with Ontario’s alcohol and tobacco purchase age. An age limit of 21 would be a better way of preventing “pot tourism” —American teens coming across the border to engage in behaviour that their federal government regards as criminal. This would also line up with the Canadian Medical Association’s recommendation that the age be set at 21 because the brain is still developing. Under no circumstances should the age be set lower, for cannabis consumption, than it is for alcohol or tobacco.
- Allowing a system known as “Local Option”: local governments should have the ability, via their zoning laws, to determine where marijuana sales outlets will be permitted, or to ban them entirely. This is similar to the system that Ontario used when it ended alcohol prohibition eighty years ago. This seems preferable to the province’s odd proposal to set up an entire network of provincially-run marijuana dispensaries within a single year.
- The combined consumption of alcohol and cannabis is unsafe, and should not be encouraged. Therefore, it should be unlawful for cannabis to be sold at provincially-owned alcohol outlets such as Ontario’s LCBO outlets.
His hopes that these recommendations would be incorporated into the final version of the Liberal government’s bill were not fulfilled.
Reid will vote in favour of a proposed amendment by a Conservative colleague (Dave Van Kesteren, Chatham–Kent–Leamington) to pass the bill at third reading but refer it back to the Standing Committee on Health in order to amend the coming into force date to allow more time for provinces, municipalities, police and health services to prepare before the bill takes effect.
For more information, please contact:
Office of Scott Reid, M.P,
Ottawa: 613-947-2277 | Toll-free: 1-866-996-9925
When did Scott Reid announce he would hold a riding referendum on Bill C-45?
- Reid announced his intention to conduct a riding referendum on Bill C-45 when he voted in favour of the bill at second reading, before committee consideration, on June 8, 2017: http://scottreid.ca/local-mp-scott-reid-votes-in-favour-of-bill-c-45-the-cannabis-act/.
- Reid repeated his intention to conduct a riding referendum on Bill C-45 in his Annual Report mail-out to all constituents in September: http://scottreid.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Annual-Report-for-2017-web.pdf.
- Reid launched his C-45 riding referendum, and companion resource webpage www.ScottReid.ca/BillC-45 on October 20, 2017: http://scottreid.ca/scott-reid-announces-riding-referendum-on-marijuana-legalization-bill-c-45/.
What other constituency referenda has Scott Reid conducted in the past? The vote on Bill C-45 is the ninth constituency referendum that Scott Reid has launched since his election in 2000. The results of each previous riding referendum can be found at: www.scottreid.ca/category/constituency-referenda/.
The first referendum, in August 2001, asked constituents whether Scott should opt out of a proposed $21, 000 MP pay raise, or opt in and give the money to charity. 83% of respondents directed Scott Reid to opt in and give the raise to charity. Scott Reid has followed up by donating $21, 000 for CPR training and the purchase of defibrillators for local emergency services, each year since 2001.
The second referendum, in October 2001, asked constituents how Scott Reid should vote on Bill C-5, the Species at Risk Act. 65% of participants voted to support the bill, and he accordingly voted in favour of the bill at Third Reading.
The third referendum was conducted in November 2001, and asked voters whether or not Scott Reid should support Bill C-36, the Anti-Terrorism Act. 73% of respondents directed him to vote against the bill, which he did when the bill came to Third Reading in Parliament.
The fourth referendum took place in October 2002, asking constituents their opinion on the Electoral Boundary Commission’s decision to alter the federal constituency boundaries. 84% of respondents voted to maintain the boundaries of Lanark County within the riding, and 79% voted to include Smiths Falls in the same electoral district as Lanark County. Scott Reid presented these results to the Commission, requesting its decision reflect the stated views of his constituents. When the Commission ignored the request to keep Lanark County united, Scott Reid petitioned to overturn the decision. In 2015, this resulted in the reuniting of Lanark County within a single electoral district.
The fifth referendum took place in 2005, asking voters whether or not Scott Reid should support the Civil Marriage Act, which redefined marriage to include same-sex unions. 9,176 voters participated. 80% were opposed to the redefinition of marriage and 20% were in favour of the redefinition of marriage. Scott Reid, accordingly, voted against Bill C-38 at third reading.
The sixth referendum took place in 2012, asking voters whether or not Scott Reid should support Motion M-312, which called for the formation of a House of Commons committee “to review the declaration in Subsection 223(1) of the Criminal Code which states that a child becomes a human being only at the moment of complete birth”. This motion was argued by some to constitute a reopening of the debate over abortion in Canada. 65% of respondents voted for Scott Reid to oppose the motion, with 35% voting to support it. Scott Reid respected the decision of his constituents, and voted against Motion M-312.
The seventh referendum took place in the spring of 2016, asking voters whether Scott Reid should vote for or against Bill C-14, which provided for medically-assisted suicide for adults with grievous and irremediable medical conditions, in an advanced state of irreversible decline. 67% of respondents voted for Scott Reid to support the bill, with 32% voting to oppose it. Scott Reid respected the decision of his constituents, and voted yes to Bill C-14.
The eighth referendum took place in the fall of 2016, asking voters whether they wanted the Liberal government to call a national referendum before changing the federal voting system. 89% of respondents voted in favour of the government holding a national referendum before changing the voting system. In the Fall of 2016, Scott Reid convinced the majority of the House of Commons Special Committee on Electoral Reform to recommend a national referendum on changing the voting system. In February 2017, the government decided to give up on changing the voting system.
How does the Constituency Referendum on Bill C-45 work? Every household in Lanark-Frontenac-Kingston was sent a single flyer, each containing four ballots. Eligible voters were invited to answer the question: “Should Scott Reid, MP vote for Bill C-45, the Cannabis Act?” The flyer included an explanation of Bill C-45, along with prominent arguments for and against the bill, as well as information for advocacy websites that can be browsed for more information. The actual mailing of the flyer is conducted by Canada Post, and is handled as “unaddressed” mail – so that every household should receive a copy, rather than individual constituents. As correspondence to Members of Parliament can be sent postage-free, constituents who want to participate in the referendum do not have to affix a stamp to their reply.
How do you ensure the process will be impartial? Scott Reid has designed his ballot forms, for this referendum and for previous referenda, on the model of the impartial voter information booklets that have been sent to voters in state referenda in Washington State, California, and Switzerland.
Why are voters asked to include their name and address on each ballot? Respondents are asked to include their address and the names of each participating voter on their ballot, so that it could be confirmed that each vote originated from within the constituency and from an individual eligible to vote in elections (as per the Elections Canada list of electors). The contents of each individual ballot will be kept in strict confidence, the ballots will be kept in a secure location, and every ballot will be destroyed following the House of Commons vote.
What are the rules for the Constituency Referendum? The following rules were contained on the ballot form:
1) Each REGISTERED VOTER in the household may vote once on Ballot #1 and once on Ballot #2.
2) Voters may choose to vote on one ballot and not the other; these votes will still be counted.
3) Ballots will be reviewed against the current Elections Canada voter’s list. If more votes per ballot are cast than the number of voters residing at that address, all of the votes will be disregarded. (However, there is no requirement that all voters residing at an address participate, in order for the ballot to be counted).
4) To prevent multiple voting, please give your name(s) and address below. By law, your information cannot be divulged to anyone. For security, ballots will be destroyed following the vote in the House of Commons.
5) The results will be made public prior to the vote in the Commons, unless the government rushes the date of the vote.
How will you determine if votes are spoiled or ineligible? Some may be invalid due to voter ineligibility (no name(s) provided, out-of-riding address, no address). Others may be invalid because it is not possible to determine the voting intention of the voter(s). (For example, some voters have, in the past, failed to mark either a “Yes” or a “No”.)
Isn’t a constituency referendum an extra cost for the taxpayer? Every Member of Parliament is permitted to send four “householder” mailings to their constituency per year, as the costs are already provided for by parliamentary budgets. Most MPs use this allocation to send calendars or holiday greetings to their constituents. As a means of giving his constituents a greater say in issues facing Parliament, Scott Reid has chosen instead to use some of his householder allotments to ask voters how he should vote on specific issues.
Posted in: News