February 8, 1934 (17th Parliament, 5th Session)


Arthur-Lucien Beaubien

Liberal Progressive

Mr. A. L. BEAUBIEN (Provencher):

Mr. Speaker, in rising to make a few observations on the address in reply to the speech from the throne I intend to follow my usual custom and be brief in anything I have to say. There are certain points which concern the people I represent and which I should like to place before the house and government, and I intend to take this opportunity to do so.
Before proceeding however may I congratulate the mover and seconder of the address upon the manner in which they acquitted themselves in the task they had to perform. I had a similar experience some few years ago, and I realize that either moving or seconding the address in reply is no small task. However when I had the honour of doing so I was seconding an address presented by a government which was doing something for the people, a government which had surpluses instead of deficits, a government which legislated for the masses of the people rather than for the privileged few, a government which was reducing the. costs of production in the primary industries and giving them every chance to make both ends meet and a government which was reducing the public

debt. Therefore, with the particularly hard task these gentlemen had to perform, I believe they acquitted themselves very well.
On Tuesday of this week the hon. member for Souris (Mr. Willis) appeared to be very anxious to find out my political status. He is reported as having said the following:
How could we get the point of view of the hon. member for Provencher (Mr. Heaubien)'! He sits with the Liberals, but we find that he calls himself a National-Progressive. Just what is a National-Progressive? I must confess it is difficult to understand even a rational Progressive. but a National-Progressive is quite beyond the bounds of human thought.
Well, if the hon. member for Souris is so anxious to find out what the word "national" means let him refer back to the National Liberal-Conservative party of 1921, and he will get the definition. May I also tell the hon. member that I am not concerned as to whether or not he knows my political status, but I am concerned with the rights of the electors I represent in this house. For the information of the hon. member for Souris may I state that in 1921 I was elected as a National-Progressive; again in 192.5 I was elected as a National-Progressive and in 1926 the Liberals and Progressives in my constituency decided to unite their forces, and after uniting chose me as their candidate. What happened? I was the only man in Canada elected by acclamation. What happened to the Conservative candidate? He got stuck in the mud which they had been slinging all through the campaign. Again in 1930, with the Liberal and Progressive forces in fusion, I was elected by the biggest majority that was ever given to any candidate in the riding. I had three opponents, and I am sure that the Minister of Finance, who is always looking for money, was very glad to get that S600 which I brought into the treasury for him. That is my political record. The electors know where I stand, and they have sent me here for the last twelve years. I believe, Mr. Speaker, that they are just as intelligent to-day as they have been through all those years.
Now a word as to political parties. When the Prime Minister made his opening campaign speech in Winnipeg on June 9, 1930, he promised everything under the sun. He was going to blast his way into the markets of the world, and find work for every man and woman who wanted it: in short, he promised everything under the sun. The people believed him to a large extent. He was a big man, and at that time they thought he might be a superman. But what have been the results? The biggest failure that has ever overtaken any government has taken place in this country in the last four years.

The Address-Mr. Beaubien
We have now in this house another political party, calling themselves the 'C.C.F. I shall not pronounce that like my hon. friend from Melville (Mr. Motherwell) did. As he pronounced it, using an "h," it sounded like C.C.heifers. I do not think that is right. What is this new party doing? They are promising everything under the sun to-day, so much so that after their convention in Regina I went to my spiritual adviser and said, "Scratch me off your roll." He asked, "Why?"
I showed him the C.C.F. platform. I said, "They are going to provide heaven on earth for me and everyone else so why should I seek it elsewhere?" They are promising to socialize the natural resources of this country and to leave unsocialized our greatest natural resource, which is the land. They are promising to uphold and follow the democratic system under which we live, and yet they know that if they are ever going to put their program into effect it cannot be done except under a system of dictatorship.

Full View