Mr. MANION:

There is no doubt that for some years both the railways have been looking into the question of cooperation at various points. One of the first recommendations made by this government, both by the Prime Minister and myself, to Sir Henry Thornton and Mr. Beatty, when we came into power, had reference to the greater need of cooperation than had existed in the past. But even prior to that the two railways undoubtedly had been canvassing the possibility of cooperation at certain points. I do not believe that either railway has any definite figure as to the number of men that would probably be laid off as a result of cooperation in different parts of the country. It all depends on the extent to which the cooperation is carried. In the case of cooperation affecting a few passenger trains it might mean very few men; but in extensive cooperation a great many men might be involved. In the speech delivered by Mr. Beatty, from which my hon. friend has quoted, Mr. Beatty spoke of unification-that was the word my hon. friend quoted, I believe. I distinctly remember reading about a statement on the part of Mr. Beatty regarding a possible saving of

S75,000,000, but although I should not care to oppose my views to Mr. Beatty's on the subject, I am bound to say that I have grave doubts that such a saving could be effected. As to my hon. friend's request for definite information, I do not think that either of the railways can say precisely what number of

C.N.R.-C.P.R. Bill

men may be laid off. I have seen statements attributed to Mr. Beatty and Mr. Hungerford, certainly to Mr. Beatty, that in the course of natural decrease year by year in the number of the employees there need not be very much interference at all with the number of those who work on the railways. Some high officials of both the Canadian Pacific and the Canadian National Railways have made that statement to myself. At any rate, while I am not disputing my hon. friend's word, I should like him to quote what Mr. Beatty said with regard to forty or fifty thousand men being affected.

Mr. HEAPS:

He mentioned a percentage, seventy-five per cent.

Mr. MANION:

Yes, and as my hon. friend says, that would work out at forty or fifty thousand. If I remember rightly Mr. Mosher did make a statement before the Senate committee to the effect that it would mean the laying off of some forty thousand men, but I do not agree with him; I do not think that by any method of cooperation that is possible, even by amalgamation, any such number of men would be laid off under any circumstances, even under the present depressed conditions in the country.

Mr. HEAPS:

What the minister has just

said shows the difficulties that will be encountered throughout the passage of this bill if we have not the experts of the railways to inform us. The fact that Mr. Beatty could make a statement along the line be did would indicate that he must have had certain information on which to 'base his statement with regard to the saving of $75,000,000; if he had not some basis for that statement he would not have made it at all. No doubt these figures were given him by experts in his own company and then submitted in the course of a public speech. I would ask the Minister of Railways to reflect for a moment on one of the statements he has made to the committee. He said that in the natural course of events, taking into account those men who leave the railway service each year -and those who die off, there need not be much unemployment on the two railway systems. On a moment's reflection, I do not think the minister would have made that statement. Does he not realize that each year there is growing up a new generation looking for work?

Mr. MANION:

Not a new generation of

railway men.

Mr. HEAPS:

It makes no difference. The

new generation must be employed somewhere, 53719-241 i

and if the possibilities of employment on the railways are being gradually eliminated it means that fewer and fewer meu among the rising generation will have any chance of entering the service. Here we have a government who a few years ago pledged themselves to end unemployment in this country; yet 'the very basis of this bill is to throw twenty thousand persons out of work. That [DOT]is something that must be considered. In my own constituency there are thousands of railway men whom I shall have to face when I go back and give some information as to what their prospects are likely to be in the *immediate future. Am I going to go back and tell them that when this matter was being discussed on the floor of the house the minister was unable to give any information?

Mr. MANION:

The hon. gentleman is disputing a statement which 'he is under the impression that I made. I did not give it as coming from myself; I said that I had read somewhere that Mr. Beatty had made the statement, and I added that other railway men had spoken to 'the same effect, that there need be no great interference with the railway employees even by amalgamation. The hon. gentleman was very much shocked. As a -matter of fact, I was quoting Mr. Beatty from memory. However, perhaps it might be well for me to read -the exact words used by Mr. Beatty in a speech -he gave in Winnipeg before the Canadian Club. It was the second address delivered' by the chairman of the Canadian Pacific Railway, and it was made on February 8:

Railway labour has been disturbed naturally by proposed changes in administration. The necessary adjustments cannot be made without some disturbances of staff. But, wisely handled, these need cause no widespread discomfort or dislocation. The normal turnover of labour will absorb the majority of those displaced as the adjustments are made. The temporary inconvenience involved will not be greater than that resulting from our present situation, and the change will lead to a permanent cure for the worst evils. There is not the slightest reason to fear that a consolidated system, operated by men who have dealt fairly with employees in the past and who know the priceless advantages of esiprit de corps, would show lack of feeling in working out the problem of reorganization. I believe that the advent of such a system would immeasureably improve the position of railway labour in Canada.

Mr. HEAPS:

The speech I referred to was the one Mr. Beatty delivered in Toronto, not in Winnipeg.

Mr. MANION:

This is subsequent to the Toronto speech.

C.N.R.-C.P.R. Bill

Mr. HEAPS:

It was the Toronto speech

that I was referring to. I quoted from it, where he said something about seventy-five per cent of the present labour. I have the exact words somewhere.

Mr. MANION:

If that is the case, Mr. Beatty has answered Mr. Beatty.

Mr. HEAPS:

I will not try to defend

Mr. Beatty, but perhaps the minister can answer a simpler question: What is the

result of the present amalgamation of services, or cooperation, between Montreal and Chicago and between Montreal and Toronto?

Mr. MANION:

The cooperation has only

begun and I do not think it is possible to give absolute figures at the present time. The judgment of the railway commission, as I indicated to the hon. member for South Perth this afternoon, was handed down only on March 21 and has been in effect since April 1. I quite admit that there may have been some men laid off as a result of the pooling of services, because that is natural; they have cut two fast trains to one fast train, and it does not require so many men to handle one.

Mr. HEAPS:

Surely the minister has in

his possession some information as to the number of men affected by the amalgamation of services between those points. I am told that in Toronto sixty-one employees of the Canadian National were laid off. Surely the same -thing would apply to other terminals.

Mr. MANION:

I hope my hon. friend does not think that I carry in my head the figures concerning every change made in the railways from day to day, from week to week and from year to year. I can get that information for my hon. friend but I cannot give it offhand right at this moment. I do not think he is fair in asking for such information out of the blue sky.

Mr. HEAPS:

The unfairness of the whole proceeding is that we have to proceed with this very important bill without having the experts of the railways before us in order to furnish information. I do not expect that the minister carries all this information around in his head. I know he is next to an encyclopaedia but I do not expect him to be a complete encyclopaedia. Perhaps he will obtain the information as to what the amalgamation of the services between Montreal and Toronto means in the number of men affected, as well as the estimated savings to the railways.

Mr. MANION:

This bill will probably

take some time and I will obtain the information in the meanwhile.

Mr. KENNEDY (Peace River):

I think

the committee should1 have the number of men laid off since 1929, divided into those laid off due to the slump in railway business and those laid off due to amalgamation of services.

Mr. MANION:

If possible, I will have

that information later in the day.

Mr. MITCHELL:

We should also have

the number of men laid off through the increase in the size of locomotives and length of trains. That would give a proper picture.