Mr. Boudria:

Mr. Speaker, I would simply ask you for some guidance. Since there are only five minutes left, and in the same spirit of co-operation that we demonstrated approximately half an hour ago, I wonder if you could call it one o'clock. At the resumption of the House this afternoon, I would be able to make my remarks in full instead of their being split up.

Mr. Don Boudria (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell):

Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Supply and Services, I will direct my question to the Right Hon. Prime Minister.

Answering my question last Wednesday, the Minister said that Statistics Canada will be in a position to gather the data required for the establishment of an affirmative action program, without the 1986 census. Considering that an internal Statistics Canada report, which I have here, indicates that the census is the only source of detailed information on professions in the labour force, how can the Prime Minister explain this obvious contradiction?

Mr. Boudria:

That is not true.

Mr. Boudria:

Mr. Speaker, I have a brief comment to make and a question which I would like to ask of this Member and the Government generally. I have heard Members speak on various agricultural issues today. There was only a very brief mention made by the Government about the wine industry. I noticed that the Minister and another Member gave themselves considerable praise for so-called rescuing the wine industry for this year by buying surplus grapes.

There is a much larger concern there for Canadian consumers. That is the fact that we must make Canadian wines more appealing to the Canadian consumer. I am thinking especially of practices which are in existence now in the Province of Ontario which clearly discourage consumers from buying Canadian wines. I believe that in the Province of Ontario and other provinces Canadian wines should be made more readily available than are imported wines. I am thinking, for example, of wines being available in grocery stores.

I recognize, Mr. Speaker, that this relates to the provincial authorities. I had the privilege of serving as a member of the Legislature in the Province of Ontario for a number of years. I introduced a private Members' Bill for the sale of wine in grocery stores. That was continuously refused by the Conservative government of the Province of Ontario.

Have initiatives such as this been entertained in the dialogue which the new Government is supposed to be having with its Conservative provincial counterparts? In view of the fact that the love affair between the provincial government and the federal Government is still on, I think it would be incumbent upon them to have this bedside chat about Canadian wines being available in grocery stores. Also, I think we should have a clear policy to serve only Canadian wines on-board Air Canada. Certainly if we want to demonstrate that we have a certain pride in this agricultural product in our country, we should do it with this institution. Has the Government entertained that idea as well?

Perhaps we could hear comments from the Member about that very important sector of agriculture. It is very important in certain provinces, especially in Ontario and British Columbia.

Mr. Boudria:

Mr. Speaker, I found the comments of the last Member rather interesting. On one hand, he is in favour of

Supply

de-regulation. On the other hand, he extols the virtues of supply management. He wants a red meat stabilization program, but he says the federal government should not impose anything on the provinces. He says the farmer should not go out of business, yet he says that red meat producers should not exist in my riding, only in his riding. I find that difficult to accept.

I also find it difficult to accept the Member's statement that the previous Government did not devote the required attention to agriculture. In the announcements of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Wilson) and the President of the Treasury Board (Mr. de Cotret), dairy programs are being cut by $6.2 million, departmental operations are being cut by $9.4 million, and Canagrex is being cut by $6.6 million. That would have been a very useful tool for the marketing of our agricultural products. The Government is deferring $4.9 million in the testing laboratory and research facility to be built in Trois-Rivieres, Quebec, and Victoriaville. All this is from a government which pretends it is going to pay more attention to agriculture. How can it direct more attention to agriculture when it does not want to invest the funds required?

In the same document, we see that $32.3 million will be cut in agricultural services. The document states that fees are currently charged for services such as food inspection, agricultural input quality assurance and so forth and that the level of these will be increased. I find it very difficult to accept that this Government would make cuts in agriculture while at the same time saying that it is interested in agriculture. Where I come from, you put your money where your mouth is.