Mr. Speaker, I listened quite extensively to the member for Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont. I was surprised by his statement at the very end of his remarks, accusing the opposition of intellectual dishonesty in terms of our motion. If intellectual dishonesty rests anywhere, it rests with the government on this issue.
What this is all about on the government's part is ideology over substance, paying $30 million more for a census return from this borrow and spend government to get less accurate information. That does not make sense.
However, the member's argument, and he went to great length in his remarks, was that one reason the Conservatives were doing away with this was because of the criminal aspect for the long form and the mandatory nature of it.
There is a double standard on that side of the House. If that is really the substance of the government's argument and the principle of its argument, then why is it still a criminal offence for farmers if they do not fill out the agriculture census?
At 12:10 this afternoon, I took this off the Statistics Canada website. One question on the agriculture census was, “Are there penalties for not answering and returning the questionnaire?” The answer was:
Yes. Under the Statistics Act, agricultural operators are required to complete a Census of Agriculture form. Refusing to answer the questions on the census form could result in a fine of $500 or a jail term of three months, or both.
Most agricultural organizations support the agriculture census with the penalties in it because they know the value of the agriculture census to the agricultural community. However, my point is this. If the government is talking about principle, then why the principle in one area and not in the other, or is its argument just intellectual dishonesty?