To the growing frustration of Ontario's noisy protection lobby, Premier David Peterson appears set to continue the delicate blend of tough talk and no action he has pursued to date on free trade.

Since the deal was signed, Peterson has said repeatedly he finds its provisions distasteful. With the premier overseas last week, Industry Trade & Technology Minister Monte Kwinter took the rhetorical baton as he began chairing a series of public hearings on free trade.

The traveling hearings, before a six-member Cabinet committee, appear to have little purpose other than to allow interest groups the chance to blow off some steam. The government, Kwinter said at the outset, has made up its mind.

The provincial government's chief concern is with the agreement's dispute settlement rules, which it says do not guarantee Canadian exporters access to the U.S.

Yet for all this, Peterson has said he will not actively try to stop the deal. He will participate in the elimination of discriminatory markups imposed on consumers of U.S. wines, the only part of the agreement requiring provincial action.

REBUFFED SUGGESTIONS

He has not pressed for a federal election on the issue, and has rebuffed suggestions that he hold up other federal-provincial business in protest. It is questionable whether he will even bring in a resolution condemning the deal when the provincial House resumes sitting Nov. 3.

The political calculations entering into this stance - or nonstance - are decidedly complex. For one thing, within his own province, Peterson has to cover his left flank. Ontario is one of only three provinces where free-traders are in a minority.

Ringing Liberal indictments of the trade deal helped prevent the NDP from capturing protectionist votes.

Anything beyond rhetoric would antagonize other parts of the country, where support for free trade is strong. It is difficult to imagine a premier from fat-cat Ontario turning voters in such free trade hotbeds as Western Canada and Quebec against the deal.

Nor would it likely help any future federal ambitions to be known as the Man Who Killed Free Trade.

PHANTOM COLUMN

Even at home, Peterson risks marching at the head of a phantom column in demanding protection for Ontario industry, given that Ontario industry overwhelmingly supports the free trade deal. ''We favor it strongly,'' says Peter Brophey, vice-president of the Ontario Chamber of Commerce, to the tune of 70% of its 60,000 members. ''You can always say we could have made a better deal, but we feel it's about as good an agreement as we could really have hoped for.''

Most economists concur. If anything, they say, Ontario stands to gain the most of any province from free trade. About 90% of Ontario's international trade is with the U.S., and the province accounts for half of all Canada-U.S. trade.

Richard Harris of Queen's University, whose econometric models of free trade are internationally renowned, predicts output, investment and employment should expand in almost every sector of the province's economy.

Furthermore, Peterson would have difficulty working up too much of a lather, given that the free trade deal meets almost every one of the premier's conditions for supporting it.

Most vitally for Peterson's political position, the deal gives the Big Three Detroit automakers extra protection against competition from Japanese and Korean autos, while retaining the symbolic Canadian production safeguards.

Canadian auto parts makers, after an initial outcry against the deal, have lately lapsed into silence - the more so last week after U.S. auto parts makers attacked free trade, saying it favored their Canadian competitors.

As some see it, Peterson might actually be a closet free trader. In this scenario, Peterson is simply playing bad cop-good cop with Mulroney for U.S. consumption. Regular provincial attacks on free trade may help settle the nerves of protectionist congressmen.

All of which has Canadian free trade opponents in Ontario frustrated and suspicious.