The last paragraph in Ben’s paper, which questions the legality of MPCI, should cause the promoters of MPCI to at least ponder and then ponder again. Particularly Mr Tehan.
There is interest and support in high places of government for MPCI. Has MPCI been politicised to gain support among the electorate without the proponents explaining the cost? Certainly this graph is a few years old but the trend line is obvious, maybe if it has changed direction you will let me know? By that I mean whether there is sufficient above the line to afford MPCI.
You can read how deeply concerned Ben is about agriculture and particularly the drought situation in Queensland and NSW by going to:
Roger Crook
Roger,
The Senate Economics Legislative asked me a question on notice at the Inquiry on March 18th. The question was to compile a short note on multi peril crop insurance. It appears that the House Economics Committee led by Dan Tehan from Victorian Western Districts is pushing it. Also the policy panacea White paper will recommend it.
This attached note was subsequently submitted and accepted by the Senate Economics legislative Committee. It should have been incorporated in Hansard. I do not know if you can publish; but, at least you know it is being pushed at high levels.
cheers
Ben
I have checked and it is legal to publish, as it has been published by the Parliament of Australia.(Editor)