Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Full Day's HansardDownload Full Day's Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Thursday, 22 November 1973
Page: 3737

Mr SINCLAIR (New England) suggested that in my comments during the second reading debate I was saying that there was no element providing for a variation in the home consumption price. Perhaps my wording might not have come through clearly to the Minister. What I intended to imply was that it was unfortunate that, at a time when world grain prices - particularly world wheat prices - were so high, no element of variation in world prices was involved in the way in which the home consumption price was assessed.

I acknowledge the changes that have been made between the present cash against costs formula and the earlier imputed cost formula, but the point I was attempting to illustrate was that, at a time when world prices are so high, the domestic consumer is given substantial protection under the provisions of the legislation as it is now applicable and under this extension. While there is an element of reason in this measure, largely because of the balance between the contributions of the wheat industry on occasions and of the taxpayers on other occasions, it is unfortunate that, at a time when world prices are so high, the wheat grower should be denied most opportunities of benefiting from that high price. Of course, that is one of the penalties he pays for a stabilisation scheme. The reference I made was intended to illustrate the difference between the world price and the domestic price, and the fact that under this legislation there was no basis by which the world wheat price could be written into the assessment of the home consumption price.

Suggest corrections