Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Wednesday, 21 July 1926


Senator PEARCE (Western AustraliaVicePresident of the Executive Council) . - When these provisions which Senator McLachlan now desires to delete were before another place the Govern ment stated that the amendment would be regarded as an open question. That is the position now, but members of the Government in this Chamber intend to support Senator McLachlan's request. I regret that we shall not have the support of the Leader of the Opposition. In his second-reading speech this afternoon, he directed attention to this objectionable feature of the bill, and whilst listening to his remarks just now, I could not help thinking how oft the promise of the bud has perished in the flower. I trust however, that the honorable senator will reconsider his decision and vote for Senator McLachlan's request.

Senator Sir HENRYBARWELL (South Australia) [5.37].- I followed Senator Needham in the second-reading debate, and remarked that after his speech we might hope for his support for a request which I indicated and which my friend Senator McLachlan also had in mind and has now moved. Senator Needham really anticipated the arguments which I had intended to use. As a matter of fact, he made out a stronger case than I had intended to put before the Senate against the provisions. Now he tells us that since he is opposed to the payment of pensions to justices of the High Court he would be inconsistent if he voted for Senator McLachlan's request. May I put it to the honorable senator that since the Senate was against him on the second reading, and has decided on pensions for justices of the High Court, he will be inconsistent if he does not vote for Senator McLachlan's request, which seeks to eliminate those objectionable provisions to which he directed attention on the second reading. It is only a few minutes since he declared his hostility to the provisions referred to. Nevertheless, he proposes now to vote against Senator McLachlan's request, the purpose of which is to remove those objectionable provisions.


Senator Grant - His attitude is quite logical.


Senator Sir HENRY BARWELL - If it represents the attitude of the Labour party then I shall have nothing further to say on the matter.







Suggest corrections