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


Senator NEEDHAM (Western Australia) . - My attitude is quite consistent. I know what I am doing. In my second-reading speech I directed attention to the possibility of the constitutionality of the bill being challenged. I said I was against the payment of pensions to any justice of the High Court of Australia.


Senator Sir Henry Barwell - But the honorable senator was beaten on that issue.


Senator NEEDHAM - Does Senator Barwell say that when he is beaten on a particular issue at the second-reading stage of a bill, he will not carry his convictions into the committee stage ?


Senator Sir Henry Barwell - I should try to improve the bill in committee.


Senator NEEDHAM - If I voted for Senator McLachlan's request my action would be tantamount to acquiescence in the principle of pensions for justices of the High Court.


Senator McLachlan - In other words, the honorable senator's action might be used against him?


Senator NEEDHAM - I am not concerned about that. I am opposed to the payment of pensions to justices of the High Court. This proposal to retire justices when they reach the age of 70 years is an attempt to evade the Constitution. If I voted for Senator McLachlan's request I should be voting for pensions for the justices of the High Court. I do not intend to do that.







Suggest corrections