When the Attorney announced my appointment last December it was noted in the press that it meant the appointment of the oldest appointee ever to this Court. Vaingloriously in the euphoria of the moment I took that to be a compliment. Later, however, I was made to appreciate the reality of the situation. As one of my erstwhile and perhaps more acerbic Victorian colleagues piquantly remarked: “What your age really means is that you’ve taken far longer than any other Judge in the history of the Court just to get appointed and whatever else that might suggest it hardly implies anything very desirable about the rate of performance in the future”.
Logically, I am compelled to acknowledge the force of that observation and I confess that there is not a great deal which can be said against it. Try as I might to propound an adequate riposte, it continues to elude me. May I, however, offer you two thoughts by way of mitigation? First, since we are in Canberra where these things are better understood than they tend to be down south, I draw inspiration from Josh Mann-Rea’s example. Secondly, to invoke one of the Pythons’ more illustrious injunctions, “always look on the bright side”. The selectors may have backed a wild card, as the press put it, but, if one looks at the matter objectively, the selectors have also capped the risk. Given the constitutionally entrenched statutory age of senility of 70 years, and that I am now three score years and four, any damage I might do in the time which remains available is bound to be relatively limited.