A good subject to talk about Shennal. The power judges possess and the fact they cannot be held responsible for their actions should lead to more scrutiny as to their appointments and how they can be removed.

However all you seem to be implying is that more parliamentary scrutiny should go into appointments. Surely we can do better than that.
How about abiding by the separation of powers concept and have them at arms' length from the other branches of government. Ie appointed by the public in elections at same time as parliamentary elections.
And then, as done in Japan and California as well as many other US states, also being able to be removed by the public.

By the way, Garfield Barwick was NOT the chief justice when McTiernan was appointed, but when he retired. You may have meant justice Owen Dixon who gave the cool reception, although he was not chief justice in 1930.