A bill eliminating debate in the Senate for senior politician pay rises passed in the House of Assembly last night, in only ten minutes.

Last night Premier Ewart Brown said the decision to bypass the Senate when debating politicians' salaries was in keeping with the Bermuda Constitution 1968 as it was a money bill.

Questions about the correct avenue for deciding politicians' salaries arose only two years ago, when the then Premier Alex Scott proposed a hike of full-time and part-time politicians salaries to $150,000 and $100,000 respectively.

However, a letter from the then Attorney General Larry Mussenden to Senate President Alf Oughton on the eve of a debate quashed the discussion.

When the upper house reconvened, Sen. Oughton decided that members in the upper house could not vote on a bill giving wage hikes to politicians.

He ruled that sections of the 1975 act, requiring a resolution to be passed by the Upper House, was "inconsistent" with the Constitution, however, there was nothing to stop them debating it.

Last night the Opposition Leader Kim Swan said the United Bermuda Party (UBP) would have no objections to the 2008 bill, but hoped to highlight the avenues that could be taken.

He said: "I am somewhat familiar with this amendment with my time spent in another place. We certainly want to encourage that everyone has an opportunity made to make sure the senate has its say.

"We are not here to provide any stumbling blocks but merely to paint what the role played in another place could do."

The bill read by the Premier last night amends the 1975 Act, which added the Senate as one last hurdle for any pay rises given to politicians.

By amending the 1975 Act, the current bill reads: "deleting the requirement for recommendations of the Ministers and Members of the Legislature Salaries and Review Board to be made to the Senate;

"And deleting the requirement for a resolution fixing salaries of Ministers and Members to be passed by the Senate."

Trevor Moniz, speaking on behalf of John Barritt, the shadow Whip and Legislative Reform Minister, followed Mr. Swan saying he was concerned the legal opinion had not been tabled at the same time.

He said: "I have not had the pleasure of seeing the opinion by the Attorney General and we do not see it to be a breach of the constitution for the senate to view the member's bill.

"We don't accept that the measure is of legal necessity. We would appreciate it if the honourable member will, as tabling the bill could table the opinion."