Since being offered a largely pointless and doomed-to-fail role as UN special envoy to Myanmar, the former Liberal Foreign Minister, Julie Bishop, has returned to the headlines.

Today’s special is a bizarre story in The Guardian titled, Tony Abbott didn’t want women in his senior ministry, former deputy Liberal leader Julie Bishop claims.

Far from a revelation or statement of fact, it’s merely Ms Bishop’s opinion.

An opinion offered without evidence.

‘I wasn’t appointed by Tony, I was there in my own right as the elected deputy leader, so they had no choice but to have me in Cabinet,’ said Ms Bishop.

Well, indeed… You should be there by merit, and not selection based upon gender.

If merit is prioritised, and that leads to imbalances between the roles held by certain genders, there is no problem to solve except to say to the gender lagging behind, ‘pick up your game’.

‘I suspect that had I not been deputy leader, I would not have been in Cabinet, so there would have been no women in Cabinet.’

‘Suspect’ being the crucial word. Former Prime Minister Tony Abbott has never made any comment or given any indication, either in print or otherwise, that he discriminated against women in the Liberal Party.

These observations about the gender diversity of Cabinet were made by Ms Bishop during a podcast in which she added that there were ‘other women who were perfectly capable of holding a Cabinet position’. Maybe, but being ‘perfectly capable’ does not mean that they were the best choice.

‘I knew that if I went out at that point as the only woman in Cabinet and said, “This is unacceptable, it’s 2013, get your act together,” then that would have caused a rift that would have been irreconcilable between me and the rest of the Cabinet.’

If Ms Bishop had made those comments, she would also have to take the next logical step and point out which of her Cabinet colleagues she thought were ‘least worthy’ of being there, naming those men ear-marked to be replaced by women. Then she would have to formulate an argument of merit for those women. Labor have fallen into this trap too. After all, the party of ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ selected an ‘old, white, straight, male’ as Prime Minister. It’s always ‘do as I say, not as I do’ when it comes to politicians.

‘I think there were ways that we could have all done more,’ continued Ms Bishop, ‘and maybe some of the issues that arose down the track could have been circumvented.’

Which is a strange take, given the biggest political issues surrounding women in Canberra during Morrison’s government arose under the watch of high-ranking female ministers.

In a move that will turn most conservative women off Ms Bishop and make them thankful that she was unsuccessful in the political coup to snatch the leadership during the Turnbull era, Ms Bishop went further to argue in favour of gender quotas.

In the era of ‘enlightened thinking’, this is an insult to every woman in the workforce.

‘I wish the Liberal Party had introduced at least targets that they were held accountable for. I mean, you can have a target, but if you’re not held accountable for it, it means nothing. So I guess if you’re held accountable, it’s like a quota.’

Such comments make Ms Bishop unsuitable for any high-profile role within a serious conservative party that believes in the principle of individual merit. Imagine the lecture Thatcher would have given her!

Let us at least laugh at the idiocy of her follow-up comment.

In an attempt to point out the existence of male privilege in Parliament, Ms Bishop said:

‘Could you imagine a woman saying some of the things that Barnaby [Joyce] says? No, you can’t.’

Setting aside the existence of Lidia Thorpe, allow me to offer this counter-argument.

‘Could you imagine a man like Barnaby Joyce donating his shoes to the Museum of Australian Democracy, like Ms Bishop did? No, you can’t.’

Parading your high heels as a symbol of ‘female empowerment’ instead of your record in Parliament is what we call ‘female privilege’.

And it’s embarrassing.

Get 10 issues for just $10

Subscribe to The Spectator Australia today for the next 10 magazine issues, plus full online access, for just $10.

SUBSCRIBE 10 issues for $10 REGISTER 3 articles a month

Already a subscriber? Log in