'I'm dead against them': Former Liberal titan Bronwyn Bishop expresses strong opposition to gender quotas amid party division
The topic of gender quotas made centre stage this week within the Liberal Party, after Ms Ley's address to the National Press Club on Wednesday where she said she was "agnostic" towards tackling the matter of trying to increase female representation in the party.
"If some state divisions choose to implement quotas, that is fine. If others don't, that is also fine," she said.
"What is not fine is not having enough women. As the first woman leader of our federal party, let me send the clearest possible message: We need to do better, recruit better, retain better, and support better."
One Nation leader Pauline Hanson and former speaker of the house Bronwyn Bishop joined Rowan Dean for Sky News Australia's program The World According to Rowan Dean. The latest episode is available to watch now, and new episodes are out every Friday, for SkyNews.com.au subscribers.
Shadow Defence Minister Angus Taylor, who competed against Ms Ley for leadership of the party following Peter Dutton's defeat in the federal election, asserted he was "not a supporter of gender quotas" in a suggestion there was some division between the two senior Liberal figures.
During a panel on The World According to Rowan Dean, former speaker of the house Ms Bishop sided with Mr Taylor's view.
"I'm dead against them, always have been, will remain so. And as the person who's been the first to do things, particularly from New South Wales, whether it's the (NSW Liberals state) president, senator, member of the House, minister or speaker of the House, I think I'm entitled to have a view," she said.
"But if we come back to Sussan Ley's position, she's acquiesced if a state wants to do it. But the bottom line is this. The left wing of the party wants to pick who the women are so they can own them. They will have their pre-selection, and they'll select the one who they can own and put them in to have their policies in place."
Fellow panellist Pauline Hanson was even harsher, as she declared she would never introduce gender quotas to One Nation.
"They're trying to piece the minority out there and push for this gender equality rubbish that's going on all the time. I don't have gender quotas in my party, and I will not have it. It's the best person that applies for the position to be a candidate, and then I judge them also, especially the Senate positions, and see if their quality and what they can bring to the parliament and if they are actually up to the job," she said.
"Sussan Ley is heading down this part of actual gender quotas or more women in parliament. I encourage women, if you feel it's a profession for you, go for it, try it and have a go. But don't think that you should get there purely because you're a female."
Senator Hanson also questioned Ms Ley's leadership credentials, and whether she was even in the right political party as she accused her of lacking conservative views.
"She should be for the Teals. She is not a conservative. Her way of thinking, her policies ... I'd like to see [her] enthusiasm [on what] to do with immigration, cost of living, this net zero needs to be thrown out," she said.
"The Libs are not ... representing the conservative side of politics. They've got no opposition, no pushback to the government. They're too aligned with them. And they've lost this election."
Ms Bishop pushed back on Senator Hanson's response, arguing Ms Ley should be given a fair chance to lead, and defended her place in the Liberal Party, describing it as an "insult" to suggest she would be better suited to the Teals.
"My first thing to say is give her a go. She's got there and she should be given a go," she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
17 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Trump applauds Putin's arrival as Kremlin lands in Alaska
Former Liberal MP Jason Falinski reacts to US President Donald Trump applauding Russian President Vladimir Putin's arrival in Anchorage, Alaska. 'Even in his first term, there has been this very strange relationship between Trump and Putin,' Mr Falinski said. 'I think that just continues here.'
ABC News
20 hours ago
- ABC News
Jim Chalmers's economic reform roundtable is a chance to do more than tinker
There are ways to solicit political ideas and there are ways to solicit political ideas. At one end of the spectrum you can ask complete strangers. It's a cheap way of doing it and, as with anything cheap, you usually end up paying twice. Joe Hockey in 2009 was offered the Liberal leadership "on a plate" as the partyroom moved to topple Malcolm Turnbull. Supporters reportedly included Tony Abbott and Nick Minchin on the condition that Hockey dump his support for Kevin Rudd's emissions trading scheme known as the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. As the tensions built, Hockey mulled what to do, setting a new standard for political consultation by going on what was then Twitter, still in its infancy. "Hey team re The ETS," Hockey wrote. "Give me your views please on the policy and political debate. I really want your feedback." A barrage of conflicting advice followed, and Julia Gillard, who was acting prime minister that morning, scoffed that "you can't govern the nation by tweet". "People don't expect their politicians to just text out a message — imagine, you know, 'what do you think the defence budget should be?'" she said. There's been much discussion this week about the wisdom or otherwise of seeking ideas. Does a smart politician really need to ask the room? Or are you better off only asking things you already have an answer for. And is it realistic to expect such a process to deliver immediate results? Next week's "economic roundtable" is the latest attempt to harvest ideas and build momentum for political change. It's both a "softening up" exercise and a way to ease pressure from those who want Labor to be more ambitious in its second term. What should the prime minister spend his political capital on? On the roundtable, it's been easy to be critical, and certainly there are internal grumblings about its likely efficacy, and whether it has merely set a bunch of random hares running. When first announced in June, Treasurer Jim Chalmers urged the press gallery to shun the normal "rule in; rule out" policy game. Everything was to be on the proverbial table. What followed was an avalanche of suggestions, many from the usual self-serving voices. As the roundtable nears, the list of ideas has grown longer, more ambitious and often contradictory. The Australian Council of Trade Unions wants a four-day work week and regulation of artificial intelligence; the Business Council of Australia reckons aggressive deregulation is needed to cut $110 billion in annual "red tape" costs across the economy. In response, the government has moved to curb expectations for what the three-day cabinet-room meeting can achieve. The prime minister has insisted there will be no tax changes until after the next election, and that the government's priority is delivering what it took to voters in May. The result is that next week's meeting is likely to produce relatively modest outcomes. These include moves to make it easier to approve and build homes and perhaps some kind of road user charging trial. But the hope, including among participants and the government, is that it sets off a longer-run process. Because much as a road-user policy or a freeze on building regulations may be useful, they're ultimately small beer. As the Reserve Bank of Australia revealed this week, the nation's living standards are under pressure. The bank's economists used to think the sluggish productivity numbers of recent years were temporary. No longer. The rot has set in. Which means tinkering around the edges may have a much bigger long-term opportunity cost than many anticipate. If productivity growth slows to 0.7 per cent over coming years — below Treasury's already-weak 1.2 per cent expectation — the annual budget balance could be about $40 billion worse off in 2034-35 dollars, according to economist Chris Richardson. Former Treasury boss Ken Henry calculates that the nation's inability to improve productivity growth has cost workers about $500,000 in lost pay rises over the past quarter century. Economists warn that without an improvement, governments of all persuasion will struggle to meet the soaring cost of commitments to maintain a high-class NDIS, a universal near-fee-free childcare system, and perhaps "Medicare for dental", if the Greens and Labor backbench have their way. Put across that the ongoing pressure from the US on allies including Australia to raise military spending. By one estimate, the White House wants the government to roughly double defence spending to almost $100 billion a year "as soon as possible". Blessedly, the treasurer has made it clear the roundtable's purpose is not to produce some G20-style communique. He has urged the two-dozen or so daily participants able to fit into the cabinet room to come up with solutions rather than yet another analysis of the underlying problems. Compromise and grand bargain-making between big groups is the ultimate goal. It's all worthy stuff, of course, but so far the omens have not been great. The worst has been the immediate shooting down of a proposal this month by the Productivity Commission for a cashflow tax. A world-first, it is designed to sharpen incentives for medium-sized companies to invest by allowing firms to immediately reduce their taxable income by the value of their investments. Andrew Fraser — one of Chalmers's oldest friends — has applauded the commission's "courage and imagination", saying the idea should remain on the table. "The coalition of the unwilling that quickly formed against the idea held up a mirror to the malaise in our public discourse," Fraser, who will attend next week's event, wrote in The Australian. "Too much of the debate to date has been about the form and process of the roundtable, not the substantive issues. "We need an abundance of ideas here, not the dead weight of sectional conditionality." Speaking to this column on Friday, Fraser — a former Queensland Labor Treasurer and now head of a major superannuation fund — said there ought to be rules for responding to big ideas. "If an idea has been worked on for six months, like this was, there should be a six-day pause before anyone responds," he said. From the perspective of a news reporter, this is patently a terrible idea. But it's worth contemplating. Taking a more measured approach — which is really the Albanese government's self-declared guiding principle — might actually be tolerable if it can produce something more than tinkering. Soliciting ideas is part of the business. But only if the listening and learning is done in good faith. Jacob Greber is political editor of ABC's 7.30 program.
The Australian
21 hours ago
- The Australian
Victory in Pacific Day: PM reflects on Australia's WWII sacrifice
Anthony Albanese has spoken of the debt the country owes to those who served the nation in a speech on the 80th anniversary of the World War II victory in the Pacific. Japan unconditionally surrendered on August 15, 1945, the message making its way to Australia via the broadcast of a code word: Neon. The Daily Telegraph reported 'Neon' was the perfect combination of a short word, few Morse code signals and easily understood. After dispatching the message of Japan's surrender from London to Canberra, the paper reported, High Commissioner Stanley Bruce went out for a 'much-needed drink'. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Opposition Leader Sussan Ley attended the 80th Victory in the Pacific Day commemoration at Martin Place on Friday. Picture: NewsWire / Nikki Short Mr Albanese, speaking at Sydney's Cenotaph, paid tribute to veterans and those who fell in conflict. 'Part of the debt that we owe to all who served our nation is to remind ourselves how close history came to taking a very different path, and to remember and honour every Australian – and every friend and every ally – who gave everything to ensure that it did not,' Mr Albanese said. 'We think of all the stories of courage. Of resilience and exhaustion, of fear and elation, and an endless longing for the home that so many never saw again. 'These are not stories rendered in bronze or marble, but written in flesh and blood.' Anthony Albanese paid tribute to WWII veterans at the 80th Victory in the Pacific Day commemoration at Martin Place on Friday. Picture: NewsWire / Nikki Short Mr Albanese added the 'nightmares made real' of the war was a weight, but that Australians stood against 'human beings in a grotesque perversion of humanity' lifted hearts. 'Amid the shadows of war, the power of their courage and the strength of their character is a light that is a beacon to us still. 'They showed us what it is to remain true to ourselves, no matter what. 'They showed us what it means to stand shoulder to shoulder with friends and allies. And together, they turned the tide.' Shadow Minister for Defence, Angus Taylor said Victory in the Pacific showed Australia could play a role on the world stage. Picture: NewsWire / Martin Ollman 'Fear was real' The surrender of Japan came days after the US dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing thousands. News of the surrender, and the end of the war, came at 8.44am with then Prime Minister Ben Chifley starting a speech less than an hour later: 'Fellow citizens, the war is over.' The formal surrender of Japan took place on 2 September. Opposition defence spokesman Angus Taylor said victory in the Pacific showed Australia 'could play a pivotal role on the world stage'. 'In those early days of 1942, fear was real,' he said. 'A full-scale Japanese invasion was not just imagined, it was planned for. Australians dug trenches, volunteered for civil defence, and braced for the worst. 'But over the course of the war, our servicemen and women stood firm. 'Victory in the Pacific was not just a military triumph. It was a national achievement. 'It proved that even as a small nation, we could play a pivotal role on the world stage. Australia did not choose this conflict. 'But when the threat came to our shores, we met it with determination and resolve. We stood with our allies, and we did so not out of obligation, but out of conviction. 'Today, we reflect on the legacy of those who served in the Pacific and recommit to the values they defended.' Read related topics: Anthony Albanese
