Conflict deepens between Abbott and Bishop over Rudd UN position

The dispute between Tony Abbott and Julie Bishop over Australia’s stand on a new UN secretary-general has intensified.

The dispute between Tony Abbott and Julie Bishop over Australia’s stand on a new UN secretary-­general has intensified, with Mr Abbott’s office yesterday publicly contradicting the Foreign Minister’s view on the former government’s position.

A spokesman for Mr Abbott told The Australian yesterday that Ms Bishop as Foreign Minister was “well aware” that the Abbott government had taken a strong stand of support for former New Zealand leader Helen Clark to ­replace incumbent Ban Ki-moon.

Last night, in a statement to The Australian, Ms Bishop rejected the comments from Mr Abbott’s spokesman and dismissed any suggestion she was aware the former prime minister had pledged to support Ms Clark for the post.

Mr Abbott’s support for Ms Clark was contained in an agreement he reached with New Zealand Prime Minister John Key in late 2014 and sealed in an ­exchange of letters between the leaders.

The context is vital: Mr Abbott wanted to ensure his government did not back former Labor prime minister Kevin Rudd for the post.

Although she was Foreign Minister, Ms Bishop insists she did not know a deal had been done ­between the two leaders to back Ms Clark. “Any letter to the New Zealand Prime Minister was not shared with me, my office or my department,” the Foreign Minister said last night. “Our position was to keep open our options until all nominations were known and then take a position to cabinet on who Australia would support. As far as I’m concerned, this was the government position and it is the government position.”

Ms Bishop said that if there had been a deal done with New Zealand to support Ms Clark then that imposed an obligation to inform Kevin Rudd. “There was no discussion in cabinet about supporting Helen Clark,” the Foreign Minister said. “No New Zealand official ever raised this with us.”

In her public statements last February, Ms Bishop was still leaving open the option for the Abbott government to back an Australian candidate, an obvious reference to Mr Rudd.

During this media conference on February 27, Ms Bishop said Ms Clark had not “formally ­approached” Australia for support.

When Malcolm Turnbull ­became Prime Minister, Ms Bishop advised him that Australia had made no commitment to any candidate and that if Mr Rudd formally asked for Australia’s support, that would need to be considered.

The reality, however, is that Australia, through Mr Abbott as prime minister, had made an ­absolute commitment to the New Zealand candidate, although Ms Clark had not formally declared.

The Abbott camp cannot believe Ms Bishop was not aware of the firm support for Ms Clark.

It is understood that Ms Bishop thinks Mr Abbott’s pledge was unwise. She would not have recommended that Australia support Ms Clark at that time since the field of candidates was not clarified.

The Abbott-Bishop spat highlights the tension between them and their different views on a possible Rudd candidature.

Since neither Mr Rudd nor Ms Clark seems a likely prospect for secretary-general, the issue will be hypothetical, but Mr Turnbull and Ms Bishop have said any decision on who Australia eventually supports will be taken by the Turnbull cabinet.