At this rate, Australia's next female prime minister could be 600 years away

Six-hundred years. When I pressed her to go on the record, she said she couldn't possibly.

When I ask senior Labor women how long it will be before we have our next female prime minister, the response is equally telling. Depends how long Anthony Albanese can hold on for. Then there will probably be a female prime minister but she will suffer exactly the same fate as Julia Gillard.

The glass cliff. Women get promoted when there's trouble. That makes it more likely for them to slip and fall. An Australian invented that term, Michelle Ryan, now the director of the Global Institute for Women's Leadership at the Australian National University.

The responses I got to my question varied from 10 years (hmm, OK then) to the next millennium. And the experts said if we wanted another female prime minister, then we have homework. So, yes please. What do we do next?

How do we make it more possible for women to be PM beyond emergencies? Ryan says normalising women in leadership positions which, sure. But what about the raging misogyny women have to put up with when they put themselves out there?

Ryan says women need to do what Gillard did 12 years ago, when she delivered the epic misogyny speech. Call it out and keep calling it out.

"The question is, how much has changed in the decade since the misogyny speech that would allow our second woman prime minister to come in and do the job properly without all of the distraction?"

And that's the responsibility of all of us, men and women alike, the responsibility not to get sucked into how a woman dresses, whether she's got a partner or kids, what's in her freaking fruit bowl.

Let me make a confession here - I am always 100 per cent interested in whether women (and men) have kids. But yeah, are these the most important attributes for their ability to lead?

And how on earth do you tell someone to just crack on and do their job, when they are surrounded by the bad actions of worse actors? I mean, surely it should have been pretty easy to think the best of Julia Gillard - and because we didn't, we disrupted a brief period of Labor government and ended up with Tony Abbott, for our sins. Abbott was a highly effective neghead, but a poor actual leader.

I'd argue that Tony Abbott set back the cause of women in Liberal Party by about half a century. Others I've spoken to think it will turn out to be longer than that.

And it's not like any of the major parties are busting themselves to shake up their leadership teams. Labor is two blokes: Albanese and Marles; Liberal leadership consists of Peter Dutton and the constantly-undermined-by-her-colleagues Sussan Ley; and Greens leadership is Adam Bandt with Mehreen Faruqi, two people who will never ever be prime minister.

Elise Stephenson is deputy at the Global Institute for Women's Leadership and she says neither of the major parties has made any real moves in the last little while to show their support for the next female prime minister in terms of putting potential candidates.

"One of the things you've got to realise is that it's not just about a party. It's about a system," she says.

Yes, of course Labor has lots of women in cabinet.

"But are they getting a say in shaping what parties need to do to make this happen?" asks Stephenson.

And, sensibly, she talks about the pipelines needed to prepare women for leadership, to mentor them so they can lead. Where are the allies to promote women? Where are the allies to support women when they are having argy-bargy at senior levels?

I mean, it's always been surprising to me that Anthony Albanese decided to send Tanya Plibersek to the naughty corner instead of utilising her considerable talents and her radiant connection with the community.

I mean, there's absolutely no way Plibersek should have been moved from education, let alone all the other portfolios where she had deep experience. Instead of being her ally, he became her enemy.

That's amazingly stupid, in my honest opinion. The only woman Albanese truly backs is one who can never be prime minister. I guess it's possible Penny Wong could move to the House of Reps but who would she have to kill to make that happen?

"It would be amazing if we saw all three of the major parties put forward women leaders at the same time ... an interesting experiment but also a really good opportunity to say OK, maybe we have had enough of all male prime ministers."

READ MORE:

Not that there's anything wrong with men. Do we have to rely on the advocacy groups within political parties to make this happen? As Stephenson points out, that's hardly fair. It should be a whole-of-party effort. Let's be grateful Emily's List and Hilma's Network exist - but truly, it's women advocating for women.

"This has to be something the whole party cares about," she says.

Which is unlikely in the case of the Liberal Party, says Sonia Palmieri, associate professor at the Australian National University and head of the department of Pacific Affairs.

"The first thing is the Liberal Party would need to acknowledge it has a woman problem. That's the first step to recovery," she says.

"I don't see that the party has acknowledged that in practice because even when men resign or or even when women resign they're not committed to replacing those people with another woman,"

I mean, truly wouldn't it be awesome if the Liberal Party committed to replacing women with women and then putting their shoulder behind Ley? Awesome as in utterly surprising.

As Palmieri explains so well, the Liberal Party seems to think women are part of some weird fringe movement. She's much more confident that Labor will be able to find a next female prime minister - but it could take 10 years. And sure, yes, the Labor Party has lots of women in cabinet but not as deputy leader, not as treasurer. By the time Palmieri and I finish chatting, she revises upwards her prediction - from 10 to 25.

Unless there's a disaster. I only wish it didn't take a disaster, a glass cliff, or even several centuries, for women to lead.