May I express my profound surprise at the comments made to The Lawyer by "one leading council member" (The Lawyer 10 February).
I am at a loss to understand whether that "leading council member" sees Kamlesh Bahl as "not sufficiently representative of the profession" because she is a woman or because she is employed. Perhaps this "leading council member" would have the courage of his/her convictions to identify him/herself and clear up this confusion.
Perhaps also this "leading council member" can explain why he/she thinks Michael Napier is "sufficiently representative of the profession".
Realistically, how many senior partners are there for Mr Napier to be representative of? Surely the bulk of the profession are not/will not reach such heady heights as the senior partner of a leading firm of solicitors. Particularly if they are women, judging by the comments by Denise Kingsmill last week to the Commerce & Industry Group Annual Dinner!
Isn't it time certain members of the council started to wake up to the fact that not all solicitors are men and not all solicitors are senior partners of leading firms. Unfortunately, despite rumours of its death, it appears that "Buggins turn" has not died out in the perception of certain "leading council members".
Martyn McCarthy, chairman of the Commerce & Industry Group.