11-10-2008, 05:51 PM
fjp999 Wrote:... I have found most of this conversation very educating but the boldest of statements concerning a huge nation that maybe the commentator has neither visited or lived in rather startling. I lived in Japan for 10 years and would not dare make such bold statements of Japan as some have been made from watching a few news pieces from the BBC...Thanks, for reminding us of this, Frank. You are, of course, correct and I apologise if my outspokeness has caused offence. I was trying to confine my remarks to the specific situation of the effects on those involved of the on again/off again marriages in California.
Quote: ... also, I wasnt suggesting that Vaz was a likely candidate for Prime Minister but just the fact that he was one of only 14 ethnic minority MPs in a parliament with 646 seats. According to the last census taken in 2001, some seven percent of Britain's 60-million population are ethnic minorities, which would translate to more than 45 parliamentary seats.Again, you are correct although what is to be done about it is not altogether clear. Despite a number of attempts at positive discrimination during selection procedures over the years women and members of ethnic minority communities are still under-represented in parliament. Is the solution more positive discrimination? I can quite take the point of any member of those under-represented groups who has stated they would not want to be perceived as having been put up for election on the grounds of their race or sex. For whatever reasons, members of specific groups in society are not putting themselves forward for selection. Were there more "minority" candidates standing for election, it's quite likely more would be elected. I suspect, though, that even this answer is a simplification of the full story. Who knows what happens in party election committees :confused: