Last month, as the Law Society's male-dominated Council was about to embark on the voting to nominate its choices for Vice-President and Deputy Vice-President, it heard an impassioned plea from a Past President to nominate a woman candidate to 'balance the ticket'.The Council ignored Tony Holland's advice - indeed he was berated for even suggesting the idea - and as a result he is utterly dismayed.

'I would feel slighted if I were a woman,' he said.The Council could have chosen between three women candidates.

Eileen Pembridge, the outspoken presidential candidate, became a late entrant to the vice-presidential race.

And, for Deputy Vice-President, there was a choice between Fiona Woolf, a partner with McKenna & Co and Kamlesh Bahl, who chairs the Equal Opportunities Commission.Both Ms Pembridge and Ms Woolf made it to the final rounds of voting but in the event the Council nominated Birmingham practitioner John Aucott, of Edge & Ellison, and Tony Girling, of Kent-based Girlings, to go forward to fight in the general election for Vice-President and Deputy Vice- President.The question is whether it is at all important that a woman should fill one of the top three slots? Ms Pembridge believes fervently that it is.

Her presidential campaign unashamedly pushes the advantages of female representation.She deplores the fact that women account for just 10% of the members of the Council and has campaigned in vain for a dedicated women's seat on the Council.

She says her decision to submit to the Council's nomination procedure - a system about which she has great reservations - was purely to maximise the chances of a woman being elected to one of the top three slots.Like Ms Pembridge, many of the women on the Council are disappointed that a woman did not feature on the ticket, but few share her sense of urgency about electing a woman.Ms Woolf, who, word has it, was a very close finisher in the race, is philosophical about the outcome.

With an extra heavy international workload at the moment, she confesses to be slightly relieved.

But she sincerely hopes that the Council's line up will not be perceived as 'old stalwarts with no new ideas'.Ms Woolf, who is currently chairing a key task force examining the communications gap between the Society and the profession, stresses that 'a lot of change is needed.

The old, tired world of the Council is gone.' She believes that women have a key role to play in displacing the perception of an organisation in the grip of the old guard but she is not avidly feminist.

When Ms Pembridge brought a motion to the Council for a dedicated women's seat, Ms Woolf was 'torn'.

She resolved her difficulty by abstaining.EOC chairwoman Kamlesh Bahl considers it 'regrettable' that the Council did not choose a woman.

Although against tokenism, Ms Bahl believes a female candidate would have 'recognised the percentage of women in the profession.

It would have been a good role model.' Women now account for over 50% of entrants to the profession.Lesley MacDonagh, managing partner of Lovell White Durrant, is one of the women who was vocal in opposing Ms Pembridge's motion for a women's seat.

Her view is that women are not a minority within the profession and so do not require a minority seat.

She sees no case for affirmative action.Was she nonetheless disappointed by the Council's choice? 'There was a good woman candidate there, put it like that,' she says.Margaret Anstey, of Tozers in Devon, is a Council old girl who has run for Deputy Vice-President twice in the past but opted out this year.

It would, she says, have been 'jolly nice' to have a woman on the ticket but she is doubtful of the necessity to have a woman candidate to represent women's interests.

This is because she believes most issues affecting solicitors are gender neutral and 'female' issues like maternity leave or part-time partnerships are best handled internally by firms.Hilary Siddle, of Holden & Wilsons, Lancaster, was not concerned that the Council's ticket did not include a woman.

In her view, the women on Council are not yet ready to lead the profession.

'There are some very good women on the Council who in time would make excellent Presidents but there has to be a lengthy training process.'Sole practitioner representative Angela Deacon, on the other hand, would very much like to see a woman elected.

It would 'send out the right signals' she says, adding, 'We have a Council dedicated to equal opportunity but you have to ask why are there so few Council members who are women.' Chief among her reasons for wanting more female representation is the fact that very many sole practitioners are women, operating from home.With Ms Pembridge still in the presidential race, the profession could still get a female leader.

A straw poll of solicitors conducted by the Gazette showed that a majority of the men thought that the women's vote would go to Ms Pembridge as a matter of course but this was completely contradicted by the women who were adamant they would judge the candidates on the issues.Most of the women on the Council content themselves in the belief that women's issues would get a fair hearing if they were aired.

But what is remarkable is that they are not aired.

In her 12 years on the Council, Ms Anstey cannot remember any substantial debate on issues like the under-representation of women at the upper echelons of the profession and part-time partnerships.

Neither can Ms Bahl.

Ms Pembridge would say more numbers would mean more clout and more debate.