the cabinet has gender parity, which has been written about widely. it also features several members of the south and central asian community, including several sikhs. yet, it does not have anybody of african heritage, near or distant, or any east asians. there aren't any arabs, and i didn't get a chance to count the jews, if there are any (there have been previously). did he overlook these groups?
well, see the question only makes sense if you're fundamentally misunderstanding the situation as some kind of affirmative action program, which it most definitely is not. the cabinet is not meant to address power imbalances in the country but actually to reflect them.
there's going to be a long takedown of an article about brampton coming up shortly, and in it i point out that south asians are actually one of the most powerful economic groups in canada, so to suggest their communities reflect some kind of ghettoization of the suburbs is ridiculous on it's face. this is the reason that south asians are over-represented in cabinet: the south asian community is very powerful.
it's not like north america has never seen this before. jewish politicians have been over-represented just about at every level for decades. the reason is that they're disproportionately wealthy. so it is with south asians in canada in the 21st century.
the gender parity is a similar reality. women are no longer the junior partners in society. they are represented at the table, because they must be. it's not some act of charity. it's a reflection of where the power lies in canadian society, and especially in canadian business.
so, where are the east asians? the arab muslims? in canada, these groups lean conservative by large margins, so one would not expect them to show up as prominent voices in the liberal coalition. and, where are the africans? there simply isn't a substantial black community in canada.
i hope that gets the reality of the situation across a little more clearly.
you could look it up if you want. i know this may be another "implosion moment" south of the border, but it does make sense.
1) in canada, east asians are roughly analogous to cubans in the united states, but less explicitly anti-communist and more explicitly pro-business. the conservatives present themselves as the party of freer markets. there's a widespread suspicion about government intervention in the economy.
2) the fact that muslims in canada lean right is actually by design - the conservatives went out of their way to screen muslims to make sure they were religious. this is a reaction, rightly or wrongly, to a feeling that liberal immigration policy in the 20th century was a type of gerrymandering. it's not clear yet whether that's going to be a problem in the long run, but i do believe that most people think our social services can handle it. in the short run, arab muslims in canada lean staunchly conservative on social issues - and tend to swing all the way to the ndp when they don't.
3) we brought in a lot of freed slaves during the 1800s, but there was a mass migration back after the civil war due to a desire to reunite with family (and maybe due to the weather). canada also had some pretty racist immigration policies from about 1900-1965. since then, we've taken in almost all of our black immigrants either directly from africa or from the caribbean. as it is, blacks are less than 2% of the population and don't concentrate much of anywhere, outside of a few neighbourhoods in toronto and a loyalist community in nova scotia.