RDU chief Ravi Philemon calls new Cabinet ‘disappointing' as more women, youth should be given seats at the table
SINGAPORE: After Prime Minister (PM) Lawrence Wong announced his new Cabinet on Wednesday evening (May 21), Ravi Philemon, the secretary-general of the opposition party Red Dot United (RDU), expressed disappointment.
'Women's voices are muted. Young people's voices are not heard. Prime Minister Lawrence Wong's first Cabinet announcement was a moment that should have signalled meaningful change. Instead, it reinforced the status quo,' Mr Philemon wrote in a social media post.
While the announcement revealed some reshuffling and a couple of new faces from the May 3 polls were appointed to lead ministries, the members of the Cabinet have remained the same since PM Wong took office a year ago.
For Mr Philemon, this appeared to be a missed opportunity for PM Wong to address 'real gaps in leadership' that had been present prior to the election, and he expressed that preserving the status quo would have 'real consequences—for working families, for women, for young people, and for the vulnerable.'
The RDU chief noted that only three of the 15 full ministers are women, despite women having been nearly a third of the ruling People's Action Party's (PAP) candidates in the GE. Mr Philemon wrote that this could mean that policies that affect women, such as childcare options, work-from-home rights, legal protections at the workplace, and recognition for unpaid caregiving, would be deprioritised.
'The global research is conclusive. Governments with at least 50% women ministers score 17 points higher on the Women, Business and the Law Index, which measures legal equality in economic opportunity. Countries with more women in leadership are more likely to pass laws that remove inequality, strengthen protections for families, and invest in the long-term well-being of society. These aren't cosmetic gains—they are structural,' he wrote.
Mr Philemon also noted that the average age of the new Cabinet is 55.1, adding concerns that younger Singaporeans today are 'living through a very different Singapore' in terms of job security, housing costs, climate change, mental health, and other issues.
'The issues that affect young people most are dealt with in a piecemeal way—because their voices are not present in the Cabinet room. Things must change. Let's not forget—Singapore is one of the few countries where 18-year-olds are expected to serve, to train, to carry a rifle for national defence, but cannot vote.'
The RDU chief also raised the issue of what he characterised as 'bloated government and wasted resources' and again questioned why Singapore would need multiple Mayors, Senior Ministers, Ministers of State, and Senior Parliamentary Secretaries.
'For me, politics should always be about people, so Cabinets must reflect the people. That means more women at the table. More youth helping to shape the national agenda, and a leaner, more focused government that puts its weight—and its budget—behind solving real problems, not maintaining political comfort.
'RDU and I will remain committed to that fight. The fight to ensure Singaporeans are treated as first-class citizens in their own country, the only home we have,' he wrote. /TISG
Read also: M Wong's New Cabinet: Masagos loses Muslim Affairs portfolio, first-term MP Jeffrey Siow and David Neo take Transport and MCCY roles
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNA
19 minutes ago
- CNA
Commentary: Iran has no good choices to respond to US strikes – only the best of bad options
SINGAPORE: In the end, it was the American president who appeared to be the most dead set against 'stupid, endless wars' in the Middle East that sent the nation's military back into the region in a purely offensive manner. Although expectations were raised that the United States could act against Iran, the attacks early on Sunday (Jun 22) were a surprise – at least in terms of timing. Donald Trump gave Iran two weeks to come to a decision on whether it wanted to return to the negotiating table. Instead, he took all of two days to strike. Whether the two-week window was a ruse, or whether the US leader had gained new intelligence about Iran's unwillingness to negotiate – or even whether Mr Trump had already decided to attack when he set the deadline – will likely be unknown for some time, if ever. Another big unknown is how successful the American attacks were in setting back Iran's nuclear programme. Mr Trump claimed that Iran's nuclear facilities had been 'completely and totally obliterated'. But the press conference on Sunday night by the Pentagon provided neither detailed battle damage assessments nor satellite imagery that could shed light on the success of Operation Midnight Hammer beyond the superlatives employed by Mr Trump. Details will surely be clearer to the White House, but whether the message has been received by Tehran remains an open question. IRAN HAS NO GOOD CHOICES Perhaps what was most significant about the president's remarks was what was not explicitly stated: The US action was intended as a one-time effort, and whether it stays that way is up to the leadership of the Islamic Republic. That, of course, hinges on two things: Whether the bomb and missile strikes were as effective as claimed, and how Iran will respond to them. On the former, a successful mission is a preferable outcome: It increases the chances that calm will return sooner, rather than later – because Iran has no good choices. If, as threatened, it decides that the only way forward for it is to exit the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and take its programme underground, this will likely invite more American, and Israeli, action as they seek to exploit a moment of extraordinary Iranian weakness and vulnerability. This is a trail that has been blazed by North Korea, which is now estimated to have about 60 nuclear weapons. Washington will have no doubt learned lessons from its failure to keep Pyongyang from breaking out. Then again, the kinetic options that were available to the US in Iran were never really on the table in the case of North Korea, despite threats from a succession of US presidents – Mr Trump himself warned of 'fire and fury like the world has never seen'. The risks of a dramatic escalation, geopolitical uncertainty and lack of solid intelligence were among the reasons the US did not draw a firm line in the sand, and allowed North Korea to call its bluff. When it comes to Iran, the line has been drawn, and the consequences for crossing it have been clearly spelled out. DOING NOTHING WOULD BE CAPITULATION As Mr Trump put it, there will either be peace or tragedy for Iran, and the choice is theirs. Beyond the missile salvo it launched on Israel hours after the US strikes, Iran could hit American bases and the 40,000 troops in the Middle East as retaliation. It could also lash out by attempting to close the Strait of Hormuz, crippling oil supplies and attack Gulf Arab states, as it has done in the past. It could also resort to cyberattacks, or terrorist actions against US and Israeli interests around the world. But that is inviting further trouble on itself. The US attacks on Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan, Mr Trump claimed, were the 'most difficult' for the military to carry out, and that future ones would be 'a lot easier'. For good measure, he added a footnote: 'Remember, there are many targets left.' In its current weakened and exposed state, any action Iran takes to widen the conflict will make its position even more precarious. That said, Iran cannot be expected to do nothing. Standing idly by would be tantamount to announcing its humiliating capitulation to the world. For the regime, much worse could follow: Doing nothing would validate an idea that many Iranians themselves believe – that their leaders have led them down a reckless path that has brought them economic misery, international opprobrium and isolation from the world. Iranians are a proud people and will rally around the flag in the face of severe attacks, setting aside political and ideological differences despite all their misgivings. An unconditional surrender, however, will force them to look inward at the choices that brought them here, and begin a reckoning against the clerical regime. WHAT'S THE BEST OF BAD OPTIONS? That leaves Iran the best of bad options – one it has taken before. In 2020, during Mr Trump's first term, it took five days after the US assassination of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps leader Qassem Soleimani before Iran retaliated. It fired more than a dozen ballistic missiles at US bases in Iraq. Before it pressed the trigger, however, Tehran telegraphed the attacks, allowing Americans to seek safety. This prevented US fatalities, although more than 100 troops suffered traumatic brain injuries. This would appear to be the best course forward. Iran can claim retaliation in force, both sides can then put a lid on this episode and then sit down to work out a lasting solution. An agreement on the terms of Iran's surrendering of its nuclear ambitions – without ever using that word – may then be worked out, allowing all sides to claim some wins, and climb down from the escalatory ladder. Then again, in the Middle East, there are exceedingly few who have been accused of being rational actors.
CNA
41 minutes ago
- CNA
CNA938 Rewind - Rain, risk, resilience for Singapore's climate
Latest Episodes CNA938 Rewind - Rain, risk, resilience for Singapore's climate In line with Singapore International Water Week, Andrea Heng and Susan Ng take a look at Singapore's flood prevention measures and find out what more can be done in this ever-changing climate. For that, they speak with Professor Vladan Babovic, Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, National University of Singapore. 15 mins CNA938 Rewind - US enters the Israel-Iran war Iran has struck Israel in retaliation for the US bombing of three Iranian nuclear sites in what's seen as America's biggest foreign policy gamble. President Donald Trump says Tehran must now end its fight with Israel or face a force far greater than what was witnessed. Andrea Heng and Susan Ng assess the latest developments with Alex Vatanka, Senior Fellow, Middle East Institute. 16 mins CNA938 Rewind - Stock take today: US strikes on Iran, crude oil forecast On the daily markets analysis on Open For Business, Andrea Heng and Susan Ng speak with Heng Koon How, Head of Markets Strategy, Global Economics and Markets Research, UOB. 12 mins
CNA
11 hours ago
- CNA
Authorities in contact with Singapore students in Middle East
Singapore authorities are in communication with students at overseas institutions in the Middle East. Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs Faishal Ibrahim says the government will continue to monitor developments closely. Tensions are escalating in the region following US attacks on Iran.
