Physical Address

304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124

Singapore leaves major Games medal incentives to private sector while government focuses on ‘broader’ sporting base: Edwin Tong

SINGAPORE: The government leaves the cash incentives for major Games medals to the private sector, as it wants to focus on funding and supporting a “broader base” such as athlete development, said Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Edwin Tong on Wednesday (Oct 16). 
Singapore’s S$1 million Olympic gold medal payout is known to be the highest globally – but while he applauded private corporations for helping raise this sum, Mr Tong said it does not help in other aspects of sports development. 
“It is very good, but it is also rewarding people who are more or less at the end of the journey winning a gold medal,” said Mr Tong. 
“It doesn’t directly go towards helping those in development, which is what we want to do with a broader spend, so that we can reach a target broader base, (get) mass appeal, and develop a pipeline so that more athletes, para as well as able-bodied athletes, can reach the apex of their sport and reach their aspiration.”
He was responding in parliament to calls by members of the House to equally reward both Olympians and Paralympians, made during a motion to honour Team Singapore’s performances at the Paris Games this year.
The motion was attended by 17 Olympians and Paralympians, including kitefoiler Maximilian Maeder, swimmer Yip Pin Xiu and boccia player Jeralyn Tan.
Maeder received S$250,000 (US$191,000) for his Olympic bronze medal, while Yip got S$1 million for her two gold medals at the Paralympics.
For Tan’s historic silver at the Paralympics, she received S$300,000. A silver at the Olympics comes with a S$500,000 cash reward. 
These cash payouts are given out under the Major Games Award Programme (MAP) for able-bodied athletes and Athletes’ Achievement Awards (AAA) for para-athletes. 
The MAP and AAA are private award schemes managed by the Singapore National Olympic Council (SNOC) and the Singapore National Paralympic Council (SNPC) respectively.
Speaking at the motion on Wednesday, Associate Professor Jamus Lim (WP-Sengkang) said it was “difficult” to see why the government had decided that it could not exercise greater influence over the amounts granted by the two sporting award programmes.
He pointed out that while the SNOC and SNPC are “undeniably” non-governmental organisations, the primary sponsor of the two programmes is the Tote Board, a government agency whose activities are regulated by various ministries. 
Likewise, Nominated MP Usha Chandradas asked for the Tote Board – a statutory board under the Ministry of Finance – to assist and support the two NGOs in acquiring the additional funding to ensure Paralympians get similar or identical cash prizes as Olympians.
Citing an article that listed the amount awarded to medal-winning para-athletes by different countries, she noted that Singapore was at the top of the league of 13 nations.
But it still lagged behind the likes of Spain, Canada and South Korea which offer rewards equal to that of Olympians’.
Noting the importance of parity, MP Denise Phua (PAP-Jalan Besar) said: ” I do call on the government and the rest of Singapore to join me … to call upon the current and potential private sponsors to please also support us to equalise these cash awards for both para-athletes and also able-bodied athletes.”
This way, more resources, including those by the government, can also be deployed for other critical and urgent needs, she added.
Responding to these calls, Mr Tong said that the incentive sizes are put up by non-government entities such as the Tote Board and decided by them.
“Between the Olympic and the Paralympic structure, there are differences, but these differences don’t mean one is better, necessarily better than the other,” said Mr Tong. 
For instance, for the Olympics, the first and only gold that is rewarded under the incentive program is the first gold, which is worth S$1 million.
But under the Paralympic programme, medallists are given S$500,000 for each gold, up to a maximum of three gold medals.
Other factors also affect the private sector’s decision, said Mr Tong.
“They have to think in terms of whether this is sustainable. Is this an incentive program that drives the right behaviour? And how long term can this be?”
For instance, for swimming, there are 141 Paralympic swimming events for which medals are awarded, as opposed to 37 in the Olympics.
“So, when the private sector as well as the Tote Board looks at this, these are amongst the considerations that they have in mind,” he said. 
Responding to comparisons to other nations with similar cash incentives between Paralympians and Olympians, Mr Tong said that Singapore still pays among the highest in absolute terms. 
“(Assoc Prof) Lim spoke about Canada, but I think (he) would probably know that Canada’s incentive for a Paralympic gold is C$20,000 (US$14,500), we are at S$500,000,” he said. 
Likewise, countries mentioned by Ms Chandradasm, such as Japan, Korea, France, and Australia, have lower reward amounts for Paralympic medallists compared to Singapore.
Mr Tong also noted that the reward amounts for Paralympians have been pushed up over the years.
In 2021, the cash reward for a Paralympic gold medal was doubled from S$200,000 to S$400,000.
Then, in 2022, the cash reward for a gold medal was raised from S$400,000 to S$500,000. 
“I can understand and I appreciate entirely why members have said, let’s find parity, because there is, in fact, no difference between the way in which our para-athletes, train, put effort, make sacrifices, as well as our Olympic athletes,” he said. 
“But let’s not also lose sight of the amounts in absolute terms and how much we support our athletes.” 
Responding to questions on why the Government leaves the funding for medal incentives to the private sector, Mr Tong said that this is because it does not want to set aside sums that can otherwise be used to develop athletes. 
He explained that at every major games like the Olympics, there may or may not be medallists. Nevertheless, funds have to be put aside for potential winners, and they cannot be used. 
“And because you can’t use them, you can’t deploy the funds elsewhere,” said Mr Tong. 
He said that, in contrast, the government looks at a year-on-year long-term master plan.
Under such a plan, the government caters for infrastructure upgrades and development, building up various sports academies, hiring coaches and physios, helping the lower-income and funding the Spex scheme for elite athletes, among other initiatives. 
“If you put aside sums and think about whether or not I need to provide for X number of gold medals each cycle, these are sums that will not be able to be deployed,” said Mr Tong. 
“We decide that we want to invest these amounts, spend them, make a commitment and ensure that we have efficiency for the spend that we make, and it is an assured amount every year.” 
Assoc Prof Lim then asked Mr Tong if he would agree with “the principle of equalising awards”. 
“If he does, then it comes down to, I think, the government working in tandem with the Tote Board as well as other private donors to try to realise their aspiration,” he said. 
Mr Tong said in response that he agrees with the principle of equalising awards for all athletes regardless of whether they are able-bodied or para-athletes. 
The government has done this by kickstarting para-sports academies, for instance. 
“I would not necessarily say that our focus is only on making sure that the incentives are equalised, because there is a danger in that … in trying to strive towards equality, you miss the woods for the trees, which is where we are already today,” said Mr Tong.
“Would you rather have equality, or would you rather want substantive support that has been given to para-athletes? I think the answer is pretty clear.”
In his opening speech at the motion, the minister also laid out six key strategies to build on athletes’ success and achieve more with each successive generation. These include making Singapore a hub for world-class sporting events and creating an inclusive sports system through the upcoming Disability Sports Masterplan.

en_USEnglish