SINGAPORE: On 16 October, Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Edwin Tong addressed the issue of cash incentives for major Games medals such as Olympics and Paralympics, stating that the government opts to leave these rewards to the private sector in order to focus on funding athlete development and supporting a broader base of sports.

While Singapore’s S$1 million payout for an Olympic gold medal is known to be the highest globally, Mr Tong acknowledged the contributions of private corporations in raising this amount but emphasised that it does not address 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, 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 concerns raised by members of the House, including Workers’ Party MP Associate Professor Jamus Lim, regarding the disparity in monetary rewards between Olympians and Paralympians.

Jamus Lim calls for equal recognition and rewards for Olympians and Paralympians

The Sengkang MP questioned why the government, despite funding both reward schemes through the Tote Board, has not ensured equal financial recognition.

Assoc Prof Lim refuted arguments that Paralympians deserve smaller rewards due to fewer participants or less popularity, equating it to discrimination against less popular sports.

He called for parity in rewards, citing examples from countries like Canada, the U.S., and France, and urged the government to align with Singapore’s values of equality and non-discrimination.

In response, Mr Tong emphasised that these rewards are determined by non-governmental entities like the Singapore National Olympic Council (SNOC) and the Singapore National Paralympic Council (SNPC), not the government.

Minister Tong highlights Singapore’s competitive athlete reward levels compared to global standards

Addressing international comparisons, Tong pointed out that Singapore’s reward levels are among the highest globally, with other countries offering significantly lower rewards.

For example, Canada awards $20,000 for a Paralympic gold, far below Singapore’s $500,000.

He argued that government’s investments create a broader base of support for sports development, beyond just rewarding medal winners at the end of their journey.

This approach, Mr Tong explained, ensures sustainable development in sports, allowing the government to focus on building a robust sports ecosystem and nurturing future talent.

Minister Tong emphasizes comprehensive support for all athletes

In a follow-up exchange, Assoc Prof Lim acknowledged the budgetary constraints but pressed the Minister on whether he would agree with the principle of equalizing awards for all athletes.

He noted that while Singapore’s reward amounts are comparatively higher than those in other nations, the country’s wealth and lower overall medal count should make it more feasible to enhance these awards.

Minister Tong affirmed his support for equalising support for all athletes, regardless of whether they are para-athletes or able-bodied.

He highlighted the government’s approach, which includes establishing para sports academies and ensuring that para-athletes compete alongside able-bodied athletes in various National Sports Associations (NSAs).

However, Tong cautioned against focusing solely on equalising incentives.

He noted the importance of providing substantive support for para athletes and raised concerns that prioritizing equality in rewards might overlook the broader context of the support already provided.

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 earned S$1 million for her two gold medals at the Paralympics. For Tan’s historic silver at the Paralympics, she was awarded S$300,000, while a silver medal at the Olympics comes with a cash reward of S$500,000.

These cash payouts are provided under the Major Games Award Programme (MAP) for able-bodied athletes and the Athletes’ Achievement Awards (AAA) for para-athletes.

Both the MAP and AAA are private award schemes managed by the Singapore SNOC and the SNPC, respectively.

The central committee of the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) was not informed about the capital extraction plan in the proposed deal between Income Insurance and German insurer Allianz until it was publicly announced in Parliament, revealed Desmond Tan, NTUC Deputy Secretary-General, on Wednesday (16 Oct).

On Monday (14 Oct), Edwin Tong, Minister for Culture, Community, and Youth, stated in Parliament that the government had blocked the proposed Income-Allianz deal, citing concerns that the transaction, as structured, would not be in the public interest.

The deal, which was announced on 17 July 2024, faced significant public backlash, with many expressing fears that it might undermine Income’s long-standing social mission of providing affordable insurance, particularly to lower-income individuals.

Speaking during the debate on the Insurance (Amendment) Bill, Tan noted that although NTUC is a significant shareholder of NTUC Enterprise, which holds a 72.8% stake in Income Insurance, it does not interfere in the day-to-day operations of the companies it oversees.

According to Tan, while NTUC’s central committee had been briefed on the broader strategic rationale behind the Income-Allianz transaction, they were not made aware of the specific capital extraction plan.

The plan proposed returning S$1.85 billion in surplus cash to shareholders within three years. Tan added that he and the central committee only became aware of this aspect when it was mentioned in a ministerial statement earlier in the week.

Tan clarified that Income, as a non-listed public company, must adhere to the Singapore Code on Takeovers and Mergers, which limits the disclosure of commercially sensitive information before certain stages of the process are reached. This requirement contributed to the non-disclosure of the capital extraction clause until the parliamentary announcement.

NTUC’s commitment to social mission

Tan reiterated NTUC’s commitment to Income’s social mission, which includes offering affordable insurance and expanding NTUC’s involvement in areas such as eldercare and educational programmes. NTUC has expressed support for the government’s decision to block the deal, noting that it aligns with broader public interest objectives.

However, Tan acknowledged that there may be some differences in the specifics of how Income’s social goals are best achieved, particularly given the company’s corporatisation in 2022.

NTUC had supported Income’s decision to corporatise, recognising the need for the organisation to access more capital to remain competitive. The corporatisation enabled Income to explore new partnerships and investment opportunities, such as the proposed transaction with Allianz.

Tan also emphasised that NTUC and Income will continue working toward their shared social mission, even as they navigate the complexities of corporatisation and competitive market pressures.

While the government has blocked the deal between Allianz and Income, it remains open to reconsidering the transaction or similar partnerships if key concerns about the public interest can be addressed.

Distinguishing earlier support for the deal

It is important to distinguish Tan’s remarks made in Parliament from an earlier statement by NTUC on 5 August 2024, which expressed full support for the Income-Allianz deal. That earlier statement was issued by NTUC without knowledge of the capital extraction clause in the proposed transaction.

In the August statement, NTUC President K Thanaletchimi and Secretary-General Ng Chee Meng pledged NTUC’s support for Income’s social mission and noted Allianz’s commitment to honouring Income’s policies, continuing its charitable initiatives, and investing S$100 million over ten years to promote social mobility.

At the time, NTUC was unaware of the full details of the capital extraction plan, which proposed returning S$1.85 billion in surplus funds to shareholders. This lack of information casts the earlier endorsement in a different light, as NTUC was expressing support based on incomplete knowledge of the transaction’s specifics.

The central committee, including Tan, only learned of the capital extraction plan when it was disclosed in Parliament.

Therefore, the August statement should be viewed as NTUC’s endorsement of the deal without full awareness of the capital extraction clause.