Singapore Sports Council (Amendment) Bill

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill. This Bill touches on a wide and interconnected sporting ecosystem in Singapore and many of my colleagues will be speaking on its various dimensions.

Ms Gho Sze Kee and Ms Valerie Lee will address how we strengthen Team Singapore and disability sport. Dr Charlene Chen, Mr David Hoe and Ms Elysa Chen will speak on mind sports and e-sports, as well as the importance of governance and accreditation. Ms Poh Li San will speak on the importance of board diversity in our sports associations, while Dr Hamid Razak will address the need for a calibrated and disciplined approach to resource allocation. Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim, Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Lee Hong Chuang will take a broader view across the Bill's themes. And closing off will be the Deputy Chair of our Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC), Ms Joan Pereira, who will close off the bench's contributions to this debate.

Collectively, these contributions will reflect the breadth of the Bill. My remarks today will therefore focus on framing the overall direction of travel, before my colleagues go deeper into the specific policy areas where their suggestions and observations will be made.

Mr Deputy Speaker, this Bill reflects how sport in Singapore has evolved over the last decade and, more importantly, how it must continue to evolve if it is to serve not just our medal ambitions but also our people, our social compact and our national identity.

At its very core, this Bill recognises a simple truth, that sport today is not just confine to podiums, pitches or to the playing fields. It is increasingly also about inclusion, health, character, opportunity and lifelong participation.

The proposed amendments give SportSG the clarity, mandate and flexibility to meet these realities responsibly.

I will, therefore, focus my remarks on four broad areas: inclusion and disability sport; the broadening of what we recognise as sport; standards and professionalism in our sports ecosystem; and finally, the holistic development of our athletes across sporting and educational pathways.

First, on disability sport and inclusion. Mr Deputy Speaker, in my view, one of the most important shifts reflected in this Bill is the formal recognition of the SNPC as a key partner of SportSG. This is alongside the SNOC and the NSAs. This is not merely symbolic. It is a signal of intent.

The refreshed DSMP made it clear that inclusion is not an adjunct to our sporting system. It must be integral to it. Athletes with disabilities do not exist on the margins of Team Singapore. They are Team Singapore.

So, therefore, formal recognition of the SNPC strengthens accountability, coordination and partnership across the entire sporting ecosystem. It enables clearer alignment in athlete development, competition pathways and event organisation. It also affirms that disability sport deserves the same strategic attention, resourcing discipline and long-term planning as able-bodied sport.

I would therefore encourage SportSG, as it operationalises this partnership, to continue investing not only in elite pathways, but also in grassroots access. This includes adaptive facilities, trained coaches and community-level programmes that enable persons with disabilities to engage in sport early and confidently. Inclusion succeeds not when we create parallel systems, but when our mainstream systems are designed with inclusion in mind from the very beginning.

Secondly, on supporting diverse sporting aspirations. The Bill updates the statutory understanding of what sport is and in doing so, reflects how Singaporeans actually live, train and compete today. Beyond competitive and recreational sport, the Bill explicitly empowers SportSG to promote physical fitness activities, mind sports and e-sports. This is a pragmatic and necessary evolution.

Physical fitness activities are foundational to public health, especially in an ageing society like Singapore. Programmes under ActiveSG, as well as local efforts, such as the North West Healthy Living Festival, recognise that many Singaporeans may not aspire to competitive sport, but still seek structured, social and motivating ways to stay active.

As an example, the North West Brisk Walking Club has grown into, what is perhaps, Singapore's largest and most consistent community fitness movements, with a strong membership base of 70,000 spanning seniors, working adults and families. What has also been particularly encouraging is its recent evolution, across all the five Community Development Councils (CDCs).

With the launch of CDC Walking Trails, the intentional design of routes to be more accessible, scenic, gamified and digitally supported, we have seen, since its launch in August 2025, a broadening participation of over 85,000, including many younger residents and first-time exercisers. When we invest thoughtfully in simple, inclusive physical activity, we lower the barriers to participation and bring more Singaporeans into physically active lifestyles.

Mind sports, such as chess, bridge and e-sports, reflect cognitive skills, discipline and international competitiveness. Singapore, as the Minister has described, has hosted various events, such as the World Chess Championships and the Olympic Esports Week as well. These, to me, are not fringe pursuits. They are globally recognised domains of excellence as well.

At the same time, I do appreciate the Bill's careful calibration that recognising the sports may not automatically mean equal funding or blanket support. SportSG retains the discretion to assess governance standards, athlete pathways and alignment with national objectives. This, to me, is important. We should be inclusive without being indiscriminate. Public resources must continue to be stewarded carefully and transparently.

I would, however, ask SportSG to continue communicating clearly with the public on how decisions are made, especially when certain popular activities may not receive immediate support, because transparency helps us to build trust, even when not all aspirations can be funded immediately.

Third, Mr Deputy Speaker, on uplifting standards across the sports industry. Because as participation grows, standards matter more, not less.

The Bill provides SportSG with the mandate to establish and maintain quality standards and codes of practice for coaching, equipment, facilities and accreditation systems. I support this direction. Parents entrust their children to coaches. Athletes entrust their bodies and careers to training systems. Recreational participants as well deserve safe environments and competent instruction. Standards protect not only performance but more importantly the people who participate.

I note the assurance that SportSG does not seek to become a regulator at this point in time and that standards will not, at this moment, be legally binding. This calibrated approach is sensible. It allows the sector to mature, to professionalise and to align voluntarily around best practices. Initiatives, such as the Safe Sport Commission, the NROC and the NREP, have already raised confidence across the ecosystem. I would encourage SportSG to continue engaging multiple stakeholders, especially smaller clubs and independent coaches, so that standards uplift rather than exclude. Because professionalism should be enabling, not burdensome.

Over time, Mr Deputy Speaker, as the sector continues to mature, there may be merit in reviewing whether certain baseline protections should become mandatory. But the present approach, to me, strikes the right balance between leadership and flexibility.

Fourth and lastly, on holistic education and career support for our athletes. Mr Deputy Speaker, perhaps the most far-reaching amendment in this Bill is the empowerment of SportSG to establish and oversee institutions that develop our national athletes across both sporting and academic domains.

The consolidation of the SSP and the High Performance Sport Institute into a single entity represents a significant shift in how we think about our athlete development. For too long, young athletes have been forced to navigate parallel systems – one focused on sporting excellence; another on academic progression. Integration therefore allows us to design truly athlete-centric pathways, where education and sports reinforce rather than compete with each other.

The SSP retaining its identity as a school is important. Education must remain a pillar, not as a concession. But strengthening its role as the education arm of our high-performance system ensures that sporting ambition does not come at the expense of future options.

The planned relocation of SSP to Kallang, alongside national training centres, sports science and sports medicine facilities, is particularly promising. It signals a whole-of-ecosystem approach to Team Singapore development, from youth to elite levels. We will miss the school in the North West district, but we wish it well when it does relocate.

I do look forward to further details at the COS, particularly on how athlete welfare, dual career planning and post-sporting transitions will be strengthened under this consolidated model. Our duty is not just to produce champions but to ensure that those who wear the Singapore crest proudly emerge with dignity, resilience and viable futures beyond sport.

Mr Deputy Speaker, taken together, these amendments reflect a maturing sporting nation in Singapore; a nation that values inclusion alongside excellence; participation alongside performance; standards alongside accessibility; and ambition alongside with a caring ecosystem.

SportSG's growing role must continue to be exercised with humility, partnership, accountability and transparency. Sport thrives not by central control but by enabling communities, athletes, volunteers as well as professionals to flourish together. I support this Bill because it provides the right statutory foundation for the next phase of Singapore sports, a phase that is more inclusive, more diverse, more professional and more humane. One team, one dream, one Singapore. Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Bill.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the intent of the Bill. The sporting landscape has evolved significantly since the Act was first passed in 1973 and it is only right that our legislative framework reflects modern realities. It is a pragmatic step forward to expand the definition of "sport" to include mind sports and e-sports and explicitly incorporate physical fitness activities.

However, as we expand the remit and powers of the Singapore Sports Council, which is now renamed SportSG, we must ensure that these changes are fiscally sustainable and do not inadvertently stifle the local private sector. I have two broad areas of clarification for the Minister: one related to funding dilution and alternative funding streams, and the other to the manufacture of sporting and fitness equipment.

The expansion of SportSG's functions to include e-sports and mind sports is a significant undertaking. These are rapidly growing fields that require specialised infrastructure, coaching and international participation. Does the Government plan to increase SportSG's budget to account for these new categories? My concern is that if SportSG's budget remains stagnant, we risk diluting the financial support currently available to athletes involved in traditional sports. We must ensure that a "win" for e-sports does not come at the cost of a "loss" for other programmes, such as track and field or swimming.

In light of this, would it be prudent to expand the scope of section 8(d) of the principal Act to explicitly allow SportSG to enter into strategic partnerships with commercial entities and other organisations? By leveraging on private sector funding, SportSG can alleviate the burden on the public purse.

It goes without saying that athlete training is very expensive, as we can see from the experiences of our own Olympic medallists. To support Joseph Schooling's training in the United States, his parents – Colin and May Yim Schooling – had to spend more than $1 million, including selling a house in Perth and cashing out an endowment plan. Maximilian Maeder estimated that the cost of training and competing at his level to be around €250,000 a year. He was supported by a three-year sponsorship agreement with local beverage company, Yeo Hiap Seng, or better known as Yeo's, and the Ng Teng Fong Charitable Foundation, demonstrating how corporate sponsors and external partners can help to chip in to groom more elite athletes for Singapore.

I hope that the Ministry and SportSG can develop comprehensive strategies to institutionalise the role of corporate sponsorship in funding athlete training and expand the Sports Excellence Programme (spex) Schemes to support high-performing athletes. We need a sustainable model where the state is not the sole benefactor but a facilitator for private sector investment in our sporting talent.

In addition to the funding perspective, for e-sports specifically, the e-sport ecosystem is unique because the "arenas", namely the games themselves, are intellectual property owned by private publishers. To run programmes or tournaments, SportSG will necessitate a different level of commercial engagement than traditional sports. How does SportSG intend to navigate these proprietary hurdles?

Mr Deputy Speaker, the Bill will retain section 8(k) of the principal Act as Section 8(l), which allows SportSG to "to prepare, manufacture and supply any equipment and items used for sports or physical fitness activities". I would like to ask the Minister to clarify whether SportSG has previously used these powers to manufacture equipment and if not, what is the intention for SportSG to retain these powers?

Traditionally, the Government procures from the private sector to stimulate the economy and benefit from market competition. Is there a specific gap in the market that SportSG is trying to fill?

In addition, the new section 8(m) will allow SportSG "to establish and maintain codes of practice or conduct, guidelines or standards in relation to any equipment, items and facilities used for sports or physical fitness activities." This creates a potential conflict of interest. If SportSG is both the regulator in setting the standards and the supplier in manufacturing the equipment, how do we ensure a level playing field with the private sector? How can we avoid a situation where SportSG sets the standards that unfairly disadvantage private competitors?

While I support the promotion of physical fitness, I believe the Government should be a catalyst rather than a competitor. If SportSG begins manufacturing fitness equipment at scale, it could inadvertently crowd out local retailers and manufacturers who operate on thin margins. I hope the Minister can provide assurances that these new powers will be used judiciously and only when the private sector is unable or unwilling to provide the necessary equipment.

In summary, while I welcome the modernisation of SportSG's remit, we must be wary of over-extension. I hope that the Minister can clarify how the Ministry will continue to increase support for our athletes and whether leveraging private sector resources is an active consideration and explain how it intends to use SportSG's powers to regulate and manufacture sports equipment. Mr Deputy Speaker, notwithstanding these clarifications, I support the Bill.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Singapore Sports Council (Amendment) Bill 2025 and I would like to declare my interest as a committee member of the Singapore Hockey Federation.

The Bill reflects an important recognition that the meaning of sport has evolved in today's society. Sport is no longer confined to traditional physical competition alone. It encompasses physical fitness, high-performance sport, community participation, mind sports and increasingly, e-sports. In fact, aside from the Edusave Merit Bursary Award ceremony in my constituency, the other event that attracted so many youths to participate was the e-sports carnival. In this respect, the amendments before us are timely and reflect the lived realities of how Singaporeans engage with sports and physical activity.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I welcome the expanded definition of "sports" to include mind sports and e-sports, as well as the explicit inclusion of physical fitness activities within the Council's functions. This reflects a broader and more inclusive understanding of sport – one that recognises its role not only in elite competition but also in public health, mental well-being and social cohesion.

I have seen first-hand many e-sports groups in my constituency and the role they play, not just in the expanded definition of sports but also in its innate ability to bring people, particularly our youths, together in a productive and positive way to hone and pit their skills against one another, to build communities and deep networks. They were, however, usually hampered by a lack of resources and funding, in part because they were measured against the frameworks used for traditional sports.

By including such new sports under the Council's mandate, the Bill gives them an opportunity to blossom and flourish under a focus on financing and talent development, while allowing them to develop their own frameworks with the Council.

In addition, by extending the Council's mandate to planning and promoting physical fitness activities, the Bill strengthens SportSG's ability to support national priorities, such as preventive health, active ageing and lifelong participation in sport. This aligns well with our broader efforts to encourage healthier lifestyles and to reduce long-term healthcare costs.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I also support the expanded functions and powers of the Council, particularly in areas such as research in sports science and sports medicine, the establishment of standards and codes of practice, and the provision of educational and career support for active and retired sportspersons.

On that note, this Bill is timely as the aspect of the proposed legislation comes on the back of the recently concluded SEA Games in Thailand where Minister earlier said the Team Singapore did commendably well in several sports, despite some challenges.

We can see from the public discourse, involving members of the sporting fraternity but engulfing the wider public too, that Singapore expects and desires more for sports. We have seen enough in the past decade that our athletes can reach the very top of their fields with the right support, perseverance and opportunities. We can certainly do more to support them.

Athletes today face increasingly complex demands – balancing training, education, competition and eventual transition out of sport. The explicit recognition of career and educational support in the Act is an important signal that we value not just sporting excellence, but the long-term well-being of our sportspersons as individuals.

The provision allowing the Council to establish institutions or entities for the development and training of sportspersons, including oversight of their academic progression and curricula with the approval of MOE, also reflects a more integrated and holistic approach to the development of our athletes.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I note as well the increase in the maximum number of Council members and the corresponding adjustment to the quorum requirements. This should provide flexibility to ensure that the Council has access to a broader range of expertise, including in emerging areas such as e-sports, sports science and physical fitness promotion, while still maintaining sound governance and decision-making processes.

While I am broadly supportive of the Bill, I would like to raise two points for consideration.

First, on the inclusion of mind sports and e-sports. While their recognition under the Act is appropriate and forward-looking, it will be important to maintain some clarity of purpose and proportionality in how resources, funding and institutional attention are allocated.

Traditional sports, community sports, school sports and disability sports continue to play a critical role in fostering physical health, teamwork, resilience and social integration. As new sports such as e-sports grow in prominence, may I seek the assurance of the Minister that the Council will ensure that their development complements rather than crowds out existing sporting pathways, especially those that promote physical activity and broad-based participation.

Clear policy frameworks and differentiated strategies may help ensure that each category of sport is supported in a way that reflects its own distinct objectives and value to society.

Secondly, I would like to touch on the Council's expanded powers relating to the establishment of standards, accreditation and the manufacture or supply of sports and physical fitness equipment.

These powers surely can help raise professionalism, safety and quality across the sector. However, I would like to caution that their exercise should be calibrated and consultative, particularly where community clubs, volunteers, coaches and small operators are concerned. In particular, many in the new sports segments may still be developing and finding their feet and they may lack the track-record, experience, capabilities and resources at the same levels of more established sports organisations.

Over-regulation or overly rigid standards, if applied too uniformly, may inadvertently increase compliance burdens or even discourage grassroots initiatives. Therefore, may I seek the assurance of the Minister if the Council would adopt a graduated, risk-based approach, with appropriate consultation, transition periods and guidance – so that standards uplift the sector without stifling participation or innovation.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, more broadly, as SportSG's mandate expands, it may be useful to continue strengthening partnerships with schools, community organisations, disability sports bodies and private sector operators. Sport is most effective when it is embedded within communities and when national strategy is complemented by local ownership and ground-up energy. Sports in Singapore should always be accessible to all and not just the mandate of the elite professionals. Mr Deputy Speaker, in Tamil, please.

(In Tamil): Hon Deputy Speaker, when the great poet Mahakavi Bharathiyar sang "Run and play, child" he celebrated the joy and freedom of sports.

Starting with childhood and throughout life, sports strengthen us physically and mentally.

This Bill fortifies the belief that sports should be attainable by all despite age, skill or whatever one's background may be.

I wholeheartedly welcome this effort that brings communities together towards a common ground that fosters sports.

(In English): This Bill represents a thoughtful and necessary update to the Singapore Sports Council Act. It equips Sport Singapore with a broader mandate, modern tools and clearer authority to support sport, physical fitness and athlete development in a changing landscape. I raise my observations and clarifications to ensure that as we expand the scope of sport policy, we do so in a way that remains inclusive, balanced and anchored in the long-term interests of Singaporeans. With these remarks, I support the Bill, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Mr Deputy Speaker, before I address the Bill, I wish to begin by congratulating our athletes who represented Singapore at the 2025 SEA Games. They competed with heart, dedication and unwavering commitment to excellence. Every athlete who wore our national colours deserves our recognition and gratitude. They trained countless hours, made personal sacrifices and gave their absolute best for Singapore. To them I say, "Thank you. You have made us proud".

Yet, Mr Deputy Speaker, pride in our athletes' efforts must be accompanied by honest reflection on our sporting ecosystem. While our athletes competed admirably, our overall performance at the 2025 Games raises important questions about whether we are providing them with the support, infrastructure and strategic direction they need to succeed.

Singapore's medal tally and rankings demonstrate that despite investments over the years, we continued to face challenges in developing consistent sporting excellence across disciplines. When we compare our performance to regional neighbours, some with fewer resources but more strategic focus, it becomes clear that our current model requires serious examination. This is the context in which we consider the Singapore Sports Council (Amendment) Bill 2025.

This Bill represents a significant evolution in how Singapore approaches sport, competition and athlete development. While I support the overall direction and intent of these reforms, I believe we must scrutinise the details carefully to ensure that good intentions translate into effective governance and tangible outcomes for our sporting community, outcomes that our athletes deserve.

Let me begin with what I welcome wholeheartedly – the formal recognition of Mind Sports. The Bill defines Mind Sports as a competitive game based on intellectual skill rather than physical skill such as chess or bridge. This is an important and overdue recognition. For too long, we have conflated sport with purely physical activity.

Yet, the chess player who trains for hours daily, analysing positions and studying strategy, demonstrates the same dedication, discipline and competitive spirit as any athlete. The bridge player who competes at international level exhibits mental stamina and strategic thinking that will challenge any sports person.

By bringing Mind Sports explicitly under SportSG mandate, we create formal pathways for these athletes – access to coaching standards and the possibility of structured support. This modernises our understanding of competitive excellence and acknowledges that mastery takes many forms.

However, Mr Deputy Speaker, I have significant concerns about the proposed expansion of the Council from 15 to 25 members, as outlined in clauses 4 and 5 of the Bill. The expansion by 10 additional members suggests the Government recognises the wider variety of sports and activities now falling under SportSG's purview. This is logical given we are adding mind sports and e-sports to the mix. But I must ask what is the strategic purpose of such a large Council?

From a governance perspective, larger councils are typically less effective, not more. Decision-making becomes slower, coordination more complex and accountability more diffuse. There is nothing preventing SportSG from establishing sub-councils or sport-specific working groups with external experts co-opted on an ad hoc basis. This would provide the specialised expertise needed without bloating the main governing body.

I therefore propose the following amendment that the maximum Council size remains unchanged at 15 members with provisions for establishing expert sub-committees as needed. A lean engaged Council of 15 will serve Singapore's sporting community far better than the sprawling body of 25 where attendance is optional. Our SEA Games performance demonstrates that we need decisive focused leadership, not a committee too large to be effective. Our athletes deserve better governance, not bigger committee.

Clause 6 proposes to amend section 8 to grant SportSG new powers to establish institutions for developing and training sports persons. This appears to pave the way for significant institutional restructuring.

I would like to ask the Minister: is this amendment intended to move SSP from MCCY's purview to the SportSG's jurisdiction? Are there other sport excellence schools planned in the pipeline that would similarly fall under SportSG's management? If so, what is being done to beef up the capabilities of the SportSG to take on these substantial new responsibilities? Managing educational institutions requires expertise in pedagogy, student welfare and academic administration, not just sports development.

Our performance at the 2025 Games provides a real-world benchmark. Despite years of investment and institutional development, what tangible improvements have we seen? Where are the success stories that justify continued investment in the current model? And where are the failures that demand course correction. Without this accountability for past spending, how can we have confidence in the expanded mandate proposed under this Bill? And without understanding what worked and what did not, how can we allocate future resources wisely?

Our athletes who completed at SEA Games 2025 worked with the system we gave them. If that system underperformed, the responsibility lies not with them, but with us, with the structures, funding and strategic direction we provided. We owe them answers before we ask them to trust a new expanded system.

Mr Deputy Speaker, clause 6 seeks to empower SportSG to provide educational and career support to athletes, both active and retired. This is genuinely welcome and represents a more holistic approach to athlete welfare.

For too long, talented young Singaporeans have hesitated to pursue sporting excellence because they feared an uncertain future after retirement. By providing structured educational pathways and career transition support, we make sports a viable life choice, not a risky gamble. This will unlock talent that currently goes untapped. Perhaps, if we have implemented such support earlier, we might have retained more athletes who could have contributed to stronger SEA Games' performances. How many potential medalists chose safer career paths because the sporting pathway seems too precarious?

However, I must ask, what about our past athletes? Many former national athletes, including those who represented us at previous SEA Games, struggle after retirement. Having sacrificed their peak earning years and educational opportunities for Singapore's sporting glory, some face financial difficulties, struggle to enter the workforce or lack credentials for career advancement.

Will the Government extend retroactive support to these past athletes who competed before such programme existed? They deserve consideration, not just those who benefit from future systems. These are athletes who paved the way, who competed when support was even more limited than it is today.

I will also propose practical support mechanisms. Could we provide additional CPF contributions for athletes who hit performance targets, including those who have represented Singapore at SEA Games and other regional competitions? Could SportSG support the healthcare needs of our past athletes, especially for conditions which were associated with their sporting careers, as brought up by Ms Sylvia Lim on 6 July 2023? These are athletes who have represented Singapore with pride, who have stood on podiums wearing our flag. Our 2025 SEA Games athletes and those who came before them surely deserve more that career counselling. We can provide concrete financial instruments that secure their futures.

Mr Deputy Speaker, this Bill contains much to support the recognition of mind sports, the commitment to athlete welfare and the modernisation of SportSG's functions. This represents genuine progress. But progress requires not just good intentions but sound governance and demonstrated accountability. A Council of 25 is a recipe for inefficiency. Expanded institutional responsibilities without demonstrated capability and accountability for past spending is putting the cart before the horse.

Our performance at the 2025 SEA Games should serve as a wake-up call. We cannot continue expanding mandates without first addressing the fundamental issues that have limited our sporting success. Our athletes gave everything at those Games. Now we must ensure that our institutions match their commitment with excellence of our own.

I urge the Minister to address these concerns directly. Show us the performance analysis from SEA Games: explain what went wrong and what will change. Demonstrate that SportSG has the capability on these expanded responsibilities, while also fixing the problems that led to disappointing results.

I also urge consideration of the amendments I have proposed: maintain the Council size at 15 and extend meaningful support to past athletes who have already served Singapore. We continue to believe that those who have already given their best years to Singapore's sporting glory deserve the same consideration in our promise to future athletes. Let us pass a Bill that is not just forward looking but also well-governed, adequately resourced, accountable and fair to all who have contributed to Singapore's sporting legacy.

Let us ensure that when we host or compete in future regional Games, we can point to this legislation as a turning point that led to sustained sporting excellence. Our athletes have done their part. Now it is time for us to do ours. Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Yes, Mr Deputy Speaker, just two clarifications for the hon Member. I note in his speech that he used the words that he proposes amendment, in terms of the size of the Council. Is the Member proposing a formal amendment to the Bill or is he making a suggestion?

Secondly, he has made an assertion that we should reflect on the results of the 2025 SEA Games. I am not sure by what measure he is referring to, because certainly in terms of medal haul, it was a record of 202 medals: I think 51 gold, 43 silver and 64 bronze. That is way more than what we had in 2023. So, I am not sure how he came to the conclusion that we did not perform better in 2025.

Okay, thank you to the hon Member for the clarification. So, for the first point that he made, it was a proposal. Sorry, if I mentioned "amendment". And for the second item, with regard to the performance during the 2025 SEA Games, even though we had broken a few records, there are some sports that were not doing well, for example, football and badminton.

Yes, Mr Deputy Speaker. Thank you to the hon Member for the clarification. With regard to his clarification on the performance, I would like to clarify with him if it is accurate to say that he is referring to specific performances of specific sports during the SEA Games, rather than the overall performance which was markedly better in 2025 than in previous SEA Games.

So, in general, Singapore in terms of our region, I think we are still fifth, so, I guess there is still room for improvement, even though in terms of medal tally we had exceeded, as compared to previous years.

Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Singapore Sports Council (Amendment) Bill and the direction it sets for SportSG in shaping Singapore's sporting future. I do want to also congratulate our Team Singapore athletes at the recent SEA Games. I spent 10 days with them and cheering them on. So, I do apologise as my voice is still recovering from those 10 days of cheering. I do want to also declare my interest as the President of Singapore Aquatics, an NSA.

In supporting this Bill, I will focus on three areas. First, how we expand participation and inclusion in ways that strengthen our sporting base; second, why uplifting standards and professionalising coaching are essential as participation grows; and third, why high-performance sport remains vital, not just for medals, but for the values it inculcates in society and the sense of who we are as a nation.

First, I welcome the expanded definition of sport to include e-sports and mind sports, in line with wider local and international developments. This recognises that structured competitive activities can take different forms and allows more Singaporeans, across different interests, abilities and life circumstances to participate meaningfully in sport, whether recreationally or at higher levels.

The Singapore Chess Federation, for example, runs regular programmes in prisons and in rehabilitation settings, showing how mind sports, like chess, can provide structure, discipline and engagement even in higher constrained environments. In the same spirit of inclusivity, I also strongly support the continued emphasis on disability sports through the recognition of the SNPC as a key partner.

This amendment, together with the refreshed DSMP signals a sustained commitment to ensuring that sport remains accessible and meaningful for Singaporeans of all abilities and affirms inclusion as a core principle of our sporting ecosystem.

For Singaporeans who may not be drawn to organised sport, but simply want to stay active, bringing the promotion of physical fitness squarely within SportSG's functions is critical. It allows SportSG to lead in creating accessible everyday opportunities for Singaporeans to keep active from neighbourhood ActiveSG programmes to platforms, like the Singapore Urban Sports and Fitness Festival. And the impact is clear. The proportion of Singaporeans who exercise regularly has risen, from 65% in 2018, to 74% in 2024.

So, taken together, these developments help Singaporeans stay active. They help them bond and it helps us strengthen our resilience in the community. But as participation grows, ensuring sport is safe and well conducted becomes even more important.

Coaching quality, facility standards and codes of conduct matter even more, not just for performance, but for safety and longer-term participation. In particular, professionalising coaching at the developmental level is critical, as research shows that early experiences strongly influence whether young people remain engaged in sport.

And so, this is why initiatives, like the NROC, matter. The certification is meant to signal professional standards and support better remuneration. But its impact is limited when certification is not consistently required across all instances where sports coaching is practised. For instance, a coach whose NROC registration is suspended may be restricted from coaching at ActiveSG facilities. But they can still coach in a privately-owned non-ActiveSG facility. Without the stronger reach to uphold standards, the professionalisation of sports coaching is weakened and, more crucially, it also puts our young athletes at risk.

In this regard, I would ask the Government to consider whether SportSG should be given greater discretion, not only to set standards but, when necessary, to make them binding across sporting and fitness settings beyond ActiveSG-managed facilities. This is important in context involving youth instruction where safety and proper conduct are paramount.

In the meantime, uplifting standards must remain a shared responsibility. Our NSAs already work with SportSG to require NROC certification for official roles in NSA-sanction activities. I know in schools as well, many schools require coaches with NROC certification. But the clubs, sporting organisations, they can also make recognised certification a requirement when engaging coaches. Parents, too, play a role. They can ask about certification, encourage coaches to attend professional development courses organised by SportSG or CoachSG, and support remuneration that reflects a coach's training and qualifications.

Mr Speaker, when we professionalise coaching in this way, we improve performance outcomes as well as safety, retention and the quality of sporting experiences.

This brings me to a related point about how athlete development is organised under this Bill. I support the intent behind clause 6(k) which empowers SportSG to develop and train sports persons, particularly at the national and elite levels where a more centralised approach can strengthen high performance.

But at the same time, I seek assurance and clarification on how this role will be exercised alongside existing developmental pathways. In several sports, early-stage development is already being carried out by private clubs and private organisations working closely with the NSAs. They play an important role in building the pipeline. Could the Government clarify that SportSG's approach under clause 6(k) is not to crowd out these developmental programmes by competing with them, nor to leave them to compete freely over a fixed pool of resources, like previous Members have mentioned, but instead, to support a complementary and sustainable ecosystem?

In particular, I would appreciate clarification on how SportSG intends to work with NSAs to identify and support credible development partners that are aligned with national objectives, meet governance and safeguarding standards and contribute meaningfully to athlete development.

Mr Speaker, while participation forms the base of our sporting system, high performance competitive sport defines its peak. We must, therefore, continue to remain attentive to how we support those who represent the nation at the highest levels. Excellence and Major Games, such as the Olympics, play a unique role in our national consciousness. It projects Singapore's identity. It builds pride and creates moments of collective unity.

Many of us will remember Joseph Schooling's gold medal at the 2016 Rio Olympics. It was not just that he won, but how he won, defeating the legendary Michael Phelps in a race that ended in a rare three-way tie for silver. That race reminded Singaporeans that, on the biggest stage, against the greatest in the world, we can still make our mark.

More recently and closer to home, at the SEA Games, we witnessed that same inspiration expressed in different ways. We saw history made as hurdler Calvin Quek and diver Avvir Tham, each ended longstanding gold medal droughts for Singapore in their respective events, achievements not seen since our Independence in 1965. What a gift for SG60.

But high performance sport is not only about individual triumphs or podium finishes. It is also about how athletes respond when their team needs them. In men's table tennis, Josh Chua was stretched off after twisting his left ankle. Yet, he chose to return to the court and played on, determined to contribute whatever he could for the team. While he might have lost his game, that decision to carry on despite being injured, had a galvanising impact which lifted his teammates Koen Pang and Izaac Quek, who themselves were battling illness and injury and helping Team Singapore retain the gold in the men's team event.

Team work is about putting the team above itself, even in sports, like swimming, that are often seen as individual. We are familiar with the women's four by 100-metre medley relay at the SEA Games which illustrates this powerfully where we saw our senior swimmers Letitia Sim, Quah Ting Wen and Quah Jing Wen supporting 14-year-old debutant Julia Yeo, who was notified at the last minute to swim in place of an injured teammate. But what was less known was that at the same time that Julia was called, another reserve for the relay, 15-year-old Victoria Lim, also a SEA Games debutant, was also asked to stand by to compete in what would have been the biggest race of her career.

Ultimately, the decision was made to go with Julia. For Victoria, that decision was understandably disappointing. We know the team won and so she lost out on having that chance for the gold medal as well. Yet, Victoria accepted the decision with quiet stoicism. She put the team ahead of her own disappointments and stood firmly behind her teammates without hesitation. I am happy to add that I met Victoria and her parents two weeks ago. After a short vacation, she was back in the pool, more determined than ever to represent Team Singapore at Major Games and to make the nation proud.

But that moment, for me, it captures what a "we first" Singapore looks like. Putting the Team first sometimes means being prepared to step aside, even at personal loss, so that the Team can succeed.

Mr Speaker, high performance sport brings these values to life in a salient way, reminding Singaporeans that while we may be small in numbers, we are united, disciplined, resilient and capable of standing our ground on the world stage. And it is precisely because high-performance sport carries this national meaning and because it is inherently resource-intensive, we must approach it with focus and intent.

And so, even as we expand opportunities for participation and inclusion, we must be careful not to spread ourselves too thin. This calls for a pragmatic strategic approach, guided by a long-term view of elite sport development.

So, if in the spirit of inclusion, we want to support a wider range of emerging sports, and if, in the spirit of excellence, we also want to sustain high performance competitive sport, then we must expand the pool of funding available to the sector.

In this regard, there is untapped potential in engaging the private corporate sector more deliberately, as some Members have mentioned, but what I would suggest is to engage them as private donors as the commissioner of charities, annual reports consistently show, sport receives the smallest share of charitable donations. To complement MCCY's One Team Singapore Fund matching grant scheme, perhaps the Ministry could explore additional mechanisms to make it more attractive for private sector partners to donate.

In this context, I wish to express my strong support for the amendment empowering SportSG to oversee the consolidated entity formed from the SSP and the High Performance Sport Institute. This is a significant and forward looking move.

While education and high performance sport require different professional expertise, for athletes, many of whom are still in school, these domains are deeply entangled. They are not separate. As a former national athlete myself, I can attest that these were challenges that I faced awhile back when I was still an athlete and it is an issue that our athletes still face today. And so, it is commendable that SportSG is actively addressing this issue.

The training demands, academic commitments, recovery and family life intersect daily for our athletes. And so, by acting as an integrator – aligning education, training and support, SportSG reduces fragmentation, eases the burden on families and strengthens development pathways; and importantly, this makes high performance sport more accessible to a broader range of Singaporeans.

Mr Speaker, taken together, this Bill strengthens our sporting ecosystem from base to peak. It broadens participation and inclusion, uplift standards and professionalism and sustains high performance sports, so that it inspires us as one united people. For these reasons, I support the Singapore Sports Council (Amendment) Bill.

Mr Speaker, rise in support of the Singapore Sports Council (Amendment) Bill. I would like to declare my personal connection to sports in Singapore. I am currently serving in my first term as the Deputy President of the Singapore Dragonboat Association, together with hon Member Mr Alex Yeo and was formerly a National Youth Athlete in ten-pin bowling under the National Youth Development Programme. I was a beneficiary of the original Sports Excellence 2000 scheme.

Although I left competitive bowling more than two decades ago, I have watched, with great interest, how Singapore sports have evolved since then and our laudable approach in harnessing the potential of our local talents. In the sport of ten-pin bowling, our young bowlers have gone on to win world championships and broadly, our athletes now train with more structured pathways.

More importantly, our sporting ecosystem has grown to support not just elite performance, but also inclusion and participation across the community. For example, I understand that there are at least nine para inclusive teams in the dragon-boating community with an estimated 250 para athletes who might be physically or intellectually impaired.

I have seen first-hand the discipline and commitment required of all athletes, the importance of strong governance and access to facilities and the impact of initiatives that broaden opportunity – all of which are directly supported and reinforced by the reforms in this Bill.

The amendments to the Singapore Sports Council Act updates our legislative framework to better reflect the current sporting environment in Singapore. They clarify the role of Sport Singapore, strengthen governance and recognise a wider range of sporting activities, while continuing to support both high performance sport and mass participation.

I will speak on three areas: first, the amended definition of sports, second, the expanded role of SportSG; and third, the formal recognition of the Singapore National Paralympic Council, followed by some clarifications for the Ministry.

On the expanded definition of sports. This Bill updates the statutory definition of sport to reflect how participation and competition have evolved, by including mind sports and e-sports. Mind sports, such as chess and bridge are internationally governed with their international federations recognised by the International Olympic Committee. These disciplines have also featured as medal events in major multi-sport competitions, including the Asian Games.

E-sports have similarly developed into structured and regulated competitive activities. They were included as official medal events at the 2022 Asian Games in Hangzhou and most recently at the 2025 SEA Games. At the elite level, competitors in mind sports and e-sports undergo systematic training, compete under sustained pressure and commit years to preparation and performance. These characteristics are consistent with what we already recognise in high performance sport.

Mr Speaker, the expanded definition should be understood as complementary and not a departure from our continued support for traditional physical sports. Many athletes continue to train over long periods, often while balancing work or study and have to rely on a stable and well-governed sporting ecosystem. This Bill preserves the statutory framework that enables that support. By recognising a broader range of sporting activities, the Bill allows our policies to remain relevant to evolving participation patterns, while continuing to uphold high standards of sporting integrity and excellence.

On the expanded role of SportSG. The Bill strengthens SportSG's mandate to establish and uphold standards across coaching, equipment, facilities and accreditation. In doing so, it reinforces a clear principle: high standards are not optional in sport, they are foundational. This is particularly important in Singapore's context, where most athletes are not full-time professionals.

For many, sport is pursued alongside education or employment. Our system must therefore support not just peak performance, but the whole athlete and the full sporting journey, including welfare, career pathways and transitions beyond competitive sport, recognising that only a small proportion remain in high performance sport for life.

The Bill also reinforces SportSG's role in promoting physical activity across the population. With a super aged society in Singapore, physical activity is no longer only a sporting issue, it is a public health imperative. Regular activity supports physical health, mental well-being and independence among seniors. By strengthening SportSG's mandate, we invest not only in sport, but in healthier ageing and a more resilient society.

Mr Speaker, I turn to the partnership with the Singapore National Paralympic Council, which is an important feature of the Bill. Singapore first competed at the Paralympic Games in the 1980s and our Paralympians won their first medals at the 2008 Beijing Paralympics. Since then, they have continued to represent Singapore with distinction at subsequent Games. Their achievements remind us that sporting excellence is not defined by ability, but by determination and by performance.

The Singapore National Paralympic Council plays a critical role in supporting these athletes from development pathways to high performance preparation. Formal recognition of the Singapore National Paralympic Council as a key partner sends a clear signal: inclusive sport is not peripheral, it is integral to our national sporting framework. By affirming this partnership in statute, the Bill reinforces a fundamental principle – that access to opportunity, support and excellence in sport should be open to all who have the commitment to pursue it.

But Mr Speaker, I do have a few clarifications to make. First, on Council Membership. Under the amendment to section 4, membership of the Council will increase to a maximum of 25 members, up from 15, previously. I seek clarification on the rationale for this increase, as well as the criteria used in appointing Council members. In a public body with such influence, how members are chosen is not just administrative – it is a question of integrity, trust and accountability. Singaporeans deserve transparency.

Specifically, given challenges unique to Singapore's sporting landscape, including the realities faced by non-full-time athletes and gaps in support for certain sports, how will the Council's composition address these issues? Will experience from countries facing similar constraints be considered? A Council that reflects these realities will be one that can make fair, informed and relevant decisions. The increase in membership numbers can then be justified.

Next, on athlete support and the spex awards. I note the introduction of the spexEducation Undergraduate Scholarship, with the inaugural 12 scholars awarded in April 2025. They hail from sports, such as fencing, swimming, shooting, wushu and silat – truly deserving athletes who exemplify dedication and excellence.

However, I would like to ask how scholars are chosen. How the Government determines the number of scholarships each year and whether athletes in mind sports and e-sports will be considered in the future? Will there be a clear, publicly available framework explaining how criteria are applied? Transparency here is not optional; it empowers athletes to plan their careers and chase excellence with confidence.

Lastly, on making sports facilities accessible to all. Under the amendment to section 8, SportSG will oversee the management of sports facilities. Will it be able to address situations where community organisations or individuals face difficulties booking national facilities, especially at the recently rebranded The Kallang, even when they appear unused for large periods of time?

Given SportSG's expanded role, clear guidelines and fair processes are essential. Access to facilities must be a right, not a privilege. In addition, I would like to raise the potential of unused open grounds and vacant land in the country being made available for short-term sporting use. In my line of work, I have seen how the Government pragmatically allows vacant industrial land under JTC to be leased out on a short-term basis for solar energy generation. This ensures land does not sit idle while still retaining long-term planning flexibility.

That same principle can and should be applied to sports. Temporarily unused open spaces can be leased to sports organisations and community groups to create facilities for training, grassroots programmes and competitions. This not only maximises land use efficiency, but also lowers barriers to participation, supports community sport and allows SportSG to meet demand without waiting for a permanent infrastructure. Efficient access strengthens trust, encourages participation and ensures our sporting ecosystem works for everyone in the country.

Mr Speaker, I would appreciate the Ministry's clarifications on the above matters. And notwithstanding these questions, I support the Bill, because it strengthens SportSG, supports our athletes and ensures opportunities for sporting excellence are truly open to all in a country. And to put on record, I thank Team Singapore for showing us what resilience looks like, because these athletes do not need a wake-up call. They have been answering the call of duty every single day. [Applause.]

Mr Speaker, I would like to declare that I am the President of the Singapore Table Tennis Association and hence, may be an interested party in some parts of this speech.

The Singapore Sports Council was set up in 1973 and renamed as Sport Singapore in 2014. The local sporting landscape has grown significantly and become more vibrant, especially over the past decade. The sporting ecosystem has also become more holistic and well-resourced.

Our national athletes are flying our Singapore flag high, with more podium finishes in the Olympics and other Major Games and world championships in recent years. More Singaporeans and residents are also participating in sports across different age groups and sports participation in Singapore has reached an all-time high, with 74% of residents aged 13 and above engaging in sports at least once a week, according to the latest National Sports Participation Survey conducted in 2022.

Across different parts of Singapore, there are high quality recreational sports facilities, such as ActiveSG sports stadiums, swimming pools, gyms and world-class competition venues, such as the OCBC Aquatic Centre. There is the MyActiveSG+ platform to book and use these facilities conveniently and affordably.

Indeed, we have much going on for us in Singapore.

This is a landscape populated by a whole community of sports administrators, coaches, athletes, guided by the vision to Live Better Through Sport, a vision set for Singapore sports for 2030. Singapore sports is growing in ambition and reach. The Singapore Sports Hub, which is now known as The Kallang, will become an integrated sports and events hub and will host major events, like the Women's Tennis Association 500, the HSBC Rugby Sevens Series and the National Day Parade in 2026. There will also be a new national training centre for local athletes and a new 18,000-seat indoor arena.

As part of the Kallang Alive Masterplan, the Singapore Sports School in Woodlands will shift to The Kallang. Sports tourism in Singapore is also experiencing a boom as more international sporting events are held here. For instance, the Standard Chartered Marathon, Singapore Rugby Sevens and the World Table Tennis Singapore Smash are some of the world-class sporting events that have attracted sports fans and their families to Singapore every year.

To realise Vision 2030 and live out the goals set for The Kallang Masterplan, there is indeed a need for deeper expertise and experience to develop the new specialised functions, such as precinct and infrastructure development, international sports events organisation as well as sports education and professional skills development. Moreover, significant Government funding for these infrastructure development and programme development will be required. Therefore, strong leadership and governance from the Sport Singapore Board is critical to ensure taxpayers' contributions allocated for sports development are not for an idealistic dream but is well-spent and will uplift our entire nation towards achieving better lives through sports.

The Sport Singapore Board will play a crucial role in this transformation journey. As with any Board, its duties include ensuring strong governance, management, accountability and alignment with key sporting goals. I, therefore, agree with the amendment to increase the Board from 15 to 25 members. The current Sport Singapore Board has a bench strength of 15 members and comprises members from the private, public sectors as well as national sports associations and athletes, directly appointed by the Minister for Community, Culture and Youth.

In the current Sport Singapore Board composition, seven out of 15 members have a finance-related professional background. Four members are from the public sector. Only one member is from a National Sports Association, one member from the Singapore National Olympic Council and one member is a Paralympian.

I would suggest that with 10 additional Board seats, the Board members should have a greater diversity of professional backgrounds and would, in turn, bring to the table wider industry networks. For instance, professionals or experts in sports education, sports psychology, sports tourism, community sports and senior sports would bring valuable insights and perspectives into technical capability building, community sports programming and sports excellence for the elite athletes.

Aside from looking at the number of members alone, we might also introduce other measures, such as term limits, which is good practice in the spirit of renewal. I recall that one previous Board Chairman had served 16 years. Last, when it comes to Board seats, it is not merely a numbers game but one of commitment, interest, expertise and passion. With more Board members bringing a wider breath of experience and networks as well as deeper expertise, SportSG is well placed to bring sports in Singapore to new and greater heights.

I would also like to pose a challenge to the better-resourced SportSG board, to aim for a more aspirational vision. Beyond improving the lives of individuals, sports can also uplift and bond the entire nation. In October 2021, I spoke in this House on how sports can bond Singaporeans together. Sports can strengthen our bodies and minds, toughen our fighting spirit and uplift our spirits during difficult times. Sports can also bring Singaporeans of different races and religions, socio-economic backgrounds together and be the unifying force that bonds and builds Singapore.

In the recent 33rd SEA Games in Thailand, Singapore sent the largest ever contingent of 930 athletes across 48 sports. A total of 202 medals were won, namely 52 golds, 62 silvers and 89 bronzes, the biggest medal haul ever.

I was in Thailand, Nonthaburi province to support our table tennis team which contributed four golds, one silver and two bronzes. I know how hard our athletes trained, the sacrifices they made and how hard they fought for every point. Each time the Singapore flag is raised and Majulah Singapura is sung, I felt immensely proud of what our young athletes have achieved.

I also met many Team Nila supporters, more than 200 of them who took time to travel to Thailand in support of our athletes competing in various sports. I also know of many Singaporeans back home who were glued to MeWatch, following the competitions and cheering for our athletes.

There were many inspiring moments that stole our hearts, seeing how our young athletes fought against their competitors to fly our Singaporean flag high. Many would remember how fencer, Amita Berthier, made a spectacular consecutive seven-point comeback to claim victory over her opponent and eventually claimed her third title in Women's Individual Foil event.

There was also 14-year-old swimmer Julia Yeo and her gungho can-do spirit. Despite being called on by her coach to replace her injured teammate just 20 minutes before the race, Julia – who had to borrow a swimsuit and a cap – did her personal best and helped the women's swim team win the women's 4x100-metre medley gold in a meet record time.

Julia is a symbol of all that sports can do – physical and mental strength, a spirit of overcoming and a pride and commitment to the process.

In 2029, Singapore will be hosting the 35th SEA Games and I hope that our whole nation will come together to support, volunteer and cheer for our athletes, coaches and other members of our sports community. The home ground support will give our athletes the extra boost to go the extra mile.

Sir, 2029 is just three years away. I look forward to the expanded SportSG Board, leading the sporting community towards this milestone SEA Games, rallying the whole of Singapore and bonding Singaporeans through sports. This Singapore spirit will be the most precious achievement, more than any number of gold medals. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the amendment Bill.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I must declare I am not as athletic or sporting as my colleagues but I do appreciate good sports and I want to thank our athletes, whether they win medals or not, they spent a lot of time training, the hard work that they put in, the stress that they faced and being in front of the nation, competing with the weight of the nation on their shoulders. I think we definitely should appreciate all of them and I would like to thank them.

Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Singapore Sports Council (Amendment) Bill. This Bill recognises something many Singaporeans already know from lived experience – that the way we engage through sport has evolved. And our laws need to evolve with it.

But as we widen definitions and expand powers, it is worth pausing to ask not just what we enable, but how these changes will affect people differently – especially our youths, families with fewer resources, and athletes who are already under pressure.

As a psychologist, I see sport not only as physical activity or competition, but as part of a wider social system. When designed thoughtfully, it builds confidence, resilience and belonging. When it is not, it can unintentionally add stress and widen gaps.

I support the inclusion of mind sports and e-sports in our legal framework. Chess, bridge and competitive gaming have grown significantly in Singapore. Many young people already invest time, effort and identity in these activities. Recognising them signals that we acknowledge different forms of talent, including those based on cognitive skills.

At the same time, recognition also carries responsibility.

By defining e-sports as "sports" as sports, we are not just enabling support – we are shaping norms. We are signalling what is legitimate and encouraged. And that is why the conditions around recognition matter.

Many youths I meet are motivated and capable, but also increasingly tired. They spend long hours on screens – often alone, often under pressure – to perform, to rank and sometimes to secure opportunities like Direct School Admission (DSA).

A CNA-Institute of Policy Studies survey found that teenagers in Singapore spend more than eight hours a day on electronic devices, and about 60% struggle to reduce their screen time. This reflects a growing imbalance in how technology fits into young people's lives.

As SportSG extends support into this space, it would be useful to hear how governance frameworks will evolve to ensure that youth protection and athlete welfare remain central.

My question to the Ministry is a practical one: how will official recognition of e-sports be implemented in a way that does not normalise unhealthy screen habits, especially for youths who are already vulnerable?

Recognition should not mean endorsement without limits. For publicly supported programmes, it would be helpful to have clear expectations – around training hours, physical conditioning, sleep and posture education, and referral pathways when concerning behaviours emerge. These are not meant to restrict interest, but to protect well-being.

There is also a governance dimension we should consider. Unlike traditional sports, e-sports are not governed by independent federations. They are owned by private publishers, who control game rules, competition formats and even when a title continues to exist.

International research cautions that governance models dominated by commercial interests may not always align with public interest goals – particularly when it comes to athlete welfare, integrity and transparency.

Next, the expanded definition of sport also has implications for education. Sports-based DSA pathways have opened doors for many students. But families with more resources are often better positioned to invest in coaching, equipment, or overseas exposure. Others may opt out early, not because their children lack ability, but because the costs or uncertainty feel too high.

So, I would like to ask how schools will ensure fair and holistic evaluation for mind sports or e-sports DSA pathways, especially where physical benchmarks are less clear. It is important that these pathways support balanced development, rather than a narrow focus at a young age.

More broadly, inequality in sport often starts much earlier than we realise. Some families have the means and confidence to take risks. Others worry about what happens if their child invests heavily in sport but has limited options later on. That is why I strongly support the Bill's provision for educational and career support for both active and retired sportspersons. It helps reduce the sense that pursuing sport is an all-or-nothing decision.

But I would also ask whether we have sufficient early-stage, school- and community-based systems to identify and support talented youths from lower-resource families before gaps widen. If sport development is meant to start early, then access and reassurance for families need to start early too. These concerns are made more pressing by the reality that national sports funding is already constrained.

NSAs compete for funding based on alignment with Vision 2030, key performance indicators, governance standards and development plans. Athletes in traditional sports have raised concerns about gaps in institutional support, particularly beyond the top tier. International evidence also shows that less visible sports, including disability and inclusive sports, tend to receive fewer subsidies unless funding models are deliberately balanced.

So, my question is this: as SportSG's mandate expands, how will funding models continue to balance elite performance, grassroots participation and inclusive sport for persons with disabilities, without disadvantaging those with less visibility or commercial appeal?

While recognising mind sports and e-sports, we should remain clear that physical activity remains central to public health. Resilience is built not only through mental effort, but through movement, teamwork and learning how to recover from setbacks.

I therefore welcome the Bill's explicit expansion of SportSG's role in promoting physical fitness activities. As new categories are brought under its umbrella, it will be important to ensure that community sport and grassroots physical activity continue to receive sustained attention and resources.

I also support the introduction of codes of practice and accreditation for coaching, equipment and facilities. Safety and quality should not depend on informal networks or personal knowledge. At the same time, smaller volunteer-led groups may worry about capacity. A tiered framework would allow standards to be applied proportionately, with stricter requirements for higher-risk or publicly funded programmes and lighter-touch guidance for grassroots groups, preserving both safety and participation.

Finally, the Bill enables a more integrated athlete development ecosystem, including education and career pathways. This is important. Elite athletes face significant pressure and uncertainty, especially as they transition out of competitive sport. Mental well-being should not be an afterthought. We should support athletes not only at their peak, but through the transitions that follow.

As SportSG oversees these institutions, it would be helpful to track not just performance outcomes, but also well-being, educational progression and post-sport transitions. These indicators matter if we want to support athletes as people, not just performers.

Mr Speaker, sport has the potential to support mental health, build resilience and bring people together across backgrounds. This Bill gives SportSG greater flexibility – and with it, greater responsibility. With careful implementation, attention to equity and safeguards for youth well-being, these amendments can strengthen a sporting ecosystem that supports Singaporeans across different abilities, backgrounds and stages of life. I support the Bill.