On May 29, the Special Commission on the Impact of Screens and Social Networks on the Health and Development of Young People tabled its final report (Assemblée nationale du Québec, 2025).
Note: This article is an automated translation. All quotes have been translated by me. All . For the original article, click on Français in the menu.
As a reminder, I was invited to testify on behalf of the Fondation des Gardiens virtuels (Virtual Guardians Foundation). The video is available below.
In this article, I’d like to focus on the content of the esports report, and analyze the various recommendations.
Consisting of 6 pages (50 to 56) out of 165, esports was dealt with in the “Screens at school” section (p. 30), and not in the “Video games” section (p. 83). This shows, firstly, that the commission focused its analysis of the esports phenomenon on existing programs in schools. What’s more, as can be seen in the following quotation, it makes a clear distinction between playing video games recreationally and practicing esports: “Esports is distinguished from the playful practice of video games by its competitive aspect and the time allocated to training and developing game strategies”.
The introduction and presentation of the various positive and negative issues are interesting, and extremely similar to what I myself wrote in my dissertation (Savard, 2025). One point that raises my eyebrows and that I’d like to see clarified is that relating to playing time among esports enthusiasts. It is mentioned that “the hypothesis that esports programs have the effect of replacing the practice of video games at home” is invalidated by studies by Antoine Lemay and Magali Dufour. This is based on the fact that their studies show that participants in e-sports programs play more games than their non-concentration counterparts, and that “playing esports adds to the total amount of leisure time pursued”. However, it’s not true to say that these two pieces of information invalidate the claim that the programs don’t replace playtime at home, given that the people interested in this type of program are those at risk of overconsumption by the very nature of their interests.
Indeed, the observation that video game enthusiasts in programs play more than those outside them is totally normal, and present in literally all concentrations. When I was in water polo sport-studies, I had more pool time than the majority of players not in this type of program. The same goes for my dance and art colleagues. We mustn’t forget that young people in this type of concentration are passionate about their disciplines, and will de facto want to put in as many hours as possible to develop. However, what’s important here is not whether they play more or less than people outside the programs, but whether they play more or less compared to before they joined this type of program. The nuance is crucial. According to qualitative interviews I’ve conducted over the years with players and their parents, the comment that comes up is that the young person plays LESS at home compared to themselves. I’ve never heard a program boast that their programs are a 100% substitute for playing time at home. Anyone who knows the slightest thing about what they’re talking about knows this isn’t true.
There are also some nuances that I would bring to certain statements. For example, shortcuts are made on certain mental health issues practicing e-sports, when in fact, these are issues that are ubiquitous among young people in general. What’s more, video game disorder does not enjoy consensus in the scientific community (e.g. van Rooji et al., 2018).
Here are the commission’s four recommendations, along with my comments:
Recommendation 32
The Commission recommends that school personnel involved in esports programs be equipped to detect health problems in young people, including cyberaddiction. They should also be equipped to facilitate discussion of video games, particularly the addictive aspects that can be found in them.
I must confess that this recommendation is my favorite of those presented in this article, and I would have gone even further. In an ideal world, anyone wanting to coach a young person in an esports program should at the very least take the Fédération québécoise de sports électroniques (FQSE) coaching course. Having given an adapted version of this in the “Implementing an esports program” course in the esports microprogram at the Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières (2025), I can guarantee that it’s a must-have. Secondly, it would have been surprising if I’d been against training on digital issues, considering that this is something I’ve been pushing enormously as a means of prevention within the Virtual Guardians Foundation itself.
Recommendation 33
The Commission recommends that schools strengthen the supervision of youth e-sports programs, to ensure that they take place in a healthy, safe and balanced environment. The Commission also recommends that clear pedagogical objectives be defined for these programs, including the development of skills such as communication, team spirit and self-regulation.
I agree with this recommendation on several levels. As was also pointed out in my dissertation (Savard, 2025), there are major standardization issues in the field of videogame competitions, whether in schools or in the public arena. As far as school programs are concerned, there are several turnkey solutions that the government could implement. Firstly, recognizing the Fédération québécoise de sports électroniques (FQSE) as a sports or leisure governing body would provide an industry-independent watchdog that could easily set up an accreditation system to ensure the healthy development of this discipline. As identified a few times in the commission’s report, the FQSE is transparent on issues related to video games. Then, another complementary solution, and one that is even more easily achievable, is to repeal the ban on schools investing in esports under measure 15028 (Ministère de l’Éducation, 2024). This is a major obstacle for schools wishing to follow this ultra-important recommendation.
Recommendation 34
The Commission recommends that e-sports programs in schools incorporate measures to prevent and raise awareness of issues related to increased screen time, cyberaddiction, performance and overall health (physical, mental and social), including workshops on screen management, healthy lifestyle habits and employment prospects. It’s important for schools to encourage a healthy balance between e-sports and other activities essential to young people’s well-being, such as physical exercise, face-to-face social interaction and rest.
This recommendation is excellent on paper, but there are shortcomings on the ground. Indeed, the quality of programs is disparate from one institution to the next, due to widely varying resource allocations. On the one hand, there are programs like those of the Esports Academy of Canada, which have had hundreds of thousands of dollars invested over the years, versus programs that are only supported at arm’s length by passionate but already overburdened teachers. The good news is that, according to my strategic watch in the field, the vast majority of student institutions have already been trying to follow this recommendation for several years, despite their limited resources. Once again, the Fédération québécoise de sports électroniques and the Fondation des Gardiens virtuels would be powerful allies with a minimum of funding.
Recommendation 35
The Commission recommends that, prior to the implementation of any new esports program, a private educational institution or the governing board of a public school inform the Ministère de l’Éducation of its decision to implement this type of program, and that the program be subject to increased monitoring by the Ministère. The Commission recommends that the government make available to school service centers and institutions an accompanying document designed to provide a framework for the implementation of specific e-sports pedagogical programs to be followed by schools. This document should be based on available data and promote informed decision-making on the possible effects on health, associated risks, academic success, motivation and student well-being. The Commission also recommends that the Ministry of Education monitor the development of e-sports programs in the school network more closely, in order to take into account the development and well-being of young people. Schools should provide the necessary data on an annual basis.
It’s hard to disagree with this recommendation. The problem, however, is the same as with recommendation 34: with what money and expertise will this be implemented? School service centers and institutions don’t have the knowledge or resources to create this type of document, let alone set up a support system. I’m repeating myself, but the Fédération québécoise de sports électroniques and the Fondation des Gardiens virtuels could directly help implement this recommendation with a minimum of funding.
Conclusion
My hat’s off to the commission for coming to this conclusion: “In the light of this evidence, we conclude that school e-sports programs have both advantages and disadvantages for young people. In this context, we rely on a harm reduction approach. We believe that, to ensure their success, school-based esports programs must be supervised and monitored by the Ministry of Education.” It’s 100% in line with my interdisciplinary PhD in health and society at UQAM, where I’m interested in the supervision of competitive videogames, with the aim of optimizing their benefits while reducing their negative aspects. Now, to remain pragmatic and easily implement his recommendations, all that’s needed is for the government to release financial resources and surround itself with competent partners (e.g. Fédération québécoise de sports électroniques and Fondation des Gardiens virtuels).
I’d love to hear what you think! LinkedIn publication : https://www.linkedin.com/posts/leoninsavard_voici-ma-courte-analyse-de-la-section-esports-activity-7343635903669563392-tuKm
Video of my participation in the commission:
Sources :
- Assemblée nationale du Québec (2025). Commission spéciale sur les impacts des écrans et des réseaux sociaux sur la santé et le développement des jeunes, https://www.assnat.qc.ca/fr/travaux-parlementaires/commissions/csesj-43-1/index.html
- Fédération québécoise de sports électroniques – https://www.esportsquebec.ca/
- Fondation des Gardiens virtuels – https://gardiensvirtuels.org/
- Ministère de l’Éducation (2024). Mesure 15028, https://www.education.gouv.qc.ca/fileadmin/site_web/documents/loisir-sport/Mesure-15028-activites-parascolaires-secondaire.pdf
- Savard, F. (2025). Perceptions des enjeux entourant les sports électroniques, Mémoire, Université du Québec à Montréal, Maîtrise en communication, https://archipel.uqam.ca/18615/
- Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières (2025). Microprogramme de premier cycle en développement du sport électronique, https://oraprdnt.uqtr.uquebec.ca/portail/gscw031?owa_no_site=6853
- van Rooij, A. J., Ferguson, C. J., Colder Carras, M., Kardefelt-Winther, D., Shi, J., Aarseth, E., Bean, A. M., Bergmark, K. H., Brus, A., Coulson, M., Deleuze, J., Dullur, P., Dunkels, E., Edman, J., Elson, M., Etchells, P. J., Fiskaali, A., Granic, I., Jansz, J., Karlsen, F., Kaye, L. K., Kirsh, B., Lieberoth, A., Markey, P., Mills, K. L., Nielsen, R. K. L., Orben, A., Poulsen, A., Prause, N., Prax, P., Quandt, T., Schimmenti, A., Starcevic, V., Stutman, G., Turner, N. E., van Looy, J., et Przybylski, A. K. (2018). A weak scientific basis for gaming disorder: Let us err on the side of caution, Journal of Behavioral Addictions J Behav Addict, 7(1), 1-9.
