Playing the Game Fair

The combined and comprehensive efforts of a number of key organisations have led to 5 significant milestones 5 firsts for Sydney. It is these milestones which together have brought about the fairest Olympic games in recent times. The lessons learnt have already, and will continue, to impact more broadly than just the Olympics. The Sydney 2000 Games have provided a catalyst to achieve a more united international anti-doping response, enhancing the fairness of the entire International sporting framework.

Todays presentation aims firstly to provide you with the facts about what was achieved in Sydney, and secondly, to leave you, as media professionals, to question how you may influence the future success of anti-doping programs in International sport.

The first significant achievement I would like to outline is the establishment of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) in 1999, and the independent, worldwide, unannounced testing program undertaken by WADA in the lead up to the Olympics. To undertake this testing program WADA has appointed the Drug Free Sport Consortium (DFSC), consisting of the Australian Sports Drug Agency (ASDA), the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport, and the Norwegian Olympic committee and Confederation of Sports, in partnership with International Doping Tests and Management (IDTM).

The DFSC negotiated testing contracts with all summer Olympic international federations except football, and subsequently conducted 2043 doping controls on athletes from 82 countries across 27 sports in the 6 months between mid-April and September 10. ASDA conducted 600 of these tests on athletes living or training in Australia. The intention was to conduct unannounced out of competition tests, however this proved difficult at times due to the quality of information coming from sports.

For the first time ever at an Olympic Games, out of competition testing was conducted in addition to competition testing. Competitors were subject to random testing from 2 September - 2 weeks before the start of the Games, whether accredited or not and regardless of their location.

The SOCOG doping control program, in conjunction with the Australian Sports Drug Agency, was responsible for the implementation of the IOC pre-games testing program. Test numbers were calculated on a pro-rata basis per National Olympic Committee. Within each NOC athletes were selected completely at random. A total of 404 out of competition urine tests were conducted, with ASDA conducting 98 of these tests on athletes training outside of Sydney Olympic venues and throughout the rest of Australia.

To compliment the deterrent effect of the out of competition testing conducted by WADA and the IOC, a test for the banned synthetic hormone Erythropoietin was developed and introduced in time for the Sydney Games. This test was a major breakthrough in the fight against previously undetectable performance enhancing drugs.

The approved test a combination blood/urine test - was conducted on over 300 athletes during the Sydney Games. The tests were unannounced, out-of-competition tests, maximising the deterrence value of the testing regime. Tests were targeted towards sports at high risk of EPO use. Despite the sensitivities of blood collection and the complexity of chain of custody procedures, a high level of athlete confidence in the program was reported.

Supporting the world wide testing programs and EPO detection breakthrough, management of testing results in the lead up to and during the Games was fair and transparent. For the first time at the Sydney 2000 Games, both sampling procedures and results management policy and procedures were fully documented and publicly available in the Sydney 2000 doping control guide and the Olympic Movement Anti Doping Code. A principle objective in carrying out these procedures was to ensure the integrity of competitors samples, and to maintain confidentiality in respect of any investigation conducted in relation to a potential doping offence. As such athlete rights, appeal and hearing procedures were also fully documented.

As further commitment to the transparency and integrity of results management, the IOC agreed to release a public report within 1 month of completion of the Games. The report will state: the number of tests conducted by sport; both in and out of competition; the results of all tests conducted; numbers of positive tests; numbers of voided tests; numbers of doping offences arising from the positive tests; numbers of tests still under investigation; and the results of blind control tests. The IOC has also agreed to provide ASDA with a copy of all laboratory analysis reports for the pre-Games testing program.

Australias IOC accredited laboratory, the Australian Sports Drug Testing Laboratory, carried out sample analysis for the games testing program. ASDTL is a Government funded laboratory and as such is publicly accountable for accurately reporting on results management.

The final milestone was the external and independent scrutiny of the drug testing process in the lead up to, and during the Sydney Games. The World Anti Doping Agency set up teams of independent observers who were responsible for observing all aspects of the testing process, including sample collection, chain of custody of the sample and results management. These independent observers attended testing sessions conducted by the Australian Sports Drug Agency and IOC tests conducted both in and out of competition at the Sydney Games.

This independent scrutiny, together with the transparent results management processes outlined previously, provided a guarantee that all samples collected were received and analysed, and that all results were reported and acted upon. Most importantly, these two actions protected the integrity of the process, the IOC and the athletes.

In summary the five firsts I have outlined: the WADA world wide testing program; the IOC pre-games testing program; blood testing for EPO; transparent results management; and external scrutiny of testing programs saw an unprecedented number of athletes prevented from competing in Sydney. Claims that doping in sport is not a problem do more damage to sport and all those associated with it than the routing of the cheats we saw from Sydney.

I would now like to turn my attention to the underlying factors and frameworks that were needed to enable us to achieve these great milestones.

Firstly, a high level of commitment by Australias Sport and Justice Ministers, Minister Kelly and Minister Vanstone, together with ongoing support from Prime Minister Howard, was instrumental to these achievements. This leadership saw the development of Australias comprehensive, whole of Government approach to anti-doping in the form of its Tough on Drugs in Sport Strategy. Key players in this strategy include ASDA, ASDTL, The Australian Customs Service, the Australian Sports Commission and the Australian Institute of Sport.

Australia has demonstrated that it leads the way in anti-doping reforms and advocacy internationally. ASDA had proposed an international conference of Governments to harmonise anti-doping efforts as early as August 1998, and it was Minister Jackie Kelly who gave the commitment to implementing this initiative following the Lausanne Conference in February 1999.

The International Summit on Drugs in Sport, hosted by Australia and chaired by Minister Amanda Vanstone in November 1999, achieved endorsement from sporting ministers around the world on actions that Governments can take to advance the fight against doping. Most importantly it forged a fragile partnership between governments from around the globe, not just Europe, and international sport to tackle the problem. Australias leadership though this Summit was instrumental in gaining their agreement to implementing comprehensive strategies based on the Australian Tough on Drugs in Sport Strategy.

ASDA is the agency responsible for Australias anti-doping program. ASDA conducts comprehensive programs based on a philosophy of deterring athletes from using banned drugs or methods. Programs consist of drug testing (OOC, event, short and no notice); education and information; policy advice; advocacy; issues and image management.

ASDAs operations are supported and controlled by specific legislation of the Federal Government, the Australian Sports Drug Agency Act, 1990. Programs and procedures are robust and have achieved quality certification against the International Standard for Doping Control (IDSC) and the ISO 9002. ASDA has also undergone a successful independent probity audit and external scrutiny by WADA, and to date no legal challenge to ASDA procedures has succeeded. The resultant high level of credibility ASDA enjoys facilitates our influence within national and international sporting and political spheres.

Although Australia is regarded as a world leader in the fight against drugs in sport, we can not fight the problem alone. We have consistently promoted reforms to expose drug cheats in international competition, through the fostering of partnerships and international advocacy. Examples of our efforts include:

ASDAs initial involvement in advocating for the concept of a World Anti-Doping Agency we were requested by the IOC in August 1998 to develop a model for the international agency. Subsequently we have been involved in the Drug Free Sport Consortium which provides international testing services on behalf of WADA Bi-lateral and uni-lateral testing agreements including 3 Government to Government arrangements, 20 International anti-doping agency agreements and up to 6 agreements with International Sporting Federations IADA The International Anti-Doping Arrangement - a pioneering multi-lateral government agreement between Australia and Canada, Denmark, Finland, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden and the UK. The arrangement aims to pursue best practice in doping control, to encourage the international community to implement effective programs and to provide for reciprocal testing agreements between the IADA countries ASDAs partnership with the Sydney Organising Committee for the Olympic Games (SOCOG) which resulted in ASDA providing services to support SOCOG in 4 areas: training of SOCOG doping control volunteers; doping control at SOCOG test events; out of competition drug testing for the IOC pre-games testing program; and ongoing advice and input into SOCOGs anti-doping advisory committee.

None of the five first would have been realised unless Australia, and ASDA in particular, were seen as highly ethical, highly accountable and highly transparent in the conduct of their business. To a large extent, this image is significantly influenced by what is portrayed by the media in the public domain. ASDA has worked hard over the last three years to cultivate media contacts in order to ensure accurate information is provided to the media so that the facts can get in the way of a good story. ASDA is now seen by media in Australia as providing a credible, effective and transparent anti-doping program.

Part of the issues management strategy is the consistency of message, and Australias Commonwealth Government worked hard during the Olympic period to ensure it spoke with one voice. To achieve this, issues briefs were prepared daily by all relevant Commonwealth agencies and channeled through a commonwealth co-ordination unit to a commonwealth spokesperson. This ensured that the commonwealth provided a clear, accurate and consistent message to the media.

I have outlined the five firsts which together enabled Australia to stage the fairest Games in recent history, and secondly provided some background as to the political, strategic, philosophical, financial and operational imperatives which were needed to achieve these milestones. This is not the time to rest on that achievement. The world community is more aware than ever of the scale of the problem and what needs to be done to enhance the credibility of elite sport. We must capitalise on the progress made in the Sydney2000 Games in order to push for a more united international response and more effective anti-doping programs.

Specifically, we must continue to urge governments to commit to comprehensive anti-doping programs or follow through on commitments already made. We must continue to develop and promote an independent worldwide testing program predominantly unannounced out of competition, with strong ramifications for athletes who are not tested or not able to located to be tested. We must maintain transparency of results management and continue to see the role of an independent observer as critical to the effective conduct of drug testing programs. We must advocate that all drug testing programs are certified as consistent with ISO and International Standard for Doping Control standards. We must ensure all stakeholders with an interest in preserving the value of sport dedicate funding and commitment to research into undetectable substances. Finally, we require fair and responsible treatment of doping issues by media.

I have already indicated that the role of the media is significant in either helping or hindering the success of programs designed to deter athletes from using performance enhancing drugs, and I wish to make two points in relation to this claim.

Firstly, when it comes to controversy, the doping issue is certainly top of the list. And rumors relating to an athlete, especially a high profile athlete, abound and grow within the closed media environment created by an event such as the Olympics. Theres no doubt that during the Sydney 2000 Games there were pressures on the media to break the big stories early and there was fierce competition among the journalists at the Olympics to be the first to do so. Unlike civil or criminal proceedings where the laws of contempt protect the presumption of innocence until an offence is proven, a rumor or innuendo of a positive test is reported as proof of a doping offence and the athlete is pursued zealously. Within such an environment, natural justice and the rights of the athletes have been severely compromised.

I therefore appeal to you to look for the evidence, and report only the facts and not the rumor. Creating a scandal where there may not be one is not only damaging to the athlete, but inappropriately impacts on the integrity of the sport, the country and the entire event.

My second point is that public and athlete perception of the integrity and efficacy of anti-doping programs influences the very degree of deterrence the programs are designed to achieve. The media is therefore in a unique position to influence this perception, by promoting appropriate messages such as

Athletes are likely to be tested
Athletes are likely to be caught
Athletes will be sanctioned appropriately
The drug testing process including management of results is fair and transparent
The responsible testing authority is a credible and legitimate agency.

These are the messages that make athletes stop and think. If any of these perceptions are publicly undermined, the athlete is essentially given an open invitation to cheat. I implore you to act responsibly in reporting of the facts and to consider the role you can play in influencing the behaviour of cheats in the future.

Conclusion
Sydney represents the turning point in te fight against doping in sport. In a decade from now it will be a clear marker in the rebuilding of athlete and public confidence and the values of sport to our societies. There is no turning back to the inadequate response and sometimes denial driven behaviours of the past two decades.

Thank you.