Luke Simpkins (Cowan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority Amendment Bill 2009.  In primary school, secondary school and even in the Army I liked to play football. As people would often remind me, I was limited by only a few things: ability, coordination and skill. So I found my way into the sport of rowing, at 11 years old, back in 1975. I was involved in the sport for some 27 years, until 2002. I competed competitively in almost all states around the country, and in other places, with time in the Army. I was also fortunate enough to win a couple of Australian championships, having represented the sport at state level three times and once at the under-23 Australian level. By ‘represent’ I mean that I pretty much made it to the top level of the state in 1985 and to the under-23 Australian level in 1984. I was at my competitive peak in the mid-eighties, and I have no recollection whatsoever of any antidoping testing in rowing at that time. Maybe it was just that I was never selected. Maybe people looked at my performance and realised that there was no way drugs could possibly be enhancing that sort of performance. In any case, I have no recollection of it. It was probably in the 1990s, when I was studying for a level 2 coaching qualification, that I developed some knowledge of testing for performance-enhancing drugs.

Drug cheating in sports probably came to the notice of Australians in 1988 when, at the Seoul Olympics, the infamous Ben Johnson cheating incident took place, when he won the 100-metre gold medal only to be stripped of it later following a drug test. Since 1988 we have heard many reports of a constant string of drug cheats from around the world, particularly in sports such as bike riding, weightlifting, swimming and at a high-profile athletics event recently, with the public disgrace of the now infamous United States multiple gold medallist Marion Jones. Australians would also have seen interviews with famous Australian sports men and women in which they have made allegations about athletes of other nations being involved in drugs and the advantages that our opponents have achieved as a result of cheating with those performance-enhancing drugs.

I do not wish to dwell too much on this specific matter, but I would like to emphasise the importance of deterrence as the main objective because, while detection after the fact is vital, at the elite level the awarding of gold medals at international events, such as the Olympic Games, is pretty much the pinnacle for an athlete. Athletes desperately want to cross the finish line first and stand on the podium, receiving the accolade as best of the best. If a winner is later disqualified and the medal is given to the clean winner, the moment of the race and the stand on the podium can never be replicated. That is the reason why deterrence and the elimination of drug cheats before the event is important to those who would otherwise have won.

Following on from the problems in the late 1980s, in 1990 the Australian Sports Drug Agency was established as a result of the Australian Sports Drug Agency Act, with a mission to deter the use of banned doping practices in sport. At that time, ASDA undertook education, testing and advocacy services and coordinated the Australian antidoping program. ASDA’s programs were directed at athletes, coaches, sports science and medical personnel, and sports administrators. I recall having some knowledge of this when I was undertaking my level 2 coaching course for rowing in Canberra in 1998. As part of a course at the Australian Institute of Sport we had a session with ASDA, as it was at that time. We were given an explanation of how performance-enhancing drugs worked, and of course the health risks involved, as well as an explanation of the way the testing of athletes was actually carried out.

On 23 June 2005, the coalition government announced a decision to add additional functions to those undertaken by ASDA and rename it, thereby establishing the new and independent anti-doping body Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority, or ASADA, to commence operations in 2006. Beyond the duties previously undertaken by ASDA, ASADA would be able to investigate doping allegations and present cases at hearings. In addition to the existing budget allocation for ASDA, ASADA received an additional appropriation of $1.298 million in 2005-06 and an additional $4.571 million over the following three years.

With regard to drugs in sport, I think we can say that predominantly Australia can lay claim to a good record and is relatively clean in this area. In the last financial year ASADA conducted 2,158 out-of-competition and 2,084 in-competition government funded tests. Another 2,395 tests were undertaken on a user-pays arrangement comprising AFL, NRL, rugby union, A league and Cricket Australia athletes. In 2007-08, 64 cases were managed by ASADA, 39 involving a sanction, of which, 18 admitted a violation. It is therefore clear that there is a problem and that vigilance must be maintained. However, I would to say that there are fine lines to be drawn on some of these matters. We know professional athletes take supplements and tablets, and they get injections. Hopefully they do these things in the belief that what they take is not illegal.

In researching this speech I looked at the case of the triathlete Rebekah Keat who tested positive to a drug test in 2004 following the Western Australian Ironman event. She was suspended for two years and has returned to competition, but has fought to clear her professional name and restore her reputation. Rebekah Keat was able to prove that a supplement, Endurolyte, was contaminated with the steroid precursor norandrostenedione. I understand that the fight to clear her name cost Rebekah Keat a lot of money and I commend her on her determination, although given her background in a most arduous sport it is little surprise that she fought hard.

That is not to say that we do not have real cases of Australians who have cheated by using performance enhancing drugs thereby justifying the need for having ASADA. Werner Reiterer, a field athlete, admitted to taking drugs before the Sydney Olympics and said that officials turned a blind eye to it. He was rightly taken to task for refusing to name names, thereby contributing to ongoing problems in the sport. In 2004, there was the case of Australian weightlifter Caroline Pileggi who received a mandatory two-year ban for refusing a drug test. Following legal action culminating in a failed Federal Court appeal, she had the two-year ban upheld. As I understand it, the member for Isaacs was the unsuccessful QC in that matter. No doubt he would have some interesting views regarding this legislation.

There have been other cases and the facts demonstrate that, sadly, Australia is not completely clean, although I would always say that we are among the best for clean sport and with our athletes. Nevertheless the record does show that we have an ongoing need to have strong and effective deterrents and mechanisms to lead the fight against drugs in Australian sport. In closing, no-one should ever be able to gain a competitive advantage in sport through illegal methods. This bill will aid in clarifying the roles and responsibilities within ASADA, as well as streamlining its processes. The need to adapt to changing circumstances has been demonstrated in regard to drugs in sports. The need for ASADA to adapt has also been recognised. I support this bill to improve its capabilities, and maintain and improve the standing of Australian sport in the world.

See this speech in context