Steve Irons (Swan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

And I hear support from my colleagues on that. As the ACC report noted, these players 'do not deserve to be under a cloud of speculation'; however, that is exactly what has happened. There needs to be some certainty as to what these players can expect or an end date to what is going on.

It is also important to take this time to highlight that Australia is not alone in identifying doping within sporting organisations. I am sure those in this place have already drawn parallels between what is currently being seen in Australian sport and what was identified by the US Anti-Doping Agency's investigation into American cyclist Lance Armstrong, who was stripped of his seven Tour de France titles and banned from professional sports for life after admitting to using performance enhancing drugs throughout his career.

It is a simple fact that all professional athletes are under pressure to perform. As I said earlier, this may be their reason for using banned substances, but it does not excuse them from facing imposed penalties for their actions. It is, however, important to note that, despite the media spotlight that has been placed on the AFL due to last year's alleged drug scandal, only one AFL player has been listed on ASADA's current list of findings which dates back to 2009. This is compared to bodybuilding, which has been listed on ASADA's top three sports for 'most cited incidences' every year since 2006; or Rugby League, which has been listed in the top three every year since 2006-07. The list of most cited substances has also been similar each year, with the highest rate of violations since 2005-06 being for the use of anabolic agents and steroids, with 75 violations; closely followed by stimulants, which had 69 violations since this time.

The core focus of the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority Amendment Bill 2014 is to align Australia's antidoping legislation with the revised World Anti-Doping Code and international standards that will come into force on 1 January 2015. This followed a comprehensive review by the World Anti-Doping Agency, whose revisions to the code were adopted by the international antidoping community at the World Conference on Doping in Sport in Johannesburg, South Africa, on 15 November 2013. As a member of the UNESCO International Convention Against Doping in Sport, Australia has an obligation to ensure that our standards are consistent with this code.

The bill before the House will revise the ASADA Act by clarifying or extending the framework of the current provisions. This includes a new prohibited association antidoping rule violation, or ADRV, called 'prohibited association'. The aim of this additional violation is to prevent athletes from associating with any athlete support person who has a proven record of violating doping regulations or similar activities that would constitute a violation.

Currently, action on a possible ADRV must be commenced within eight years from the date the violation is asserted to have occurred. An additional amendment to the code will increase this time frame to 10 years to improve ASADA's ability to uncover doping programs and retrospectively analyse athletes' stored samples as new technologies for doping identification are developed.

Additional amendments to the code will also require ASADA to maintain a public record of violations, to be known as the 'violations list', which will include information such as the name of the athlete or athlete support person, date of birth, relevant sport, team, nature of the violation, date when the violation was determined and the period of ineligibility and any other consequences imposed. This will expand ASADA's current requirement to report on its website the details of an ADRV once a matter is finalised.

As mentioned earlier, ASADA currently lists reported violations on its register of findings. There has, however, been confusion with how these violations are listed, with the Anti-Doping Rule Violation Panel currently being required to enter details of a possible violation onto the register. This entry is not confirmation that a violation has taken place; it is simply a notation to state that it is a possibility. To reflect this public confusion, the legislation before the House proposes that the concept of a register is removed, with the panel instead making an assertion to ASADA's CEO that, based on reviewed evidence, the panel believes a violation may have occurred.

In the wake of significant advancements to the media industry and its online presence and immediacy, amendments to the code are also proposed in regards to the public disclosure of information. These amendments will introduce an exception to current legislation, which prevents public comment by ASADA on specific facts of a pending case. The exception will allow ASADA to publicly comment to correct or clarify facts where an athlete or their representative initiates discussion publicly about his or her case.

This bill goes a long way to sorting out a few issues that need to be sorted out so there is clarity and surety for athletes in Australia and in our national sporting bodies, and to bring us into line with the world antidoping agencies.

I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context