Bernie Ripoll (Oxley, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister Assisting the Leader for Small Business) Share this | Hansard source

Obviously it is somebody's responsibility—that is right. Anyway, it was not his fault.

The Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority Amendment Bill 2014 is not a controversial bill. It is a bill that does a range of things. It aligns Australia's antidoping legislation with the revised World Anti-Doping Code and international standards that come into force on 1 January 2015. It is important that we align our codes with the international standard. It is to make sure that it is a continued operation of a globally harmonised antidoping framework. International sporting federations and governments are now required to amend their own antidoping frameworks to align with the revised code and standards by 1 January 2015. Australia is a signatory to UNESCO convention, so the Australian government is also obliged to amend its antidoping arrangements to align with the principles of the code. In that sense there is nothing overly interesting about this particular amendment.

Labor supports the bill and unequivocally supports the fight against doping in sport. In recent times there has been much controversy and debate across a whole range of areas in this respect. Doping is plainly and simply cheating. It is using banned substances and practices to gain an unfair advantage over a rival. Doping can and does cause serious long-term health problems for athletes. Australians, quite rightly, have an expectation and demand that our athletes are doping free.

To give some sort of historical context to this, the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority Amendment Bill 2014 aligns with the World Anti-Doping Code. Australia's antidoping legislation gives effect to the international obligations under the UNESCO convention. The international sporting community, including the International Olympic Committee and international federations who are signatories to the code are committed to updating their antidoping policies to reflect the revised code. At the same time, the 176 governments who have ratified the UNESCO convention, such as the Australian government, are obliged to align their arrangements with the principles of the revised code.

Within Australia, ASADA implements code compliant programs and activities that encompass deterrence, detection and enforcement. ASADA works closely with Australia's national sporting organisations in implementing these arrangements. All of these NSOs' antidoping policies replicate the essential parts of the code. This includes the provisions for the sanctioning of athletes who are found to have committed an antidoping rule violation, an ADRV. In late 2011 the, WADA, initiated a comprehensive review of the code. Revisions to the code, arising from this review, were adopted by the international antidoping community at the World Conference on Doping in Sport in Johannesburg, South Africa on 15 November 2013.

The key revisions to the code include: an enhanced focus on the role of investigations and intelligence gathering; mandatory four-year sanctions for certain ADRVs, relating to the use of performance enhancing substances such as anabolic steroids; a relaxation of the rules surrounding the requirements for specific athletes to provide ongoing notification of their whereabouts to facilitate testing—known as the whereabouts requirements—which have been criticised in the past as being unfair and harsh; systems to provide more effective and efficient testing regimes to maximise the chances of catching doping, by ensuring that the testing targets the substances most likely to be used by athletes in that sport; and a new requirement on sporting organisations that coaches and support staff do not use prohibited substances themselves.

Further, to ensure the continued operation of a globally harmonised antidoping framework, international sporting federations and governments are now required to amend their own antidoping frameworks to align with the revised code and standards by 1 January 2015. As I explained earlier, Australia, as a signatory to the UNESCO convention, is also obliged to amend its antidoping arrangements to align with the principles of the code. This is what this bill seeks to do and Labor is happy to support it.

There are serious implications for noncompliance or failing to enforce the WADC. All national Olympic committees and international sports federations are required, by the IOC, to sign the WADC. Sporting codes or countries that fail to sign up to and/or enforce the WADC risk exclusion of their athletes from the Olympics and/or other key sporting events—and, of course, Australia does not want this to happen to our athletes. For national sporting organisations the consequence at a local level of noncompliance or failing to enforce the WADC includes being ineligible for Commonwealth funding and other support delivered by the Australian Sports Commission and potentially being liable for breaches of existing contracts.

At the international level, the relevant NSO and all its athletes and officials would be excluded from major international events such as the Olympics and most world championships conducted by a relevant international federation. The consequences of noncompliance for Australia more broadly range from having individual sports excluded from international competition through to Australia as a whole being excluded from the Olympic Games and other top-level sporting events. This would include Australian athletes being ineligible to compete as well as Australian cities being ineligible to bid for hosting or actually hosting key events. So these are pretty serious consequences if Australia were not to align its code, and hence why it is important that this comes before the parliament; it is important that it gets parliamentary support, which it does; and it is important that we implement this alignment fully.

The bill also provides for the creation of a new antidoping rule violation. The code currently specifies a list of eight actions that individually constitute an ADRV. The international antidoping community has agreed to increase the number of violations from eight to 10. This includes a new violation called prohibited association. It will become an ADRV for an athlete to associate in a professional or sports related capacity with an athlete support person who is serving a period of ineligibility or who has been convicted of crime or sanctioned for professional misconduct for activity that would otherwise constitute a doping violation. This ADRV is designed to curtail the influence of people with a proven history of doping and with the skills to facilitate systemic doping programs.

The Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee inquiry into this bill heard concerns about the practical implications of this new prohibited association violation. The Department of Health has explained that these concerns seem to relate to a lack of detail in the bill and explanatory memorandum. While we are comfortable with the department's explanation, Labor looks forward to seeing the extra detail being provided in the associated regulations to be presented soon.

Further, the bill will extend the limitation period for authorities to commence action after a violation is believed to have occurred. Currently action on a possible ADRV must be commenced within eight years from the date the violation is asserted to have occurred. The code has been revised so that from 1 January 2015 authorities will have up to 10 years within which to commence action. This change improves the scope for antidoping agencies to uncover sophisticated doping programs and provides greater scope for retrospective analysis of stored samples as new technologies to identify prohibited substances are developed.

The bill also seeks to make changes to the operation of the Australian Sports Drug Medical Advisory Committee, the ASDMAC. The committee is responsible for considering applications by athletes for the legitimate therapeutic use of prohibited substances or methods through the granting of therapeutic use exceptions—TUEs. The TUE process aims to ensure that athletes can obtain legitimate medical treatment without committing an offence—an ADRV. Under the revised code antidoping organisations are explicitly required to provide for reviews of decisions on TUEs. So while currently there is a clear authority for the ASDMAC to approve TUE applications in Australia, the only mechanism available to athletes to appeal decisions of the committee, if unsuccessful, is to challenge such a decision with WADA. The bill will allow the minister to appoint three people for the sole function of reviewing ASDMAC decisions in the first instance. While these people are ASDMAC members, they will be independent from the committee decision-making process, ensuring that reviews are independent of the initial decision. The bill also seeks to enshrine in the ASADA Act the requirement of the revised code that at least one member of the committee should have experience in the care and treatment of athletes with impairments. Labor believes that it is important that the needs of athletes with impairment are considered at all stages of this process.

When we consider that the ASADA CEO recently stated that positive blood or your own tests detects on average between one and two per cent of violations, it is clear that intelligence gathering is an essential element of any strategy for detecting doping. The revised code emphasises the need for effective information flows between government agencies, sporting bodies and antidoping organisations. The bill enhances and simplifies the information-sharing provisions in the ASADA Act to improve the exchange of information between relevant stakeholders that would assist in identifying and substantiating doping violations.

The bill seeks to repeal the current sanctions of the ASADA Act which distinguish between national antidoping scheme personal information, national antidoping scheme contract personal information, and protected Customs information, and restructure the information-sharing provisions around a single concept of protected information. 'Protected information' will be defined as information obtained under, or for the purposes of, the ASADA Act or legislative instrument made under the ASADA Act that relate to the affairs of a person and could be used to identify that person.

It will be an offence to disclose that information unless it is an authorised disclosure. Authorised disclosures will be described in the ASADA Act and ASADA Regulations. The potential to be publicly named as a drug cheat is considered to be part of an important deterrent for any athlete, and all athletes and support persons should be aware that the details of an antidoping rule violation may be made public. It is the current practice for ASADA to report on its website the details of a violation once the matter is finalised.

This bill, to be consistent with article 14 of the code, will propose that ASADA be now required to maintain a public record of ADRVs to be known as the violations list. The violations list will include information such as the name of an athlete or athlete support person, date of birth, relevant sport, team, nature of the violation, date when the ADRV was determined and the period of ineligibility and any other consequences imposed.

Importantly, the bill provides discretion for the ASADA CEO not to place the details of a violation on the violations list in limited circumstances. For example, this may include a first violation by a person under the age of 18 years where the need for confidentiality for an underaged person outweighs the need for transparency.

The high-profile ASADA investigations that have dominated news in AFL and NRL over the past two years have taught us there is significant public interest in antidoping and significant pressure on persons involved to make public comment.

The new code provides that no antidoping organisations shall publicly comment on the specific facts of a pending case except in response to public comments attributed to an athlete, other person or their representatives. While existing legislation prevents public comment by ASADA on specific facts of a pending case it does not recognise expressly this exception, which is provided for in the code. This bill seeks to recognise this exception so that a public comment can be provided by ASADA to correct or clarify facts where an athlete or their representative initiates discussion publicly about his or her case.

There are also a number of minor or technical amendments proposed in the bill. A definition for 'recognised laboratory' has been added to reflect the accreditation process specified in the International Standard for Laboratories, the definitions of 'international standard' and 'registered medical practitioner' have been updated and reference to 'safety checking service' has been removed to better reflect current practice.

This bill contains one measure that is not required for consistency with the new WADC. Currently, the operation of the Register of Findings midway through the ADRV process creates complexity and confusion, leading some people to assume that the Anti-doping Rule Violation Panel is the final hearing body for an ADRV. This is not the case. The purpose of the ADRVP is to review the evidence collected by ASADA. An entry on the Register of Findings after the ADRVP review only indicates that, based on the evidence the ADRVP has reviewed, it is possible that the violation has taken place. Once an entry is made, the matter is referred to a sports administration body for determination. In a recent case, the full Federal Court observed that, despite the terms used in legislation, the ADRVP makes an 'assertion' of a violation, rather than 'finding' that an athlete has committed the breach.

I conclude by reiterating Labor's strong support for the antidoping measures. As parliamentarians we must do whatever is possible to protect the integrity of Australian sport and of Australian athletes and the codes we hold dear in this country. Labor believes this bill does that, and I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context