Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise tonight to talk about drugs, specifically the use of illicit drugs by our sporting professionals. I want to talk about the code of silence that protects illicit drug users and often defends their behaviour.

A common goal of sports administrators in this country is to stamp out the insidious use of drugs in sport and to ensure a clean playing field. I am sure the CEO of the AFL, Andrew Demetriou, reflected all sporting administrators when he recently stated:

Our strong view is that the fight against illicit drugs is not a fight that should be restricted to match-day.

We believe that if we are to take the toughest possible stance against drugs then we need to fight the use of illicit drugs out of competition and out of season. It is not a part-time fight. It is a full-time fight.

Elite sport in Australia is required to comply with the World Anti-Doping Agency in relation to competition testing for performance-enhancing and illicit substances. I am proud to say that this government has led the charge in ensuring that our sport system is in full compliance with WADA policy. I compliment this government and specifically Minister Kemp for pursuing this course of action. But it now begs the question: why are many of our sports administrators too frightened to tackle the use of illegal drugs outside competition?

We know that athletes who use illegal drugs and performance-enhancing substances on match day are guilty of a major offence. They are liable for hefty fines and an automatic two-year suspension from the game. We know that those who use performance-enhancing drugs outside competition are also guilty of a major offence, and they face fines and an automatic two-year suspension from the game. But why is it the case that sports professionals can use illegal drugs during the week and face no or minimal recriminations from their sport’s governing bodies?

In recent days, the AFL have been much maligned for their three-strikes policy for out-of-competition illegal drug use. Let me make it clear: the AFL are WADA compliant, but the additional testing they do—and this should be commended—needs to be improved. It is the case, in my view, that the AFL’s penalties for illegal drug use outside competition are completely out of step with the legislative and policy framework under which illegal drugs are considered in this country.

The penalties adopted by the AFL in relation to out-of-competition testing for illicit drugs are lenient, to say the least. Under the AFL’s Illicit Drug Policy, it takes three positive tests for illegal drugs used outside competition before the player is deemed to have been involved in conduct unbecoming and eventually faces a tribunal. This involves the player being named, with a possible match suspension—I say ‘a possible match suspension’—imposed. Even after they have given a third positive drug test, if a player tests positive again, they only face a minimum 12-match suspension. The AFL’s Illicit Drug Policy clearly states:

Illicit Drugs are dangerous and AFL players have the opportunity to set an example to the wider community by collectively making a statement that they do not condone the use of any illicit substances.

It is now time for the AFL and other sporting bodies to back their rhetoric with action.

Outside sport, where illicit drugs are concerned, our community has a zero tolerance policy. Whereas, under the AFL rules, a player could take ecstasy, he could turn up to training, he could be tested and he would only receive counselling and a guarantee of anonymity. However, if that same player then hopped in a car and drove home, if he were pulled over by the police and subjected to a random ecstasy test—as they now have in South Australia—he would face, in South Australia, a fine and a loss of demerit points on his licence. There might be criminal penalties, and this would be a matter on the public record.

The law does not condone the use of illicit drugs at any time. So why should we condone the use of illegal drugs by AFL players at any time? Even the Brisbane Lions captain, Michael Voss, said earlier this year:

The AFL’s code is very soft and the message to players must be tougher.

The AFL’s Illicit Drug Policy allows players to maintain a mask of anonymity that is completely at odds with community expectations and standards that befit players who are highly remunerated, very well-advised and in receipt of an opportunity that many Australians would love to have.

Our sportspeople are public role models whether they like it or not. They inspire the champions of tomorrow, and they encourage our children and young adults to reach their highest potential. It is a matter of public importance that these role models completely reject the notion that it is okay to break the law and take illegal and dangerous substances in pursuit of a good time. Over many years, our society has quite rightly decried the abuse of alcohol by sporting personalities, but why should the use of illegal drugs be now covered up?

However, rather than maligning the AFL unfairly, I believe they need to be further encouraged to be leaders against illicit drug use. Their code of football has much to gain in terms of public support by adopting a zero-tolerance policy towards illicit drugs. And I have to say that at least the AFL does have a policy in place, albeit one that is inconsistent with community standards. But what about our other professional codes? Where does the NRL or the ARU stand in relation to illegal out-of-competition drug use? They have both signed up to the WADA code, which mandates competition testing for all performance-enhancing and illicit drugs.

However, out-of-competition testing for illicit drugs is not specified in the WADA code. This means that a player could use cocaine on non-match days and, as long as he is not caught by law enforcement authorities, he is effectively immune to NRL official sanctions because there is no mandatory testing for illicit substances.

Even more curiously, under the NRL code—or lack of code, I should say—individual clubs are actually allowed to come up with their own policy to tackle the issue. Therefore a player who tests positive for illicit drugs while playing for, say, the Cowboys, will be kicked out of the club and their contract torn up—but this same player is then allowed to sign up for a second club, who may or may not conduct out-of-competition illicit drug testing. This is simply not on.

I believe we must break the nexus between drugs and sport full stop. There is no safe level of illicit drug use. We need leaders in our sporting community who are prepared to address this issue across all levels and all codes of sport. According to senior sports administrators there is no culture of illicit drug abuse in professional sporting codes. If this is true then the players, and the sports, have nothing to fear. In fact, by being tough on drugs they have more to gain as they will win the support, the respect and the applause of the wider public. Most especially, they will win the support of parents who want their children to be involved in a sporting code that is drug free.