Matter of Public Interest: SENATE
31 March 2004
Senator LUNDY (Australian Capital Territory) (1.00 p.m.) -I rise to speak on a matter of public interest today: the issue of EPO research. Until recently Australia was the world leader in anti-doping research.
Senator Kemp -It still is!
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Marshall)-Order! Minister, please do not interject from the advisers’ box.
Senator LUNDY -Inexplicably, however, since the Sydney Olympics the Howard government has chosen to enforce a ban on some of this world leading research, which has effectively relegated Australia to a position of disciple rather than Messiah. In the lead-up to the Sydney Games scientists at the Australian Institute of Sport in Canberra were working to develop cutting-edge tests to detect the powerful performance enhancing drug EPO, which had become a major doping concern in the late 1980s. In a world first the AIS scientists had developed two tests, an on-model test which detects EPO when an athlete is still using, and an off-model test which can detect EPO traces after an athlete has stopped using but is still gaining doping benefits. The International Olympic Committee, which had strongly supported this research on the basis of its groundbreaking potential to catch cheats using a substance that was previously undetectable, gave the go-ahead for the on-model drug test to be used at the Sydney Olympic Games. At the Sydney Olympic Games no competitors tested positive to EPO using the on-model test. However, in a data collection exercise several athletes tested positive to EPO under the off-model test. While the off-model test was not officially in use, these positive results showed that the AIS scientists had been successful in developing a test to detect a performance enhancer that had eluded antidoping efforts for so long.
The importance of this work on the world scale did not go unnoticed. It was applauded by the IOC, by the World Anti-Doping Agency and by the AIS. And, in an attempt to gain acclaim for their role in supporting this world leading research, it was applauded by the federal government. In fact the government was so impressed with the work of the AIS scientists it awarded those involved in this project the Australian Sports Medal for their work, in particular for developing the EPO test.
In what was a totally inexplicable and unjustified move, however, within nine months of the Sydney Olympics the Howard government placed a ban on any more of this world leading research being conducted at the AIS. Under a directive issued in April 2001 by the then Minister for Sport and Tourism, the AIS scientists were ordered to cease any further work on blood doping research and to confine their participation in antidoping research to intellectual property. This meant that the AIS’s world leading scientists could contribute to the scientific design of research studies and assist in the evaluation of research findings turned out by others but could not conduct any antidoping research on-site at the AIS themselves. Incredibly, despite its receiving recognition from many quarters, including the then minister for sport, without reason or explanation as to why, the Howard government had scuttled the AIS’s world leading blood antidoping research program.
On a number of occasions we have heard, most recently from Minister Kemp, that the decision taken by Minister Kelly was ‘undoubtedly carefully considered’. Last week, former Minister Kelly, in a personal explanation in the House of Representatives, stated:
… there was extensive consultation and correspondence between my office, the AIS scientists, the Department of Industry, Science and Resources, the Australian Sports Commission and the Australian Sports Drug Agency.
In reality not one of the scientists involved in the EPO research program was aware of any discussion surrounding the banning of further research at the AIS and they most certainly were not consulted. In fact the principal researcher and head of the AIS’s sports haematology and biochemistry lab, Robin Parisotto, was curtly notified of the decision via an email forwarded from the head of the AIS. The ban was imposed by the Howard government on the spurious pretext that such testing might compromise elite athletes at the AIS. It was implied that it was the World Anti-Doping Agency that had raised concerns regarding research being conducted on-site at an institute where athletes train.
Despite repeated requests, however, there has been a decided failing on the government’s part to substantiate these claims. This is not surprising given that the following evidence clearly indicates that it was not WADA that had concerns about the AIS research. Firstly, Dick Pound, head of the World Anti-Doping Agency, has himself clearly stated that it was not WADA that called for a ban on the AIS research. In fact he has said he ‘could not fathom why the Australian government had done so’. Secondly, WADA, in response to a request for funding by this group to continue their antidoping research was, according to scientists, ‘almost pleading with this group to continue research to have a test in place for synthetic haemoglobin for the 2002 Winter Olympics’. And thirdly, the fact that WADA recently allocated a very large sum of money to the German Sports Institute to conduct antidoping research clearly refutes claims that WADA has an issue with supporting research being conducted at sports institutes.
It appears that, in an attempt to scuttle antidoping research at the AIS, the Howard government and its representatives made erroneous comments regarding the AIS research to create the spectre of a conflict of interest. What does seem to be very clear is that integral members of the discussions conducted between the minister’s office and relevant authorities were influential officers from the Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources and that it was these influential officers who exerted considerable pressure to have the AIS research program axed. In an empire building coup d’etat, these heads of divisions at the Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources seem to have successfully lobbied to have the AIS research banned and moved into AGAL, the Australian Government Analytical Laboratories. Coincidentally, AGAL, which is home to the Australian Sports Drug Testing Laboratory, is overseen by the Analytical Division of the Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources. This is the same division that is responsible for the establishment of the new National Measurement Institute, as announced in the 2003-04 budget, which will coincidentally take full control of AGAL and its drug testing laboratory in July this year.
It appears from this evidence that the ban on research at the AIS is directly linked to a premeditated move by the officers within that department to gain complete control over blood doping research. The government has now tried to cover this seemingly obvious transgression by touting that there is now a record level of funding going towards antidoping research in Australia. What is not mentioned is that AGAL has been successful in garnering a large proportion of the funding currently being handed out by the government for antidoping research, having been given two of the four research grants being awarded.
The fact that the development of the EPO test was only possible as a result of work that the AIS haematology unit were doing on blood analysis and could not have been done outside the AIS has not been noted or acknowledged. Undeterred, after the Sydney Games the Canberra based EPO research team moved to form an international consortium of major pharmaceutical companies, sports scientists and drug testing laboratories to continue the fight against drug cheats. This consortium, known as Science and Industry Against Blood Doping, was established with the blessing of WADA and was successful in being granted research funds from the US Anti-Doping Agency to continue work in the area of blood doping. However, at the 11th hour, as work was due to commence in October last year, approval for this research, which had initially received strong support, was once again, without reason, withdrawn under the direction of the Australian Sports Commission board.
The government’s decision to scuttle the AIS’s world leading antidoping research not once but twice is mystifying. If there is a just cause, a reasonable explanation as to why they continue to ban world leading antidoping research, we are yet to hear of it. While a number of weak excuses have been made, the facts seem to indicate that the real motive behind these directives, which have effectively relegated Australia to a position of follower rather than leader in the fight against drugs in sport, was based on departmental empire building. This sorry situation was perfectly encapsulated by a well-respected member of the sports community who described it in a recent Four Corners program on this issue as ‘bureaucratic perversity and ministerial stupidity’.
It seems hypocritical for the government to now cry foul play on having their motives questioned when in reality it is the AIS scientists who were working on this project who have suffered and had their reputations tarnished via the implications and suggestions by interested parties that there were international suspicions about institutionalised doping at the AIS. Not surprisingly, five of the scientists involved in this cutting edge research have left the AIS, after becoming disillusioned as a result of the government’s ban.
Staying ahead in the fight against the use of performance enhancing drugs in sport means staying ahead in research. Every day there is evidence of previously undetected drugs coming to light-THG, EPO, HGH, genetic modification; the list seems endless. Athletes from all sports must know that the chances of being tested and being caught are much greater than the chances of avoiding detection. While the government continue to talk up their support for their Tough on Drugs in Sport policy, their actions have spoken much louder than their words. It is totally incomprehensible to think that the Howard government are genuine about this fight against drugs in sport when they are banning the very research that will help win the battle. The government should play an integral role in providing support for the work of those who are fighting to develop detection tests to stay ahead of the drug cheats-the work of dedicated people like the AIS scientists. However, for some inexplicable reason, rather than help get tough on drug cheats the Howard government have chosen to get tough on the people who are fighting to expose them.
