Live Doping in Sport Committee Select Committees

Good afternoon. Welcome to this further session in the select

committee enquiry into doping in sport. Before we start the first

evidence session I would like to run through a few housekeeping points.

Firstly that the committee has sought guidance on the use of

medicines from the medicines and health care products agency which is

an executive agency sponsored by the Department for health. The committee

will probably refer to some of the guidance we received during the

course of the hearing and we have agreed that we will publish the note

that we have been given by Gareth Newman, the head of policy at the

body, so we will publish that and we have agreed to publish that now so

we will make it available as soon as possible so there will be copies

available for those who want to see the full guidance we have been given

later on. As many people will know, we have hoped to receive all

evidence today from Doctor Friedman. As we know, he had to decline the

opportunity to go over this on the grounds of his ill-health and we do

not feel the opportunity of giving evidence by remote video link has

been possible so the committee will be following up with a series of

written questions to Doctor Freeman following the evidence session today

and we hope that in lieu of his ability to appear today that he will

be able to answer questions in writing to us and the committee

reserves the right to call Doctor Freeman or any other witnesses that

are relevant to our investigation in the future, if we deem that

necessary. Now to today's evidence session.

Thank you to Mr Cope for joining us today. This is held as part of our

doping in sport enquiry and particularly with regard to how

regulations are policed in cycling. There is particular interest in the

package that you delivered at Team Sky's request in June 20 11. I

wonder if I could start off by asking questions about the sequence

of events that led up to you making the journey to Team Sky on 12 June.

We've received test dummy from other people and written evidence from

British cycling including some of your travel documents and expense

claims from that trip but it would help us to ask directly about that

time. We appreciate it was some time ago but we would be grateful for any

details you can give us. Firstly, the rate in question started on the

5th of June 2011. Do you remember when you were first contacted by

Team Sky to ask whether you'll be able to collect a package to bring

out with you to join the team? I think, like you said earlier, this

is a good five years ago now. Last week, I was on a training camp in

Spain, I can't even remember if you ask me what I did last Tuesday. I am

going to piece together what I can remember. I was asked to go out to

help in a logistical role, and as I was going out there, could I bring

this package? You don't remember the date? In my world, the cycling

world, one race merges into another. Like I said, it's just... I've been

looking at you guys thinking, it's a totally different world to what you

working. Looking at the documents that British cycling gamers relating

to those days, it looks like you made a special trip to Manchester to

collect the package. That's incorrect. My base was in

Manchester. I was in Manchester and asked to pick the baggage up and

bring it out to the Dauphine. I had an apartment there. I was based in

Manchester. The travel receipts we were given, you make a rail journey

from Eastbourne to Manchester. I live in Ashford in Kent. Why would I

go through Eastbourne? Anybody who knows their geography and train

lines, you'd go through Stratford into Saint pancreas, Eastbourne.

That was the route I used all the time. Also, I had a British cycling

car so I would have driven backwards and forwards. That journey was to

the hotel at Gatwick. There are two trips. There is one for a rail

journey between Eastbourne and Gatwick Airport and there is also a

rail journey on the 8th of June which was in relation to the

Dauphine, a train journey from Eastbourne to Manchester. I've not

seen that. I don't see why I would have gone from Eastbourne to

Manchester but it is five years ago. Maybe I did go that route, you have

the evidence. That's what it says in the nose. The question is whether

you went from Manchester to Eastbourne to pick something up. I

wouldn't have said so. But it is five years ago. I had a GB team car

which we all got given as coaches and managers. So, I would have

driven to Manchester but I would have been in Manchester anyway. What

you're expenses claim shows is a railway journey from Eastbourne to

Manchester on the 8th of June. Which you account for. You obviously

return to Eastbourne afterwards because there is a claim for a rail

journey between Eastbourne and Gatwick Airport. I don't know why. I

don't live in Eastbourne. That is where the ticket was bought. It

could well be. If you buy them online... I can't answer that. The

answer to that question could be that you were asked to collect

something from Manchester. Yes. You are saying that you don't remember

going to Manchester on the 8th of June as Jamaat I would have said I

was in Manchester, I collected the package and brought it back home.

From my memory, this is what I remember. I collected a package, I

went home, I went to London on Saturday night to watch a women's

race. Went to Gatwick, stayed in a hotel got on a plane and flew to

France. Your record shows that on the 8th of June, you made a rail

journey to Manchester from Eastbourne, you come back, you make

a rail journey on the 11th of June from Eastbourne to Gatwick Airport

where you stay the night in a hotel and get the flight the following

morning. Although, your hotel booking says you requested car

parking. It's your expenses claim. It is what you've noted down. You've

noted Dauphine as part of the claim. If memory serves me right, I didn't

make a special trip to Manchester. There is car parking in their as

well. That is for the 11th. There is a rail journey between Eastbourne

and Manchester on the eighth. I know that I would not go through

Eastbourne to go to Manchester from where I live. That is where the

ticket was purchased. Do Southern rail have central base when you pay

by credit card, online, but not may be. What is interesting is the

journey itself. You were in Manchester on the 8th of June. You

don't fly out to Geneva until the 12th of June, the day the race

finishes. So, when you were asked to collect something, bring something

out with you, did your travel plans change in anyway? Did you come out

on the 12th of June, was that the day you were always asked to come

out or did you change plans? I think, if memory serves me right, I

was always asked to go out on the 12th. You didn't book your flight

until the ninth after you'd been in Manchester. Any particular reason

you made the booking that late? I didn't make the booking. It was made

for me. Presumably you issued a request for it to be made? I was

asked why buses -- by my bosses to come out, I had a job prior to this

as women's Academy coach until the end of 2010. The Academy ceased to

be because all the girls I coached moved onto proteins, they deemed

there wasn't enough riders to take on to run an Academy in 2011, they

made me women's road manager. That was a part-time role. Let's go back

to the delivery of the package itself. Your view is you were in

Manchester and you were asked to bring it out. Regardless of whether

your expenses tally with that, that's your position. You don't

remember exactly when you were asked to bring the package out? Who

asked... How did the message get to you to bring the package out? I

couldn't remember at the time but since reading stuff, it would have

been Shane Sutton. Asked me to bring a package out. OK. How would he

normally communicate? Text message, telephone? It could have been a

phone call, I can't remember. Were you doing a lot of this? I was a gap

filler. I didn't really have a role other than alleging the women's road

team which was an administrator role. You run the World

Championships, that was it. All of these ladies were in proteins. Their

teams would provide them with a race programme. So, really, my job was to

keep them up-to-date with the UCI rankings that would qualify you to

ride for the Olympic Games. We wanted to finish in the first five

of the UCI rankings to gain maximum riders for the Olympics. My job was

to look at how many points we could score. That was it. It was a

part-time role. We will come onto that with the women's team but was

this a normal thing? To be asked to do stuff. I was a gap filler. Shane

Sutton would often call you up and ask you to bring a package out? It

could be a package, or take a bite to someone, do this, do that. If you

are paying someone a salary, you want to get your pound of flesh.

Nothing unusual for you in that? Not at all. There have been various

descriptions of what the package was? It was left on a desk in an the

British cycling office. It was a jiffy bag, around that size, a

little post it note, saying for Simon, for Richard Freeman. And the

package was sealed? The package was sealed. You said you were going out

anyway. Shane Sutton said it was logistics. How long were you with

the team that day? You couldn't have been with them very long. I came

with them in the morning, got to the finish, help sought some stuff out

and brought Shane back to the airport. Looking at your travel

schedule, assuming it arrived on time, you would have been landing in

Geneva at about 11 o'clock, get through the airport, collect a

higher car, say that takes an hour, 12 o'clock, two-hour drive to the

destination, so that's two o'clock. Then your return flight was at

9:45pm. Work back, you would have got a couple of hours before then,

you are only with the team for about three hours that day. I was asked to

go out on a logistical role and that was it. My boss asked me to go and

do something and I don't question my boss if I want to keep my job. What

sort of logistical role do you undertake in three hours? That was

for them to decide what they needed me to do. I needed to bring Shane

back to the airport. Other than you driving Shane back to the airport,

what did you do there? Delivered the package to the doctor. Help sought a

few bikes. I was under the impression that I needed to bring

some bikes back but that never happened. You were asked to come out

for the team and before you knew that you would be asked to deliver a

package, you say you were coming out anyway, your duties were to spend

the day making a round trip where the only duties you were aware of

were driving Shane Sutton to the airport and maybe bringing back some

bikes? Was that normal? It is normal in our world. It seems an unusual

use of resources to make someone make a journey that. People do

unusual things like flying detergent out to a race because one rider is

allergic to it. If you look at any sport, really. OK. When you arrived

with the team on the 12th of June, at the end of the race, what did you

do with the package, will who did you give it to? The doctor. Did

anyone else see you do that? I can't remember that. There was people

milling around whether they took any interest or not, I don't know. Did

Doctor Freeman give you anything back to take away or dispose of?

That was the last resort of the package? Yes.

Did you ask what was in the package? I didn't. Why would I? I didn't

think anything was towards. It is a national governing body and why

would I question the integrity about our governing body, basically? It is

not about questioning integrity, it is just when you are going through

an airport with a package of quite like to know what is in the package.

Guild no, I ask. Did you not asked because of fear for keeping your

job? Not at all, I just didn't ask. You could think I was stupid.

Absolutely not, I have your CV in front of us and you are a former

professional cyclist and a national circuit race champion and you have

been obviously on the Olympic programme and you have a substantial

record is both a cyclist and also a coach as well, are you, in fact,

though in this instance the most core overqualified a delivery boy in

history? I could well become a Yaffa! As I said earlier, I had a

role in 2010, that was a full-time role. I suddenly moved into a role

that I could see 12 months down the line, that did happen, I was made

redundant so I was doing everything possible to keep everyone happy and

trying keep my job. I have family to keep so what would you do? When

someone asks used to do something, your boss, you don't question it. I

was struck that you said one race Rock moulds into another but this

one was quite an exceptionally important race because it is the

run-up to the Tour de France under one week long race and effectively

all across the New Year that Mr Wiggins was trying to win the race

and the build-up, was trailed in the press and of a thing like that, it

is not just one race at Malton to another so when you are asked to

take a package through an airport, a jiffy bag, did you not make some

connection? There have been 101 Dauphines, to me it is just another

bike race. To certain people and to his story it was a standout race but

to me doing my job, no, it just moulds into another race. I am quite

intrigued as to what you were expected to do when you were there.

It seems like they went to the expense of sending you there and you

were just going to hang around for a few hours and do this or that and I

understand that a professional cycling team will have a lot of

manpower and flexibility but at the same time you are a very highly

qualified coach and someone with this particular background, is this

just not very strange that you were asked to go there and hang around

for a few hours and incidentally handing over a jiffy bag? At that

period in the time, no, not really. As much as I was qualified didn't

actually have a job. You saw others on the team doing something similar?

They would be doing that, yes. Would they be taking other bags through? I

would have thought so, in every cycling team in the world. What you

think now looking back with the benefit of hindsight, should you

have asked more questions? I should. I probably should have asked what

was in the package but as I said at the time really I didn't think it

was anything untoward. If you wanted to ask more questions now, does that

mean you are suspicious? No, but because of the media asking why

would you travel here or there and the other day I travelled down to

Spain with 40 boxes in the car and I didn't open every box but I presumed

they were helmets but I don't know. We do travel from a and B and C with

a lot of stuff. A quick question on that. Thank you, Mr Cope, before I

was a member of Parliament I was in the Royal Air Force and I'm

interested in airport security. Obviously in 2011 there was a lot

going on in the world and airport security was very heightened at the

start of the Arab Spring. Can you remember, did you check any luggage

into the hole that all? I did, yes. The jiffy bag was in the hold. You

would have been asked when you are checking in did you pack the bag

yourself and were you given any items to put on board. I cannot

remember to be honest but I probably said yes. So you would have misled

the check-in staff? Obviously you had a package, so you put the jiffy

bag, what kind of bag you normally travelling when you check something.

It was a normal hold tight bag. In a side pocket? No, just chucked it in

with anything else, my wash bag and everything else. The only reason I

check to hold bag in was that I had items that would be confiscated

going through overhead. You seem to have good recollection. I have lost

a lot of money doing that, with aftershaves and things like that so

I know now to check the bag in. So that is your regular procedure. It

is now, yes. When you have a package you put in your hold luggage. Well,

I don't get given packages that often but at this point I did. So

just to clarify you would have misled airport check-in staff if you

asked whether you packed everything yourself? They would have done

because of the state of security. Do they still asked that question? They

stopped asking it. They do, yes. You just said you went to Spain last

week with 40 boxes which you presumed had helmets in them. What

did you presume was in this package? You must've had thought what the

Senate. If it came from the doctor it was a busy something medical but

anything untoward, no, because our national governing body. I have been

a cyclist for 30 plus years and looked up to British cycling and we

have done so well, and with the stance of zero tolerance towards

performance enhancing drugs, I would have never thought that anything

like that would be in a package, so I had no reason to believe it was

anything untoward at all. Why Makar how long did you do the job for? Was

about five years? Which job? The job you are doing at the time. Five or

six years. Where you asked to take packages are any other time? I

asked to take stuff, packages, asked to take stuff,

clothing, helmets. I mean small clothing, helmets. I mean small

jiffy bags. It could well be, yes, but I have no recollection. It is

not untoward to take stuff from A to B. What about small packages that

could contain all sorts? Semiregular occurrence? Semiregular. Did you

ever ask what was in them? Did you take them abroad through customs?

Could well be, yes. It depends how you were travelling, if I was in the

boot of a cart -- if I was in a car would be in the boot but in an

airport it would go in the hold luggage or maybe the hand luggage,

it just depends really. You are making out I am -- I assume you take

more than one package so each time was your normal method of operation

to put them in the hold luggage other hand luggage? It would be

either. What would make your mind up?

Well... I would've thought you would always put it in the hold and every

time you would be asked by customs, did you pack it yourself? And you

would obviously say yes, even it was no. Tier I did packet, but in the

bag. You are splitting hairs, you had a package that you did not know

what was in it that you put it in the suitcase and you said yes when

the answer was no. He said that happened several times. Once or

twice, yes. Yes. Did you bring anything back? Did you bring any

packages back, you came back on the same day? I didn't come back on the

same day, no. I didn't bring any packages back. Did you booked the

flight yourself, or was it booked for you? Booked for me. Did you pay

for hold luggage or was it booked with the ticket? Your initial

thought was that you were going out to give someone a lift back to the

airport and bring some bags back and the return ticket, where these bikes

booked on your return ticket? I do not remember what was put on the

return ticket or not, I am not sure. Given new when staying overnight,

why did you take your overnight bag with you? I stayed overnight after

the London knock-down, which I explained earlier, so I had an

overnight bag with a change of underwear and probably a change of

clothing, so yes, that's why had an overnight. It is unclear whether you

left your car at the hotel? Some people might have left the bag in

and back for the sake of it and and back for the sake of it and

checking it through airport security and that adds delay and it is odd

As you said with my expenses, I As you said with

can't remember if it was a train or can't remember if it was a train or

back into holes -- would not check a back into holes -- would not check a

bag into a hole that they did not bag into a hole that they did not

Where you asked by British cycling made just to bring it back

to make sure the package was checked to make sure the package was checked

into the holder not carried by hand? I wasn't asked by anybody what to do

with it. Can you give us an idea of how big it was? About a shoe box,

about... I don't know what was in it, papers or something. You guys I

say it is fluid so I don't know. That is what the doctor said it was.

I don't even know how big Bloomer sillies.

Just a quick question, you spoke about your reference for British

in their managers and that you would in their managers and that you would

not questioned them but you said earlier that they tend to wear two

hats with Team Sky. Do you have the same reverence for Team Sky? Yes.

There is a zero tolerance across the board. The fact that British cycling

is running the game has been running for some time gives them a sense of

credibility and so on. Team Sky and you are trying to establish

themselves and they start off with a poorly attaining season before they

start to do well and you have no reason therefore to trust the

integrity of Team Sky? It is the same people, I think the reason they

had a poor couple of seasons is because starting a new team takes a

hell of a lot. You know, you don't just walk in and take the world on,

it takes a hell of a lot of thinking and a lot of mistakes to get it

right. Do you resent the fact that you have been asked to carry the can

for this business? Carry what can? I mean my name has been all over the

media, yes. Indeed, and you are in front of the select committee

answering some very tricky questions about a package that nobody seems to

know what was involved in it, does it not annoy you a little bit? A

little bit, yes. But it is history now, so I can only say what I know,

and that is it. Thank you. Can I just be clear, was your trip to

Manchester solely to collect this package? Not that I can remember, I

was based in Manchester, I would have been in Manchester from memory

that we potentially running track programmes. I don't remember going

solely to Manchester pick up a package to come home. You think you

were in Manchester anyway? Tier I was based in Manchester for a good

few years so to actually travel to Manchester Speaker package up and

back row, I don't remember doing that at all. I am confused about the

timescale on this. The evidence that the chairman has referred to said

that the package was collected on June eight, and the journey was not

made until the 12th of June, the journey to France, so there is a gap

of three days. I can't remember, to be honest. I think potentia picked

it up on the Friday came home and then, like I said, went to London on

the Saturday Night Live went to France on the Sunday. Did you

deliver packages often? No, not offered. Have you ever delivered

another package? Tier package as in medical package or clothing package?

Paper? Did you know this was a medical package when you picked it

up? I didn't know it was a medical package but I assumed that being

from a doctor it would be something medical. Had you delivered a medical

package from a doctor before? Not if memory serves me right, no. Have you

delivered a medical package subsequently? I don't think so, no.

So this is the only medical package you have ever delivered.

Potentially, yes. If memory serves me right.

You said earlier you did not know what was in the package. I still do

not know what was in the package. What told you it was from a doctor?

Did someone tell you? If something is being made up for you to be given

to the doctor you assume it is from the doctor has ordered at. He did

not say it was from the doctor, he said can you pick a package up to

give to Richard Freeman, who was the doctor at British cycling. I am

assuming. I cannot imagine Richard ordering anything else. I could be

wrong. I want to go back to something you said before where you

said you have taken packages more than once but you never know what

was in them. But sometimes you put them in your whole bondage and

sometimes in your hand luggage. How could you take something in your

hand luggage they did not know what was in it Mr? I am not saying I took

packages here are, there and everywhere. To take something in

your hand luggage you would have to know... Maybe I asked what that was.

So just sometimes you know what is in these packages? Yeah. What would

have sometimes been in these packages that sometimes you know? It

could be licenses. Licenses? Every rider needs a licence. I got sent a

package the other day full of licensees. This package we are

talking about on this occasion that you picked up in Manchester for the

doctor, you decided to put that into your hold luggage, why? I did not

take any hand luggage. Other than my passport in my pocket. Would that be

usual thing for you to do to put things in your luggage and not know

which were taking? It could have been anything. It could have been.

You would never question that? If a guy on the street gave me a package

I think I would be suspicious. This is our national governing body. I

had no reason to be suspicious at all. Is that because it was known

practice at the things that were not quite legitimate in packages? I do

not know whether it was normal practice, I was just asked to take

the package and I did not ask what was in it. Do you find on reflection

that was a strange thing to do? It probably is on reflection. We are

five or six years down the line. You were not an experienced person

around cycling so I presume you not inexperienced to presume what was in

the package. Why would I presume it was anything untoward? I am not

saying it was but with your years of experience you would surely have the

reasonable understanding of the types of things that were in

packages? Basically I did not think it was anything to worry about. I

trusted my colleagues. OK. When you handed the package to

doctor feeling did he give the impression he knew what was in it? I

just gave it to him and I presume he said thank you like most common

decent people would and that was that. No other comment, just handed

straight to him? No. I did not think it was anything untoward or secret

or underhand. It was like me handing a bit of paper like you guys have

been handed paper. At the airport when you arrived in Geneva you

picked up a car. What car was it? I have no clue. I have driven a

million cars between now and then. Was it a car or van? It was a car. I

know it was a car. You were expecting to bring things back from

the airport -- bikes? You can put the hood down and transport them. If

I needed to bring five bikes back surely they would have booked a van

but the booked a car. You did not look it, somebody else booked it?

Exactly. You mentioned your job at the time was part-time. Yes. I much

did you get paid? I think that is for British cycling to say, not for

me. You are not willing... No. I do not think I have to disclose that.

Was it adequate? What is adequate? Were you paid sufficiently not to

ask questions? No. It was not a three figure sum, I can tell you

that. It was not? No, nowhere near. I care.

It was enough to make you drop everything. It was not a question of

dropping something, he was my boss. Without question you take what you

are asked to take and go where you are asked to go. Do you ask

questions to your boss? I think you do. Is it normal for Team Sky to

move bikes around on an easyJet flight? I would have thought so.

Like any cycling team flying anywhere with bikes. You have done

that before? They can bikes on flights? EasyJet? Why easyJet? That

is who you are flying with. You can boot a bike on any flight. Had you

done that before? Yes. Nothing unusual about that? No. When the

story about the package was first reported and you did an interview

for that Mike cycling News you said the package was not for Brad, why

did you say that? Because it was for doctor Freeman. What he did with it

was none of my business. You did not know? No. The press like to twist

things. What you told this package was important? No. Doctor Freeman

must've thought it was important and yet you are asked to clear it

through an airport without any documentation or any knowledge of

what it was. If you had been stopped and questioned the package could've

been confiscated and taken off of you. Without any documentation. That

is my naivete for not asking. It seems naive of them as well. You

would have to ask the doctor. The potentially care more about the

package than you. Potentially. That is a question for the doctor. When

you were told about the package that was no importance attached to it and

no sense of how important it was that he did not miss your flight?

Not at all. I am struck by the fact that your memory has recovered to an

extraordinary degree in the course of this evidence. You began and

could scarcely remember what you did last Tuesday but now you can recall

your travel arrangements and have a detailed memory, you remember you

are asked to drive Shane Sutton to the airport expecting to bring back

bikes, there was a car, not a van, you checked in luggage, you remember

the size of the package. It is a curious way your memory works. I

can't help how my memory works. Credibility. Why did you not ask

what was in the package? I did not feel I needed to. This was an

unusual circumstance. You said you did not often deliver to the doctor

and yet on this occasion you are asked to give something to a doctor.

At the heart of this evidence what people will find hard to believe is

that you travelled through an airport with the package for a

doctor and you did not ask what was then that package. I trusted my

employees. Do you understand why people find that an extraordinary

bit of evidence for you to give? Potentially, yes. It is not about

hindsight. I understand why you say you trusted your employer because

that is clearly an intent to shift focus onto them but the focus is on

you today. Whether you trusted your employer or not it is a normal and

natural question to ask what is in a medical package that you are

transporting across international boundaries by plane. I did not ask.

I would ask my partner, my best friend, my employer, what within a

package I was going to transport by plane. All of us would. Everybody in

this room would come apart from you. They are better people than me. It

is not a question of being better, it is doing something that is

logical because we know that when we go to the airport we get asked what

is in our baggage. You are faced with two choices, to lie and say you

did know what was in a tangible acted yourself or that you were

carrying nothing. That is why at the heart of this evidence people find

something deeply suspicious. I was asked to take a package out of

France and that is what I did. I did not ask what within it. You have

said sometimes people were asked to transport detergent. You said that

earlier. Yes. Clearly your employers were in the habit of telling you

what within packages. I did not say I transported the detergent. You can

get asked to take anything anywhere. You mentioned detergent. That was an

off-the-cuff comment. That is what you said. Clearly your employers

were in the habit of telling couriers but as yourself what was in

the packages you were transporting. That may well be but they did not

tell me what within this package. The standard practice was to see

what within packages and on this particular occasion transporting

medicine to a doctor they did not say what within the package? You

would have to ask them that. I cannot answer. No, you are the

witness. Not them. That is why we are asking you questions. I did not

know what within it, I took it and that is all I say. What do you think

was in the package looking back? I have no clue. If that is what it was

that is what it was. What was your master plan? What we're going to do

if the package had been opened? I did not have the master plan. I

think you think this is some... I do not know what. I was asked to take a

package... You are different from everybody else in this room because

I would be very nervous as I was transporting a package that I did

not know what within it. I did not think it anything untoward. You did

not have a clue? Not a clue. I did not ask. In your period as an

athlete have you ever seen dodgy substances given to athletes?

Physically actually seeing it? Yes. No. Not at all. Track-side, have you

heard about it? Gossip? There is gossip everywhere. Gossip you

believed? Believed and tell people to go positive, basically. There is

gossip about anything, mechanical doping, gossip about everything.

Yes, but we are talking about you and people you knew in the sport

that you presumably loved, did you hear people talk about doping in a

way that you found credible? There has been talk, yes. Did you find it

credible? Credible? Credible. We are repeating one another, I do not know

why. You know what credible means. Did you find it credible, some of

the gossip you heard? Yes, believable, yes. I will go with

believable. You found it credible, believable, some of the gossip you

heard about drug-taking. I think we all that within sport, is financial

gain. You have been involved in the sport and had her gossip about

drug-taking, you find that gossip credible or believable, you were

then asked most unusually to transport a package across

international boundaries and even though you believed that drug-taking

was credible and that you were being asked to deliver this package in a

report to ask what was in it? No. Not with the stance of Team Sky and

British cycling of zero tolerance, I believe that was their philosophy.

You said you believe gossip about drug-taking. Tier I'm going back to

20 years in my career. You can't you believe the gossip and you don't

believe the gossip. I was under the impression of we were talking about

my career as a cyclist. In the sport in general I would believe there are

some people who cheat. OK, so we have established that you think

there is cheating in sport. In general. You believe or you do not

think there is cheating in cycling? I believe there is potentially, like

anybody else. OK, so you think there is cheating in cycling. I am talking

about cycling as a whole worldwide, I am not talking about British

cheating in British cycling. I have cheating in British cycling.

never heard anything at all. No never heard anything at all. No

gossip, no rumours. I am sure the journalists would love the answer to

this question. I am sure they know themselves. I am not going to say

who I think is cheating because I am putting my neck on the line. How are

you putting your neck on the line? I could be wrong. I am not asking you

to name names! There has been systematic doping within the soviet

union, hasn't there? So that has come out. I would say individual

riders potentially would take the risk because there is financial

gain, but as for British cycling, I have never seen anything. Who did

you talk to in the run-up to giving this evidence session? Who did you

prepare the evidence session with? Just my lawyer, that's it. You

didn't talk to anybody else involved in the sport? As in? I am asking you

the question. No. I have spoken to my lawyer and also some friends,

that is it. Friends involved in the sport. The friends have been

involved in the sport in the past, yes? Any senior figures in the

sport? Mechanics and things like that. You were asked when he went

out to Geneva that you might expect to bring some bikes back, in the end

did you bring anything that? No, I didn't. Shane Sutton said about your

visit that he also took some stuff back with him and I grabbed a lift

back to the airport with him. No, I didn't bring anything back. That is

what he has told us and he was travelling with you so he might have

noticed if you are bringing anything back. I didn't bring anything back.

You are saying Shane Sutton was wrong and you were not bringing

anything back. I didn't listen to what he said but I was not given

anything to bring back. A couple more quick questions. Just to

confirm, was the package sealed? It was, yes. Hypothetically, if you

were to take a package to one of the team doctors and that package

contained performance enhancing drugs that might have therapeutic

use, and you were the coria and the team doctor administered it to

athlete, you would be implicated in athlete, you would be implicated in

that doping ruling? Yes, I would be. So it means in the nicest possible

way it is very handy that you were not aware what was in the package?

here and I think you are being here and I think you

stitched up, I think you have been stitched up, I think you have been

left to dangle by people who may or may not be former colleagues and

friends and that actually you have been left in a very difficult

position. Yes. Do you feel that? Is there anything else you want to tell

the committee? Bearing in mind that you have been done in. Tier I have

told you everything I know, I don't know what was in and I was asked to

take it by my employees. I was in a position where my role was not full

side so I was trying to secure the job so any job that I was asked to

do that I would do it. Has your reputation been damaged as a result

of this? Potentially yes. Kammy clarify from where we started in

terms of your arrangements and where you spend your time. You said you

live near Ashford in Kent and you also said you live part-time in

Manchester as well, is that correct? I live me quake in Manchester and I

went home at weekends. Did you say you had a flat in Manchester? It was

shared with a couple of mechanics and another coach. It was a

registered address for you in Manchester? No, my registered

address was still in Ashford. Did you have a residence in Manchester

or wager sharing with some friends? I suppose it was sharing really,

wasn't it? I used to get their Mundie Nightingale home on Friday

afternoon. How long did that continue for? Two or three years and

I hated every minute of it! To be clear, were you on the electoral

register or paying bills? No, I left everything down in Kent. Thank you,

Mr Cope. in front of the committee. We have

seen you several times in our doping in sport enquiry and we are very

grateful for your existence that you have given the committee and your

colleagues during the course of this enquiry. We would be very keen to

ask you about the progress you have made in this investigation of this

matter and you will obviously be familiar with the evidence we have

just received from Simon Cope and the evidence we received last year

from sky -- Team Sky and British cycling. The key thing we were told,

I think, when Dave Brailsford gave evidence to us was that he had been

told by Doctor Freeman that the package that Simon Cope delivered to

Team Sky contained Fluimucil and I think we are interested to know

whether in the evidence you have received from British cycling, Team

Sky or anybody else you spoke to in your enquiries as to whether there

is any corroborating evidence or written evidence to support

backplane? If you will permit me I will start from the beginning, which

is that on the of September last year we started an investigation at

UK anti-do in and that was based on the fact that we had received

information to suggest that a possible anti-do the rules violation

may have been committed during some stage of the Dauphine in France in

June 20 11. Subsequently that Anti-Doping Agency violation in

question became about the contents of a package that was delivered to

Doctor Freeman in France with the additional allegation that the

package contains a glucocorticosteroids. We have into

void 32 individuals that across current and ex-employee 's British

cycling and Team Sky, writers and medical professionals. -- we have

interviewed. And the fact as we have been able to establish art that at

some point during the Dauphine a request was made by Doctor Freeman

for a package to be delivered to him. He requested Shane Sutton to

arrange for that package to be delivered to him over in France and

Shane Sutton then got into contact with Simon Cope to pick up that

package and to bring it over to France. Parallel to that is a

conversation that Doctor Freeman had with a British cycling

Phil Burt and he was the individual Phil Burt and he was the individual

then left the package with Shane then left the package with Shane

Sutton 's assistant, on her desk or with her we are unsure, because we

cannot ascertain specifically how that action took place and as you

have concerned -- as you have heard that is from where Simon Cope

collected the package up in the velodrome. On the basis of the

information that we have received Simon Cope travelled to Manchester

to pick up that package and then at some later point he travelled to

Gatwick on June the 11th and he stayed overnight at Gatwick and then

he took a flight out to Geneva on the 12th of June anti-car and he

took it to the end stage of the Dauphine on June the 12th passed the

package over to Doctor Freeman. We have received one account of what

was in the package and that was that the package contained Fluimucil.

That, for the committee 's information, and I have heard you

already have information about Fluimucil, is not a prohibited

substance and it is used for the treatment of a build-up of mucus or

Qatar which is, I believe, quite common in endurance sports. The

reason we have asked a wealth of individuals about what they believe

the contents of the package to contain, specifically Phil Burt who

put the package together, and he has no recollection whatsoever of what

he put in the package, neither does anybody else, so we are not able to

confirm or refute the one account that we have been given, which is

that it contained Fluimucil. I think it is important also add that during

the course of our investigation we have asked for inventory is and

medical records that can go to confirming whether it actually was

Fluimucil and we have not been able to ascertain that because there are

no records. Thank you. The guidance that we received from the medicines

and health care regulatory product, we have been asked to us from their

point of view what would be normal in terms of record-keeping, and at

this time Fluimucil was an unlicensed medication in the UK and

supplying an unlicensed medicine in says here that where a doctor is

supplying an unlicensed medicine in the UK he would need to record the

source and the date where he obtained the product and the data

which he supplied and the quantity supplied and the details of any

adverse reactions which he is not adverse reactions which

became aware of, so in this case it became aware of, so in this case it

appears there is no such records that have been kept, because if they

had been kept then you would have documents that showed that it was

Fluimucil. That is correct. There are no records, particularly those

kept by Doctor Freeman, who was the doctor overseeing Team Sky at this

particular event, there are absolutely no records whatsoever of

any treatment during the course of that event. Our enquiries have

established that Doctor Freeman kept medical records on a laptop and he

was meant to, according to Team Sky policy, and a policy that the other

doctors followed was to upload the medical records into a drop box,

which all the doctors had access to. He did not do that, for one reason

or another, and in 2014 we have been informed that his laptop was stolen

whilst he was on holiday in Greece and that is why we have not been

able to access the medical records that we need to because they are on

a laptop which has been stolen. If he was supposed to upload them,

that had not been done. Isn't the case -- is it the case that medical

records in this case for Bradley Wiggins do not exist or are

incomplete? They do not exist or they are incomplete. Have you been

given full access to the medical records that exist? Yes. I am in

front of you and I will be nothing but honestly to that in the first

instance we have met with a degree of resistance and I understand why.

I do not undermine the argument of doctor-patient confidentiality. But

it has caused a delay to our efforts and we have had to find various

routes round getting round that argument that wanting to access

various individuals' records is breaching doctor-patient

confidentiality. We have been able to access the wreckers and I wish to

be clear that we are specifically looking at records that pertains to

the duration of the race in question and not beyond that and there are no

corresponding records of any treatment whatsoever. The General

Medical Council requires the doctors keep such records. We'll doctor

Freeman be pursued by the GMC? I think the GMC will want to be

involved and we have been communicating with them. Yes, it is

my understanding that doctors are expected to keep as contemporaneous

a note as possible of the treatment given to patients. With regards to

British Cycling itself, the advice we were given by the medicines and

health care products regulatory industry was that in this case if

produce cycling supplied then they would be acting as a wholesaler? Dr

Freeman war two hats. He wore the heart of the employee within British

Cycling but he was also employed by teams guide's doctor. We have seen

invoices and records which indicate that when he was ordering medical

products he was wearing one of those two hats however when those

medicines, products, were delivered, they were all delivered primarily

within... To the Manchester velodrome. And they were kept in one

area and there was no segregation of the products that were designated

for British Cycling as opposed to Team Sky. Neither, from what we have

obtained, any clear records of what was going in and out of that medical

supply and how those various products had been ordered were being

administered. Regardless of how they did or did not keep records, in this

case Dr Freeman was effectively purchasing drugs from British

Cycling to administered to a collie rider competing for Team Sky, not

Team GB. Possibly. We cannot see at what point... There no record to

show the were coming out of the Team Sky order and purely going to Team

Sky riders versus the orders that he was able to put in on behalf of

British Cycling. The guidance we received here suggests that if

British Cycling supplied medicines to Dr Freeman they would've had to

have held a wholesaler is' license and kept a record of supply

including minimum quantity, the date of dispatch, and adverse reactions

to the products they became aware of the case of a licensed product.

There is only a legal requirement was records are kept for five years

so in this case the wreckers were destroyed shortly before your

investigation started but have you been given any indication by British

Cycling that they keep records of that sort? No. Not that our records

have yielded. Clearly when we are asking for access to records about

what an individual has been prescribed, it was very much

confined to this particular race and the cyclists involved so I cannot

speak for Dr Freeman's record-keeping as opposed to other

riders. It is just very clear from investigation that there is no audit

trail of what is going in and out of a comprehensive supply of medical

products. Incredibly serious matter because there are laws around the

dispensing and administering of medicines and it would certainly

seem from what you have said Dr Freeman is not complying with the

GMC guidelines and British Cycling is not complying with their

obligations to keep records, a legal requirement to keep records for the

dispensing of medicines. Yes. One or two further questions. With regard

to the use of a drug you mentioned earlier, this was a drug for team

were using and we were told that it was used out of competition when

there was medical need for Team Sky riders. Have you found records about

the amount that was being used? We have seen orders, yes, from Team Sky

and British Cycling that indicate that it has been ordered. That is

clear from the infantry of orders that have come into the Manchester

velodrome. There is no audit of how it was used. From the records you

would expect to see of what is going in the supply of products there is

no clear audit that it has left or been administered to an individual.

That said you would have to pry into every riders' medical record to see

of them is a note of them having been administered that at any time.

The TUV certificates? I am not aware of the extent to which it has been

prescribed to riders within Team Sky or British Cycling because our focus

has been on this particular package and in relation to Bradley Wiggins.

We would have to overcome the hurdle again and showed justification of

why we wanted to delve into the therapeutic use exemption is of

every other rider and whether there was clear justification. I think it

is helpful for me to set out that obviously when it comes the

therapeutic use exemption is we all except that there are athletes who

have genuine medical conditions who should not be excluded from sport

because of those medical impairments for want of a better word. That is

exactly why therapeutic use exemption system is there. You as an

individual have to apply to your national anti-doping Organisation or

your international federation, you have to apply for therapeutic use

exemption ahead of your use and that application for an exemption is

considered by an independent therapeutic use exemption committee

who will consider the request against some strict criteria,

primarily can that individual demonstrates they have the condition

to begin with? Secondly, is there any other permissible alternative

available to them? From the records you have seen relating to the use of

this drug, was more product ordered than is needed to administer? Yes.

Specifically in relation to Bradley Wiggins, yes, far more. Looking at

the quantity that was ordered, do you believe the quantity would

suggest a widespread use I cannot specify whether it is used in or out

of competition. You will have to squeeze me of my medical terminology

is vague but my understanding is it is quite a serious product but you

do not treat conditions with it lightly. My understanding is you

would not... I research study done in 2009 or 2011 which demonstrated

that it was not... It should not be the preferred method of treatment

and for that reason you would either think there was an excessive amount

of triamcinolone being ordered for one person or quite a few people had

a very similar problem. So based on what you have seen you would see if

all of this triamcinolone was for one person it would have been an

excessive amount or it was being used by lots of riders? Yes. It is

difficult because of the lack of records to understand over what

duration these orders were lasting. Given that you said you received an

allegation that triamcinolone could have been what was in the package

that was sent out to Bradley Wiggins, were you concerned that the

use of triamcinolone was far more widespread than just the isolated

occasions we know it was used? For starters it is permitted out of

competition. It is permitted in competition via certain routes. It

gets a bit complicated. You are required... It is prohibited if you

take it intramuscularly, morally, intravenously, for example, and that

is when you would have to apply for a therapeutic use exemption. Through

any other route it is acceptable so it is a very challenging substance

because first it is quite difficult to detect in a sample and it is

difficult to detect the writ of administration and whether it was

through a permissible or prohibited route. The large quantities of

triamcinolone being ordered, presumably by Dr Freeman. The GMC

says that the team will not... Is this the matter you have discussed

with the GMC in terms of whether they will be investigating Dr

Freeman's use of triamcinolone? Our investigation is not concluded. At

the point at which we are prepared to package everything up then

absolutely, there has already been dialogue with the GMC with regard to

doctor-patient confidentiality and we will continue that dialogue with

regards to what we think is appropriate to handover. You said

there is a lack of records. Have you given any information that suggest

Biba had been asked to destroy records that might have been

relevant? We have no evidence there has been any sort of cover up or

tampering. That is an incredibly serious allegation. In our mind it

is an allegation that we can pursue as an anti-doping rule violation and

the anti-doping rules and at this time we have no evidence to pursue

such a charge against anyone. No evidence Biba have been asked to

delete emails or computer files? -- people. Not that we are aware of at

this time. You gave evidence that Fluimucil was in the package. That

was Dr Freeman who told us that Fluimucil was in the package. Phil

Burt, is he an employee of British Cycling? Yes, he is a British

Cycling physio. And he put the package together but there are no

records kept by British Cycling about the administration of this

drug? No record at all of what went into that package. Can I ask about

the laptop that Dr Freeman says has been stolen? Do you know when that

was said to be stolen? I am sorry, I do not recall the date, I think it

was... It was 2014 but I do not know the month, it was the summer.

Was that reported to the police? We believe it was reported to the

police and we are working with Interpol to obtain confirmation that

it was reported. It was reported to British cycling so they have a

record that a theft from Doctor Freeman was reported and we are

unable to ascertain that Team Sky was informed as much. When was

British cycling informed about the theft of the laptop? I am terribly

sorry, I don't know that, I can certainly let the committee know

afterwards. Can we have that information because I am very

concerned about the absence of documentation from British cycling

and Team Sky and that we have not got supporting evidence. That is

your experience as well, isn't it? Is there any written evidence of the

theft of the laptop? My understanding is that there is a

record at British cycling that the theft was reported to them. Have you

seen a record? My team have seen that records are they are aware of

that record and we can find a record from Team Sky because clearly Doctor

Freeman was acting with a dual role here. Yes, I am very concerned about

this dual role. As far as your enquiry is concerned, have that

presented problems in apportioning responsibility, for example? Yes, it

is very difficult at any given time to see what is being prescribed when

Doctor Freeman is acting on behalf of Team Sky or whether he is acting

for British cycling. Your enquiry is being conducted at the request of

British cycling, is that right? Game no. How did that actually happen? We

became aware via a source that there was an allocation being made about

this package and that is what has instigated our enquiry. Sorry, I

think there was also something that came out in the press around the

same time as well. I had a recollection of British cycling

referring to your enquiry but that particular matter is not of great

importance. Can I ask you, in your conclusions, and I know you have

reached them yet, will an issue that you consider BB dual role of British

cycling and Team Sky and individuals who seem to have been employed by

both? I am aware that UK sport conducted a Deloitte audit enquiry

of this specific, more general, area. I don't imagine that when you

conduct an audit of the roles that people are playing anybody who is

minded to pry into the role of Doctor and possible antidote

allegations that may come out of that and so when I answer your

question it is purely from that perspective, it is that I do find it

very difficult and I absolutely recognise that from, purely from an

anti-doping perspective I think there is a huge conflict of

interest. Thank you. In their evidence to us at an earlier session

two people said they declined to answer numerous questions on the

basis that you had asked them not to reveal any details of the

conversations, is that correct? At the time that we first started we

had discussions with British cycling, primarily Ian Drake, the

then chief executive at British cycling, and we asked them not to

discuss beyond that conversation, to discuss it more freely, so, yes, Ian

Drake and I then had some conversations where they wanted to

be kept appraised of our investigation and clearly we won't

discuss an investigation with an independent organisation, we don't

have to answer to sports and, yes, I think at the time they certainly

wouldn't have known anything about the package in relation to our

investigation because we weren't sharing that information with them,

if that makes sense. At the start of your evidence today you talked about

obstructions he faced early in the enquiry. Can you talk a bit about

those and what they were and who they were from? When I say

obstructions I don't mean that they were malicious. The obstructions or

the obstacles rather, that we faced, was primarily doctor/ patient

confidentiality which is we will not give you access to these records

because it is an invasion of that right, that premise. And that is

incredibly frustrating for us as an organisation when we are seeking to

prove or disprove something. We found a way around that and so

whilst that was used as a, I guess, a first response to our request, we

have met with corporation eventually from all parties involved. What was

the way round it? What we did was we first of all contacted the GMC and

asked for their advice. They very much left it between us and British

cycling and Team Sky to resolve. My understanding is that the premise of

doctor/ patient confidentiality is not absolute and it can be

circumvented in a number of instances, one is when you are

required to under law and the second one is with a patient's consent and

the third one is this the public interest in that matter outweighs

the need to maintain the confidentiality. Notwithstanding

that any of those arguments works for us, how we found a route around

was that we used an independent doctor to access the records that we

wanted to get hold of, so they were our filter, so we were not trawling

through. The problem was that in accessing one individual 's records

you had to see a number of riders records and the concern was that

Doctor Freeman 's records in relation to other riders would then

be available to us and the restriction was that we were

specifically looking at the medical records of Sir Bradley Wiggins. How

long did it take from the time you first made the request to see the

records to when you had an independent doctor? A long time. I

would like to say that we finally got all of the records we wanted at

the end of January, and we started this in early October. That was

quite a bit of time there. Quite a bit of time, yes. Are you confident

that the records that your doctor sought with a full and correct

version? As much as we are able to establish that, that was a

comprehensive record given what I have already told the committee in

relation to the record-keeping and the lack of record keeping. These

are not his GP records, for example? This is specifically related to

self-management by British cycling and Team Sky? Yes, and very

specifically in relation to primarily Doctor Freeman. Have you

or anybody at UK anti-doping had a conversation directly with Sir

Bradley Wiggins regarding this? Guild yes, we have interviewed Sir

Bradley Wiggins. Are you able to say what he has commented on in terms of

this? His recollection was that he was treated the Fluimucil the

evening of June the 12th. He does not know what was in the package.

OK, but he was treated with Fluimucil? Victim Care Unit he was

treated the Fluimucil that evening. At that time Fluimucil was

unlicensed in the UK but was it available elsewhere in Europe? Yes,

our records indicate that the Fluimucil for Team Sky and British

cycling was coming from two outlets, one in Germany and one in

Switzerland. OK, so much closer to the location and getting someone on

a plane and a train and an automobile to travel halfway across

Europe to deliver something that was readily available on the doorstep?

Indeed. Thank you very much. Did Bradley Wiggins say how he was

administered this? Yes, he said by nebuliser. The records for Team Sky

about Fluimucil is that we have records of them buying ten

cloud-macro 33 Bridges cycling in Manchester. No, my understanding of

how this was ordered is that there seems to be no record of it being

ordered in the UK, which can only lead me to believe that Fluimucil

only ever came from pharmacies abroad. The records I can't prevent

disprove that. It is quite interesting because some people have

suggested that the reason it may have been ordered from the British

cycling store is that they might wanted a consistent supply but if

they wanted a consistent supply in this case they would've gone to a

pharmacist in Switzerland? Is entirely possible. Our understanding

is that the reason that Doctor Freeman chose to ask for it to be

transported from the UK to France was because he was unsure of his

prescription rights in France and he wanted to be 100% sure about the

concentration of the Fluimucil that he was using. I understand that it

can vary in terms of its strength abroad. We ask British cycling if

they would give us records relating to the quantities of drugs that are

routinely stored in Manchester and they have not done that but have you

seen any evidence to suggest that Fluimucil is ordered by British

cycling are kept in their stores? I have not, no. The information

British cycling has given you as part of the investigation, there is

nothing to suggest that Fluimucil is a drug that they hold. I have only

seen invoices and records that relate to products which do not

include Fluimucil. There are lots of records but no records to support

the Fluimucil? Guild no. Can I ask as well, regarding the Manchester

City that Simon Cope said he made, we believe from the written evidence

that we were given that it was quite clear that he made a trip to

Manchester on June the 8th and that is your recollection as well, is

that based on their document or other evidence you have received? No

I cannot be specific about that. I can confirm it and I believe it is

based on the records that you have seen. The overall picture that you

paint is extremely concerning because it seems that there are no

records that British cycling or Team Sky can go back on to demonstrate

the drugs that Doctor Freeman is ordering on what he is doing with

the man who really is giving them too. There is certainly no record of

what was put in this package which went with Simon Cope from the UK to

France. There are no records of the large quantities of Triamcinolone

that they are ordering and how that is being used either, if outside of

the scope of your enquiry? It is outside the scope but my expectation

is that not withstanding you would expect to leasing audit trail of

what is going in and out of what I would very flippantly call a

medicine cabinet, but certainly the extent of our investigation has not

delved into exactly where those products are being administered. We

have been told that the team operate an ethical policy whereby medication

is only ever used to treat medical need, but it is unclear how we can

be certain that is the case when there are no records to demonstrate

that is true. Correct. I understand that back in 2011 there was a Team

Sky policy which was about the keeping of clear records by the

doctors and I am aware that there were other doctors who absolutely

kept watertight records and, again, the extent of our investigation is

confined to this particular race for which there are zero records by

Doctor Freeman. Given that he was employed by British cycling and

still is, what does this say about the British cycling policy on the

administering of drugs in the way police is the anti-doping

guidelines? I clearly would absolutely think that there should

be some clear adherence to the General medical Council 's

guidelines, which are about keeping comprehensive records and when you

are talking about a prescription only medicines and there should

absolutely be a record of to whom that bulk order of prescription

medicines are being administered at any given time and a clear record of

the conditions for which they are being treated.

What excuse have British Cycling given to you for this lack of

record-keeping? We have not had an excuse. There is just an

acknowledgement that there was no policy and no records, that is it.

And the same at Team Sky? Team Sky had a policy but not everyone was

adhering to it. Is there any evidence of how the team management

sought to keep track of the policies that the doctors were following and

the administration of those? No. That has not been the extent of our

inquiry. I have been told Team Sky had a routine policy of review

meetings where the coach and the doctor would look at treatment of a

particular rider and that is part of a review and not unusual for

professional athlete it seems strange those detailed reviews were

carried out but there were no proper records kept of their medication.

Clearly there is this dropbox for which there are records being by

other doctors. I am not sure that is the policy that was employed at the

time across the board. Is the lack of records in this case unusual?

Certainly in relation to the record-keeping of other doctors,

yes, this is unusual. Following up on the questions from the chairman,

I hear what you are saying about record-keeping but Team Sky and

later UK cycling, particularly Team Sky, founded on the basis of winning

clean and fair and yet what you are suggesting is not they are not doing

that but they are not providing or maintaining the evidence to

demonstrate they are doing it, which is central to their mission, which

strikes me as a little bit old. It strikes me as odd as well. I would

expect particularly for a professional road cycling team that

was founded on the premise of exhibiting that road racing could

"It cleanly am not to have records that would demonstrate any

influences to the contrary. Have you found them to be slapdash in other

areas of the operation? The extent of our investigation has not gone

into that. I have no oversight of that. Electronic interference there.

Do you have a timetable whereby you can hope to conclude its

investigation? The team at UK anti-doping is still finalising some

other lines of inquiry. I cannot definitively say to you when it will

be concluded. I will be very happy to tell the committee as and when we

beat that juncture. Given the evidence so far do you think there

would be grounds for widening the scope to include the use of

triamcinolone? It is difficult because our premise is to

investigate where we think an anti-doping rule violation may have

occurred. And unless there is reason to believe that there has been one

it is difficult to stray into an area which is purely about the

medical practices of an organisation. I am absolutely

committed to pursuing any avenues which indicate that there is

wrongdoing that falls within the parameters of the rules. In this

case I suppose would the use of triamcinolone be something that the

GMC might investigate? Very possibly, yes. Looking at this

experience, from our point of view our interest is the legal powers and

the resources that you haven't your disposal. Do you think that has to

be reviewed in terms of the resource and powers you have? Very much so.

From October of last year this has been an incredibly resource

intensive effort which has spanned the breadth of UK anti-doping in

terms of the staff involvement. I think it has involved well in excess

of over 1000 man hours. Whether in relation to my time or down to

researchers and investigators at UK anti-doping. I think what it has

highlighted to me is that gone are the days when much of what we did

was about testing and getting a positive outcome to a blood test or

you're in test, that investigations themselves are becoming more common

than before. When you look at the resources that this is taken up...

At the detriment of other activity at UK anti-doping, then I do not

think that the resources that we have at the moment, it is not a

sustainable model at all. If you were to say to me what do I want? I

would love my budget to be doubled. We have a grand budget of 5.3

million. If we were to receive twice that amount, which I understand is

whistling in the wind, that would enable me to cover a greater breadth

and depth within the sport some sports we cannot even get to test.

The education is absolutely fundamental and as this particular

case has indicated we need far more investigative manpower generally

when it comes to investigations and intelligence. You are talking about

people time rather than tangible outputs as it were, resources that

are needed to undertake that. Your power is to trigger investigations

based on evidence reasonable grounds for investigation being brought to

your attention but it seems that the record-keeping that enables a team

or governing body to police the anti-doping rules has been woeful.

It seems there is a need for more constant checks on the way in which

the day-to-day administration of the rules are being followed. Yes, we do

not have the powers the police have, the powers of search and entry or

seizure. Or arrest. We have an incredibly good relationship with

law enforcement, whether the police or medicines health care regulatory

agency or Border Force. You have to look at our website to see that at

the moment there are ten current sanctions which pertain to

non-analytical cases, but the problem is that we have no powers to

compel people to provide other information, to talk to us. If

nothing else, I would like to see two things. That is for the cord to

change, the world anti-doping code to change, to enable organisations

like ourselves I guess to have the power to obligate individuals to

comply with an investigation, to assist with an investigation. There

should be sanctions if they refuse to do so. Similarly I think it is

incumbent on sports themselves to perhaps make it a condition of

participating in that sport that their athletes and support personnel

should be prepared to waive their right to things like doctor-patient

confidentiality to enable us to demonstrate and to give confidence

to the public that they are complying with the varied roles that

are in place. What response do you feel that UK sport has in this? --

role. We make it a condition through collaboration and the partnership

with not only UK sport but all the warm country sports councils to make

it a condition of funding that sports, in receipt of public money,

are gearing to not only the anti-doping policy, but wider

complying anti doping rules and I think it is for each of those

funding bodies alongside us to help us to ensure that sports are

adhering to those rules and are held to account if not. UK sport has

responsibility for operating the system whereby athletes have to give

a of the day they are available for testing in a location that can

found. Is that correct? That is our requirement. At any point when it

comes to a requirement to make yourself available for testing that

is determined by others at UK Anti-Doping. The gathering of

information, is that done by UK Sport? No, that is done by us. Have

you had any concerns about other texts? To make sure that team

members are complying. Absolutely. We have designated staff at UK

Anti-Doping who are monitoring the provision of athlete whereabouts and

we will support athletes who are struggling with abattoir and but at

the same time we will give them so many chances and if they are still

not doing what is asked of them we will issue them with what is called

a filing failure, failing to file the appropriate information, or

worst case scenario they give is inaccurate or misleading information

and we go to test the man they are not there, they will receive a

missed test from ours, and three of those over a year equates to an

anti-doping rule violation. How long do you hold those records for to

make sure you receive information about someone who might not have had

up-to-date information? 18 months, because it is personal data and we

have an obligation not to hold its beyond the time for which we need

it. Thank you. I think that completes our questions. Unless you

have any other comments? No, I think I am