Brian Cookson - President of the International Cycling Union Extra Time

that at the moment does not look likely. Now on BBC News, it's time

for Extra Time. Extra time today comes from the sport accord

convention at a resort on the southern coast of Turkey, where the

keynote address on day one was delivered by the new president of

the International cycling union, Brian Cookson. Rarely has a sport in

in such turmoil, stretching back to the late 20th century with the

doping scandals which engulfed the two to France. Its seven time

champion Lance Armstrong was stripped of his titles. The election

of Brian Cookson was a contentious affair, but he has a mission to

clear up the sport. It has certainly landed him in some controversy.

Brian Cookson, welcome to this addition of extra time. The first

line of your election manifesto was that you are a cyclist. It is a good

slogan, of course. At political skill is surely more important? I

don't think they are alternatives. You have to be a part of the sport

you're administering. Surely, to have a good understanding of the

sport is absolutely essential. I have been a cyclist all my life. My

earliest memories were riding on a track at home. Cycling has

eliminated my life. It enhances your credibility. Yes, absolutely. You

were opposed last September in Florence by the incumbent. He

challenged you are a number of technicalities. He even suggested

towards the end of the election that the ethics committee was

investigating an allegation that you had offered the Greek cycling

Federation 20,000 euros to back you in the election. That is nonsense. I

don't operate that way. That is absolutely untrue. We are now in the

process of establishing a new ethics commission, and that is one of the

allegations that is going to be put to them, to let them come up with a

genuine Independent that investigation. We will talk about

that in a moment. As far as the election is concerned, it is fair to

say that they manoeuvred things to a certain extent. Would it be fair to

say that you were entirely without guile in that process? We had a

strategy. As a team, we had good people around me with good advice. I

think we were certainly, we were prepared for some shenanigans, if I

can put it that way. But I don't think we were prepared for the

number of lawyers that my opponents produced on the day. And the way

they presented themselves. Throughout the campaign, we tried to

stick to the moral high ground. And not to get involved in mudslinging

and so on. And Frank Lee that paid off in the end. At the announcement

of the result, apparently Pat McQuaid burst into tears. I think

that was an exaggeration. I never saw him in tears, but I'm sure he

was disappointed, as is understandable. Any sympathy for

I have a lot of respect for him. He I have a lot of respect for him. He

achieved a lot in his time. I think it was perhaps unfortunate to him

that certain events took place which she did not have much control over,

as he might have wished. But ultimately, politics, and it was

politics, sports politics, politics can be a nasty game. And sometimes

he win and sometimes you lose, as any politician will tell you. The

background to the selection was years of suspicion that you had been

complicit in ignoring the doping culture. Your first task was to

seize all files at their headquarters. That they were all

under suspicion? It just means we wanted all the necessary information

for the subsequent investigation. All of that information was copied

and duplicated electronically and put under lock and key. I have not

seen it or investigated it. It has been handed over to the new

independent commission. That is presumably because you feared the

destruction of the files. Yes, but I'm confident we have the necessary

information. If there has been any wrongdoing, then I'm sure that it

will be dealt with through that process. It is not a flawless

process. No investigation is flawless. But we have the tools to

do the job, and we have some great people and that commission who have

the skills and experience in what to look for and where to look for it.

It is a 3`man enquiry, it has been set up. But the results will only be

as good as the evidence presented to it. Pat McQuaid's contribution is

essential, isn't it? I would encourage him to come forward. As

well as his predecessor. I think they have important evidence to give

in the way they did their jobs during that period. That's not to

say I'm alleging any wrongdoing, but there been allegations out there,

and I think they will want to clear their names. It is important that if

we really want to do that, they should contribute to the commission.

He said in January he would be willing to co`operate if the terms

of reference were OK, and if he could get an assurance it was

independent. Can he get that assurance? Absolutely. The terms are

out there on the website anyone to see. We have discussed an agreement

to make sure they are acceptable to international agencies, because if

we didn't do that we would have no credibility whatsoever. And it has

not been set up in a way to prejudge any of those issues. I would

encourage Pat McQuaid and all of the riders and team officials and

everybody else in those entourages, who have something to tell in those

years, to come forward. You said at the convention, there had been

testimony from a wide range of people. I understand so. That's all

I know. I want to be absolutely clear with you that the commission

is entirely independent. I don't know who is knocking on their door

or whose doors they are knocking on. I have had a broad assurance that

already people are, in collaboration and dialogue with the commission. I

don't know when they are speaking to the commission. What I really wanted

to avoid is any sense that UCI might have, might be interfering with the

outcome of the commission. That was certainly an allegation under the

previous regime. It has to be genuinely independent. And I am not

involved in any sense of the word. The other thing I wanted to avoid is

it becoming a circus. So teams of cameramen camped on doors outside

the steps of the commission, waiting for Lance Armstrong or whoever else

to turn up. We really don't want that. It's not a circus. It's not a

theatre. It's a genuine commission of enquiry, going about its work

with professionalism, honesty, and integrity, and it will produce an

excellent report, I am sure. Move onto lands Armstrong. Stripped of

his titles, then the famous confession with Oprah Winfrey.

Clearly the enquiry will want his participation. I suppose there is a

quid pro quo. He wants his own truth and reconciliation in order to

further or resume his professional career. What kind of deal is the

commission prepared to offer? There are two things here. First of all,

it seems to me that the reputation damage done by his own actions is

very substantial. If you really want it restored, he needs to come out

and be more truthful, tell all of the truth, like he has told some of

the truth to Oprah, but not all of it. I think there is more to come. I

would encourage him to come forward. But from the point of view of

cycling, he has said he wants to be the first on the queue, knocking on

the door. Well there you go, there is the opportunity now to come

forward. I hope he will be as good as his word. If the commission want

to speak to him, do they have to come to you and make some kind of

deal with him about compensation? Not at all. They have the power to

recommend things. The problem with lads is he has already been

sanctioned. The body that did the sanctioning has to agree to any

reduction in sanctions. I believe that the anti`doping agency in the

United States will be prepared to make some sort of compromise. What

you think it might be? I think they might allow a reduction in the

lifetime ban. How much is not a matter for me. But he won't get an

amnesty. Would you be happy to see such a tainted cyclist back in

cycling? No. But we have to work within the rules that are there. I

have some sympathy for Lance Armstrong's contention he was not

alone. He certainly was not. The fact is, he was the only one who was

victorious in seven tour to France. He made millions. We have a

situation that certainly, at the very least, it set a new standard,

as it were, or a new low, if I can put it that way, in cheating. You

say that you wouldn't like to see him come back to cycling. If he

did, what would it do for the reputation of the sport? I don't

think there is going to be anything like a zero sanctioned, or anything

which would allow him to come back, given his age, to anything like the

top level. If he wants to compete at another level, that is a matter for

those sports and those disciplines. As far as I am concerned, I don't

think it's good. But I guess in any system of justice you have two allow

for some redemption. There's nothing you can do about it? There's nothing

I could do about it, we are signed up to the international code, and it

is important we support them in what they are doing. If you want to apply

a double sanction, or something outside the rules, it will get

thrown out the courts. So it has to be legal as well is moral and

ethical. What you could do is telephone him and asked him to

participate. I could, but I don't think that's my role. If the

commission wants to do that, maybe they have already done that job. I

really don't think it's appropriate for me to be seen to be trying to

steer the direction of that. If I did, everybody would then say, or

some people would say, Brian Cookson is doing a deal with Lance

Armstrong. I have had no contact with him. Have you apologised? Very

briefly this morning at the start of the conference, I shook his hand and

sat down. Unfortunately, he left before my speech started so did not

get the chance to talk but I am sure we will have a good dialogue. He did

to your suggestion could be shifted to the Winter Games and demonstrated

that you did not like the British sense of humour he had admired for

so long. He said your suggestion was a joke! It was not a joke, it was

perhaps too radical for some people. It was a little bit inappropriate to

mention any particular individual sport. I was trying to establish the

principle, if Thomas Bach and his vision project really want us to

think outside the box then we should be repaired to take into

consideration all ideas. In speaking to a journalist, it was a slightly

naive idea. It was off the top of my head, I am sorry for any offence

caused. If you think about it, maybe that is not a bad idea. You are not

backing down, are you? You even said here today that you raised the

possibility of sports Treasury played in the winter and suddenly I

begin football reeling from summer to winter. I haven't mentioned

football. But you did J Sports traditionally played in the winter.

Why other Winter Olympics only contested on snail and ice? It in

the Olympic Charter. `` snow. The IOC can change the Olympic charter.

When I go around the world, speaking with people about the Olympics and

cycling events, they do not say, Ryan, it is too big. They say, we

were more cycling events in the Olympics. We won't have more riders

qualified. They cannot get enough riders qualified. We had the

situation at the London Olympics where Chris Foy was not even

selected because each nation was only allowed one competitor. And

yet, in other sport you see a whole podium of one nation. There are some

huge inconsistencies in Neolithic. And cycling could take place on ice

and snow. Thomas Bach has ruled it out. He said they are exclusively

for sport which take place on snow and ice. I respect his point of

view. I can train to contribute to an injured in debate. I do want to

upset anybody for the you do want to upset people within your own sport

either. I have to admit that so far, I have not had a lot of support that

track cycling should move to the Winter Olympics. It was an idea of

the top of my head. I think we should, if not prepared to have

interesting debates and discussions, what are we here for? It is an idea.

What what about the funding crisis in sport? How badly is cycling

underfunded? I get you see as a fallout of doping scandals. I do.

Traditionally, professional road cycling, amends in particular has

always been on a knife edge. Teams have been very weak with their

financial basis. Television rights have been very restricted and

difficult. Cycling is an odd sport. You can't sell tickets. It takes

place on the public highway in front of your house. That is a

disadvantage but it is also an advantage. The Tour de France, it's

as if Wimbledon was played on the village green. We learn to live with

these minor inconveniences. I am curious about this business about

how the public don't seem to be turned off public cycling. The

general public are perhaps more excepting of social drugs and

performance enhancing drugs will do is that fair? Yellow mat no.

Integrity in sport is absolutely essential. Without that, it becomes

a circus. Watching the Tour de France lies and seeing people booing

and whistling when they see an attack or an incredible performance

because they have been pulled into thinking something was exceptional

and has proved to be drug fuelled. Now they see something again and the

immediate `` immediate perception is, someone is cheating again. The

ghost and the other side of the road is great but to go and do an whistle

because you think somebody is cheating, that is all integrity and

transparency. We have really got to work hard at that. You have taken us

back to the Tour de France and I know during the doping scandals a

number of riders were simply saying, you cannot compete meaningfully in

the Tour de France without doping. Is the action a case for reducing

the length of the duration, the difficulty of major events like the

Tour de France? I think there probably is. I do not accept it is

impossible to compete and win the Tour de France without doping but I

do think it is a huge physical challenge. I think we need to look

very carefully at the length and degree of difficulty of those major

things. How would you do that? Yellow mat I think that is going to

be a bit of a bitter pill to swallow. Excuse the analogy! I think

that doping is not about the degree of difficulty of the sport. If that

was the case, why would they cope in a hundred metres sprint. Nobody is

saying that is an easy event. Can we just explore the kind of ideas that

you may be having about changes to these major events. Mini to allow

riders more recovery time. We should look at the health of the riders a

lot more. We should make sure the teams do not put too much demand on

them. That is the root of a lot of the problems was up the demand on

the riders is set by the administrators who decide on the

course. Maybe, instead of visiting both regions, would you say just one

mountain... The Tour de France is likely to always last two weeks. The

events around that programme are perhaps, we look at them more

flexibly to see what the opportunities are. There are some

hard discussions to be had. You have to look at that against economic

difficulties as well. There is a realisation that we have to have a

more balanced calendar. We can't put unreasonable demands on our

athletes. There is a dialogue to be had. I am in favour of that dialogue

and I don't want to push anybody into it or make any commitments to

you today. In general, we have to look at maybe rationalising and

reducing the demands on our competitors. Brian Cookson, thank

you very much indeed. Thank you. Easter Monday at was a glorious one

for much of Scotland and Northern Ireland but further south, we saw

conditions deteriorate. We saw cluster showers and under storms

developing to the west and they spread