§ Lord Moynihanasked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport's press release of 26 August 2003, what are the "appropriate safeguards which have been put in place to ensure there is no conflict of interest" between the role of the interim Chair of UK Sport, and her advisory role to government on school sport initiatives and policies. [HL4520]
§ Lord McIntosh of HaringeyThe Government do not believe that there is a conflict of interest.
Nevertheless, as required by the Cabinet Office code of practice for board members, all non-departmental public bodies, including UK Sport, should have in place proper procedures for dealing with conflicts of interest with chair and board member personal, business or other interests as well as the interests of close family members, which may arise out of carrying out board responsibilities.
These rules include a requirement for declaring, and if necessary resolving, any potential personal or business conflicts of interests in relation to the work of the public body concerned.
A register of members' interests appropriate to the body's activities should be kept up to date. The register should, as a minimum, list direct or indirect pecuniary interests that members of the public might reasonably think could influence board members' judgment. Board members are strongly encouraged to register non-pecuniary interests that relate closely to the body's activities, and interests of close family members and persons living in the same household as the board member.
Board members should declare at board meetings any interest that relates specifically to a particular issue under consideration, for recording in the minutes. Board members should not participate in the discussion or determination of matters in which they have an interest, and should normally withdraw from the meeting if their interest is direct and pecuniary, or if their interest is covered in specific guidance issued by the body or the sponsoring department which requires them not to participate or to withdraw from the meeting.
These controls are effectively operated at UK Sport. All board members, including Sue Campbell as chair, are required to complete and maintain a declaration of interest's statement. UK Sport also maintains a related party transactions register that is published with the annual accounts.
60WA
§ Lord Moynihanasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether it is their intention to continue to allocate 9.2 per cent of sports lottery funds to UK Sport for world class funding; and whether, in the event of future reductions in lottery funding, they will continue the policy of' making up shortfalls through requests to the Home Country Sports Councils. [HL4552]
§ Lord McIntosh of HaringeyWe have no plans to alter the current allocation of 9.2 per cent of the sports lottery fund to UK Sport for the remaining period of the existing National Lottery licence. UK Sport has produced its business plan for 2005–09 on the basis of the known estimates of lottery income and no shortfall is anticipated. There is therefore currently no intention to ask the Home Country Sports Councils to meet any shortfall.
§ Lord Moynihanasked her Majesty's Government:
How much of UK Sport's modernisation budget was transferred over the last five years to support the World Class Programme. [HL4553]
§ Lord McIntosh of HaringeyThe total transferred over the past five years is £4.5 million.
§ Lord Moynihanasked Her Majesty's Government:
How many tests for erythropoietin (EPO) were carried out by UK Sport's Drug Free Directorate in each of the last three years; and how many are planned for each of the next three years. [HL4646]
§ Lord McIntosh of HaringeyIn the last three years the number of bodily samples analysed for EPO, as part of the UK's anti-doping testing programme, is 111 to date. Of these 111 tests, 46 were analysed for EPO in 2002, 29 in 2003, and so far in 2004 36 tests have been analysed.
In line with other leading national anti-doping organisations, UK Sport has undertaken limited EPO testing in the past, primarily because of the high cost involved. UK Sport is looking at ways in which the level of EPO testing can be made more cost effective and thereby significantly increase the number of EPO tests undertaken in the future, focusing on those sports particularly at risk.
§ Lord Moynihanasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will meet any third party claims for compensation arising out of a faulty drug lest carried out by UK Sport; or whether the national governing body will remain responsible. [HL4647]
61WA
§ Lord McIntosh of HaringeyWhere UK Sport is legally obliged to pay compensation, responsibility for paying that compensation lies with UK Sport and not with the relevant national governing body.
§ Lord Moynihanasked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by the Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 22 July (WA 82), whether the United Kingdom is now fully compliant with the World Anti-Doping Code; if not, in what areas it is not compliant; and what changes have been made to comply with the code. [HL4648]
§ Lord McIntosh of HaringeyThe World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) originally set the start of the Athens Olympic Games (13 August) for the national anti-doping organisations and sport to bring out full compliance with the World Anti-Doping Code. WADA has since recognised that several complex issues need addressing in order for the code to be properly implemented, and as a result WADA has extended the timetable for full compliance.
The UK's national anti-doping organisation, UK Sport, is currently concluding the consultation exercise for the new National Anti-Doping Policy that began earlier in July. UK Sport intends to publish the policy in January 2005 alongside a set of model rules that will help sport's governing bodies incorporate the code into their rules and regulations.
WADA is content with the progress that UK Sport is making.