Tellingly the report notes that the ALP saw a need for quick results are going off early in the initial 'blackest day' effort, when there simply wasn't any genuine evidence at the time of all the things they spoke of.
_________________________________________
ALP wanted Essendon punished
CHIP LE GRAND | The Australian | August 13, 2014 12:00AM
THE Gillard government wanted Essendon stripped of premiership points and club employees sacked amid growing concern they “over-egged’’ the release of an Australian Crime Commission report into drugs in sport on the so-called “blackest day in Australian sport.’’
Revealing the level of political involvement in the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority and AFL’s joint investigation of Essendon, former ASADA chief executive Aurora Andruska recounted to the Federal Court former sports minister Kate Lundy’s determination to strike a deal to punish Essendon.
A Federal Court trial into the legality of the joint investigation heard evidence that by June 13, 2013 the AFL had its “ducks all lined up,’’ to suspend senior coach James Hird for six months or much longer. Hird was suspended for 12 months on August 27 after ASADA provided the AFL with an interim report of the investigation.
Ms Andruska, the ASADA chief executive throughout the Essendon supplements saga, said she ignored political pressure on the investigation. However, she recalled a series of meetings where Senator Lundy or government advisers made clear their desire for a quick outcome.
Ms Andruska told the court that at one meeting, David Lording, a corporate and government communications consultant brought in to advise ASADA, said Senator Lundy needed a deal with the AFL and ASADA to relieve political angst created by her decision, along with then justice minister Jason Clare, to invite sports chiefs to attend a February 7 release of the ACC report.
Ms Andruska’s notes of the June meeting read: “Deal with AFL. Support staff sacked. Points off. Players off.’’
“It was his (Mr Lording’s) words, Lundy needs something. He is talking about the political situation to start with. The minister can’t do anything, it is all in ASADA’s court.
“She needs something, she needs probably a deal with the AFL but she can’t do anything without ASADA agreeing. That was his ... view as to what might have been going on in the minister’s mind.’’
Essendon and Hird are challenging the legality of the ASADA and AFL investigation into the club which resulted in anti-doping proceedings against 34 former and current players accused of taking a banned substance.
ASADA maintains its investigation was lawful.
Throughout a five-hour cross examination by counsel for Essendon Neil Young QC, Ms Andruska gave painstaking evidence about the joint investigation.
Ms Andruska was asked to explain why, given ASADA’s statutory obligation to operate independent of government, Gillard government officials were routinely present during meetings and telephone hook-ups throughout the investigation.
The former ASADA boss, who retired in May, detailed a May 24 meeting she attended with then AFL boss Andrew Demetriou, league integrity manager Brett Clothier, Senator Lundy and her media adviser Chris Owens. At the meeting, Mr Demetriou told ASADA the existing “timeline’’ for the delivery of an ASADA report was “completely unacceptable’’ and the AFL needed something by the end of July, well before the finals series. ASADA knew the AFL intended to use the report in disciplinary proceedings against the club.
Justice John Middleton asked Ms Andruska whether it was unusual for her to be at a meeting with the minister, her press adviser and the head of a sporting body. “Yes it was,’’ she said.
The court was told that Richard Eccles, a Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet deputy secretary responsible for sport, had a “persisting involvement’’ in the investigation from January, 2013, when he attended a briefing with the ACC about Operation Aperio, a year-long investigation into the use of peptides at sporting clubs and links to organised crime.
Mr Eccles was later party to a phone hook-up with Ms Andruska and Mr Clothier on February 1, when it was discussed how ASADA could use the AFL’s coercive powers to conduct an investigation into Essendon. Mr Eccles was also present at a June 4 meeting, along with Mr Owens, when AFL deputy chief executive Gillon McLachlan expressed concern about the impact the saga could have on finals ticket sales.
The court heard that Essendon was clearly identified as the target of the ACC probe at a meeting of AFL chiefs on January 31.
In evidence that contradicts repeated, public statements by Mr Andrew Demetriou, Ms Andruska confirmed an exchange at the meeting where Mr McLachlan asked ACC executive director Paul Jevtovic whether Essendon was the club under investigation.
Ms Andruska testified, Mr Jevtovic responded: “say no more.’’
“When these words were said you immediately recognised there had been a clear identification by the ACC that one of the clubs was Essendon, didn’t you?’’ Mr Young asked. “I agree,’’ Ms Andruska said. Justice Middleton described Mr Jevtovic’s remark as a “wink and a nod’’ to everyone in the room.
