Poorly kept medical records could result in loss of funding, says UKAD chief executive

British Cycling could be at risk of losing its public funding if there is any repeat of the Jiffy bag controversy which has rocked the organisation over the past year.

UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) closed its investigation into the contents of the package delivered from British Cycling to Team Sky at the 2011 Critérium du Dauphiné, which Dave Brailsford had said contained the decongestant Fluimucil when giving evidence to a committee of MPs in December 2016.

However, when announcing the end of its investigation, UKAD  said that it was “unable to confirm or refute” whether the package did indeed contain Fluimucil due to a “lack of accurate medical records” kept by British Cycling and doctor Richard Freeman, who received the package in France.

>>> Team Sky, British Cycling, and Bradley Wiggins not exonerated by end of ‘Jiffy bag’ investigations, says MP

Speaking on Thursday, UKAD chief executive Nicole Sapstead again highlighted her concerns with the lack of medical records kept by British Cycling, saying that any repeat by British Cycling or other governing bodies for other sports could put their public funding under threat.

“If we come across situations where records we think should exist don’t exist, or don’t exist in a proper format, we will escalate the matter to the funding body when there is one,” Sapstead said, as reported by The Telegraph.

In British Cycling’s case those funding bodies will be Sport England and UK Sport, which will give British Cycling nearly £26 million in funding ahead of the Tokyo Olympics.

>>> British Cycling and Team Sky issue statement in reaction to UKAD ‘Jiffy bag’ investigation

In March UK Sport chief executive Liz Nicholl said that that funding could be under threat unless British Cycling can keep proper medical records, and fulfil other “conditions of the grant”.

Following the end of the UKAD investigation, British Cycling said that it had “implemented a number of significant changes to the management of our medical services” and was “intent on ensuring that the integrity of our record keeping is never called into question again.”