Editorial: Swimming's secrecy won't wash

Daniel Bell. Photo / Brett Phibbs

Opinion

The old adage is that sunlight is the best disinfectant. You mess up; you fess up. And when it comes to organisations that are funded with public money, the approach becomes more than just good practice: full and frank disclosure is obligatory.

This seems to have escaped Swimming New Zealand as they have attempted to close down discussion about the Delhi drinking bout of swimmer Daniel Bell.

Bell, the silver medallist in the 100 metres backstroke at the Commonwealth Games, was sent home early for breaking the team's strict zero-tolerance alcohol policy.

His infraction was described by SNZ chief executive Mike Byrne as "a couple of beers" - a term whose vagueness was always bound to encourage suspicion - and in response to further questions Byrne said: "Our feeling is that the issue is over, done and dusted."

He was echoed by former head coach Jan Cameron, now a senior SNZ manager, who snidely wondered if the story "keeps going" because there was "nothing on to do with the All Blacks, Kiwis or whatever."

We are certainly happy to clear up her confusion about that matter: our interest in the affair remains keen because an organisation that receives $1.35 million a year of public money and lottery funding has closed ranks around a swimmer who has now three times been involved in alcohol-related incidents and who, by all accounts, appears to have a significant drinking problem.

The organisation has dealt internally and secretively with the latest breach and its representatives have sought to avoid public accountability with high-handed and dismissive comments.

Our sports writer Andrew Alderson exclusively revealed last week that witnesses said Bell was much drunker than anyone would be after "a couple of beers" and that many in the swimming community think he is being protected by swimming authorities.

Bell is the only swimmer nominated for the New Zealand Olympic Committee's scholarships to the London 2012 Games - worth around $20,000 - and some of his team-mates are bristling at SNZ's indulgent attitude. It is plain that our persistence is justified.

It is worth stating the obvious: that sports stars are role models for tomorrow's champions and that turning a blind eye when they break the rules sends a powerful and poisonous message.

But SNZ should also learn that when you're paid from the public purse, coming clean with the public is not just a good idea, it's a duty.