“The two main justifications for banning the use of performance-enhancing drugs in sport involve protecting the health of athletes and maintaining fair competition” ( Black, 1996 ; cited by Waddington, 2000). The main aim of the UK Declaration on Anti-Doping Policy follows from this. The aim is to ensure that the various governing bodies of sport in the UK adopt a consistent and regular set of policies and regulations in order to “protect the right of athletes to compete drug-free” (UK Anti-Doping Policy Statement ). This policy, published (January 2002) by UK Sport, was considered “a milestone in the fight for drug-free sport”. This was an attempt to establish standards in accordance with the International Standard for Doping Control (ISDC). The policy also aims to ensure that “government bodies respect legislation that protects the rights of athletes” (Annual Report 2001, p.4). Indeed, as Verroken (2002; cited by Burgess, 2002) states, “a strong relationship between sport and government is vital to achieving a drug-free environment for elite athletes”. -annual anti-doping program with UK Sport and collaboration with UK Sport to achieve program objectives. They will appoint a person responsible for the anti-doping policy and programme. They will also appoint a UK Sport or ISO 18873 (international standard for doping control) certified agent to carry out the testing. They will also provide UK Sport with the information needed to organize the tests. Again, they will need to advise athletes on testing procedures in preparation for their involvement in the testing program and convene, in a timely manner, independent review panels, investigative and appeal hearings to ensure fair procedures for evidence review and reporting of the results. decisions. Additionally, they will be responsible for analyzing the “B Sample” and providing a fair process for investigating allegations or admissions of drug abuse. The policy also provides that the Governing Bodies are responsible for applying sanctions against athletes who have committed doping offences. Such sanctions should comply with the regulations of the sport outlined by the Governing Body or the International Federation. Sanctions should also be respected... middle of paper... and educate them. Some criticism, however, has centered on the fact that some sports are not in favor of directly linking anti-doping compliance to public funding. Others have criticized the fact that British Sport's efforts to inform and educate governing bodies about policy have made “uneven progress” (PMP Review, Appendix – Strengths and weaknesses of the current system). Others have also helped shed light on the fact that several governing bodies have refused to understand, implement and support this policy. The fight against doping in sport is very difficult. Verbruggen (1997; cited by Waddington, 2000, p.180) stated that “fighting doping simply through control and punishment does not work. The scammers stay ahead." In a sense, it also underlined the need for constant review and re-evaluation of existing policies; policies that work now may not work in the future due to a number of factors. What is encouraging about British sport is that it follows this principle. Indeed, UK Sport aims to replace the current Anti-Doping Policy Statement with a new UK National Anti-Doping Policy which will come into force on 31 January. 2005.