Thinking | 15 June 2015
Changes to the Australian Sports Commission Sports Governance Principles
The Australian Sports Commission has recently announced amendments to its Sport Governance Principles.
The ASC has also announced an increase in the number of Australian sporting organisations it requires to comply with the mandatory elements of the Sport Governance Principles.
In 2012 the Australian Sports Commission (ASC) published Sport Governance Principles detailing ASC’s guidelines about various aspects of the governance of sporting organisations.
In 2013, certain elements of the guidelines that the ASC believes are critical to good governance were made mandatory for the seven Australian sports organisation that receive the highest level of ASC funding (Mandatory Sports Governance Principles).
In early June 2015 the ASC:
- updated the Mandatory Sports Governance Principles; and
- announced it will now require the 15 sports organisations that receive the highest level of ASC funding to comply with the updated Mandatory Sports Governance Principles. The ASC has also commented that from time to time it will require additional sports organisations to meet the Mandatory Sports Governance Principles.
The updated Mandatory Sports Governance Principles can be accessed here.
The table below provides a summary of the material changes that have been made to the Mandatory Sports Governance Principles, including the addition of a new principle relating to independent directors (rule 2.7).
|Principle description||Principle||Additional requirements and changes|
|Independent directors||2.7||The new principle requires all directors to be independent, regardless of whether they are elected or appointed.
Independence requires that the directors:
The updated principles also make it clear that it would be a material conflict of interest if a person held both a state-level director or administration position and a national-level position at the same time.
ASC will consider on a case by case basis situations where an international federation has particular requirements relating to board representation of Australians who hold a position with the international federation
|CEO not to be appointed to board after leaving role||2.9||This principle now provides that a CEO not be appointed to the board for a minimum period of three years following the CEO’s departure as the CEO. The previous principle simply provided three years as an example time period.|
|Conflict of interest register which is enforced||2.10||This principle now provides that a director must not hold any official position that provides a material conflict of interest. This is contrasted with the previous position, which provided that a director should not hold any official position at state, regional or club level, or other administrative position that provides a material conflict of interest.|
|Disclosure of administration expenses||3.4||Along with the current disclosure of administration expenses, reporting bands for remuneration and associated expenses should be made for all key management personnel rather than the top five staff members in the sport as previously required.
Key management personnel are defined as those persons who have authority and responsibility for planning, directing and controlling the activities of the entity, directly or indirectly, including any director (whether executive or otherwise) of that entity.
|Integrity measures on anti-doping, sports science and match fixing||3.6||This principle now places additional obligations on sports in relation to anti-doping and, for the first time, also places obligation on the sports in respect of match fixing.
The principle now additionally requires the Board to:
You might be also interested in...
Thinking | 11 Feb 2020
This publication outlines some of the more important regulatory requirements for a foreign person investing in Australia.
Thinking | 19 Dec 2019
Financial Services in Focus is a fortnightly round-up of legal and regulatory developments in the financial services sector in Australia. Read more here.