But he did go to USADA and Pat you call him a liar.
With regards to Landis, he says, “What I don’t accept is his motivation. If he wants to help the sport, which is what he initially said, he should have come privately to the UCI, WADA, USADA (US Anti-Doping Agency), and sat down with all of us and said, ‘Look, I’ve done this and this, here’s how it’s done, here’s how I can help you.’”
Why would he have preferred a private meet? “I’m not trying to hide anything. If people need to be sanctioned or if there are criminal proceedings that need to be brought against anybody, then let’s do it. But the authorities should be able to do that in a quiet way outside of the glare of the media. And when they come to their decision, then it can become a media thing.”
Clearly it is problematic if one federation is responsible for both policing and promoting the sport, even more so if it is commercial in nature and dependant on sponsors. Can an organisation honestly perform both roles?
“I’ve never tried to hide the fact that there’s a doping culture in cycling, I’ve said that time and time again,” McQuaid vehemently insists. “I’ve said that I’m determined to get rid of that culture and that’s what I’m working on,” he adds, referring to his other major objective as UCI president.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...ident-of-the-International-Cycling-Union.html