BRITISH Cycling chairman Jonathan Browning declined the opportunity to apologise directly to Jess Varnish after the national governing body’s board ruled she had been discriminated against, it is understood.
Varnish’s complaint of “inappropriate and discriminatory language” against former British Cycling technical director Shane Sutton was upheld last October.
And the British Cycling board expressed “sincere regret” when the decision was announced.
However, a source close to Varnish has said that Browning was given the opportunity to apologise in person to the former Great Britain sprinter at a meeting in March, and opted not to.
Browning instead pointed to his earlier apology, which did not refer to specific individuals.
“Where there are failings we apologise,” Browning had said in a television interview in March.
British Cycling declined to comment, saying it had agreed with Varnish that the content of the meetings would remain confidential.
Varnish has not received an apology from anyone in British Cycling’s senior leadership group, according to the source close to the 26-year-old.
The expression of “regret” last October is the closest the national governing body has come, the source added.
Browning’s position as chairman has been questioned, with former Olympic and world champion Nicole Cooke agreeing with MP Damian Collins that change is needed at the top of the national governing body and world governing body UCI.
Cooke wrote on Twitter: “MP DamianCollins wants BC Chair Browning to go & UKSport to abandon their backing of UCI President Cookson. I agree.”
British Cycling on Thursday night insisted reform is under way and that Collins’ criticism is “ill-informed”.
Collins called for Browning and UCI president Brian Cookson, who until September 2013 was British Cycling president, to leave their respective roles following the damning independent review into the Great Britain cycling team.
The investigation, led by British Rowing chair Annamarie Phelps whose findings were published on Wednesday, was critical of British Cycling, former technical director Sutton and funding agency UK Sport.
Cookson is standing for re-election in September. Browning was also on the British Cycling board during the period investigated, as a non-executive director before being elevated to chairman in February.
Varnish was dropped in April 2016, a decision attributed to performance data showing the track sprinter was no longer world-class.
However, Varnish’s removal came shortly after she had criticised her coaches for inconsistent selections in the women’s team sprint event which left her just short of qualifying for the Rio Olympics.
The shock of her exit, and Sutton’s blunt comments about her no longer being worth funding, led her to tell a newspaper that the Australian had used sexist language towards her and was responsible for the team’s “culture of fear”.
It was those allegations, coupled with claims of a similar nature from three other former riders, that led to an independent investigation into the “climate and culture” of British Cycling and an internal inquiry into Varnish’s complaint against Sutton, who was suspended and promptly resigned.
The independent panel’s report into the saga was highly critical of British Cycling and Sutton — but not as critical as a leaked earlier draft from February.
Several allegations were removed from the draft, cutting its length by seven pages, and many of the sections about Sutton were more nuanced. This was a result of Sutton’s response in a process which gives those criticised the right to reply.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here