For those who don't know him, Peter De Clercq was a pro rider from 1988 to 1996. He won the Mountain classification at the Tour of Switzerland as a neo-pro, won a stage in the Tour of France in 1992 and was 13th in the 1991 Paris-Roubaix.
He was not a multitalent but could have achieved much more if ... He stopped his career in 1996 at age 30, just like Edwig Van Hooydonck or Frans Maassen. Back in 2007, when after the admition by the former Telekom riders, Van Hooydonck famously made allegations against EPO
dopers of his era and Museeuw in particular, De Clercq seconded him saying "We were the victims" (as I said in my biography about Edwig Van Hooydonck)
Now in the Nieuwsblad he said:
The interviewer said that it's weird that between 1989 & 1996, only one rider tested positive on the Tour of France: Jesus Montoya for amphetamines.
It does not surprise me. We could than feel that something was going on in the big teams with a lot of money but that the testing did not help. They were loonking at it powerlessly. EPO was undetectable but is it something new?
"If there's one constant in all those years of doping controles, it's they are always behind the facts. It was the case before the nineties. That was certainly the case in the nineties and within 20 years it will appear that it's still the case today.
Interviewer: But in the meantime those who did not take EPO were sent back home. You were part of the Lotto team who in La Plagne in 1995 in which 5 riders retired or were out of time limits in that stage. [they ended that Tour of France with 2 riders: Andrei Tchmil & Peter Farazijn]
That was the total failure of the testing. There was something lacking. But nobody believed us. We could not prove anything. In retrospect we've been proven right of course.
Last sentence "daar ben ik het vet mee zijn" I cannot really translate. He must mean something like this does not really help...