Openness

18/07/2006

Leaving aside the fact that both the FIA and Renault clearly knew the French Grand Prix was going to be so engrossing that they could put together statements regarding Sunday's engine discussions knowing that they would be issued, read, digested and posted on websites while the race was still in progress.

Not for the first time, the FIA was clearly keen to make its feelings public, ensuring that what it has to say, and the reasoning behind its actions, is out in the public domain as quickly as possible.

For the governing body of any sport to act in this way - allowing the media, and thereby the great unwashed access to its thoughts and to be given first hand explanation of its actions - is a wonderful thing, and is naturally very much appreciated.

However, one has to question why this process is so seemingly selective, after all, though we are all now privy to the FIA's thoughts regarding Sunday's meetings and the ongoing failure to reach agreement regarding the engine freeze, it would be interesting if the sport's governing body were to be as open as to how various other decision were reached, namely, how Prodrive got the nod as twelfth team.

Furthermore, should the FIA get its way regarding the engine freeze and fighting fund - which it no doubt will - can we expect the same openness when announcing the processes behind the selection of the 'mystery' engine supplier?

In the recent past, contracts have been awarded to AMD, Microsoft MES and Bridgestone, yet in each case the process by which each decision was made was never made public, it would be nice if the FIA was to always be as 'open' as it was at the weekend, and at other (selective) times in the recent past.