Sauber team principal Monisha Kaltenborn believes that handing rule-making authority for F1 back to its governing body would be the best thing for the sport.
With the F1 Strategy Group facing criticism from the smaller teams not involved in its decision-making process, and issuing proposals that, on the face of it, appear to be taking the sport in a more costly direction when cuts are required to preserve the future of those smaller teams, Kaltenborn suggested that handing control to the FIA might not be a bad idea.
“I think that's the sensible approach because the sport is about, on one side, the racing, so the show, the commercial aspect at the end of the day, so the commercial rights holder will have a vested interest in that, and, on the other hand, it's about the Federation, which sets the rules,” she said when the possibility of a Jean Todt/Bernie Ecclestone axis was put to her at the Canadian Grand Prix.
“I think we can take things from the system that we had before, where you have working groups which should consider the teams' views, something that's more like an expert commission or whatever, where ideas and strategies can be discussed and determined, and then decide them somewhere else. Otherwise you end up with, especially if you have 4-5 strong players in there, you want to get all their ideas and then you end up where we are now.”
Willing to find ways of safeguarding against an abuse of power in that scenario, Kaltenborn insists that F1 needs to change 'because otherwise we would never get to any change in the system so that rules are simplified', a key she sees to allowing the likes of Sauber to play an equal part in the future of the sport.
“If you make people do the rules who have their own very vested interests, you have to cater to all their interests to come to some agreement and that is where it becomes so complicated,” she acknowledged, “If you take it away from there and say it is like another sport, where rules are done [by another party], you can simplify them so much more and take other things into account that maybe not everyone looks at here.
“You don't necessarily have to have [a Concorde Agreement], as long as you can guarantee transparency. But that's not given, same with the Strategy Group. One can discuss the representation in that group because, obviously, the smaller teams don't agree. It's about the whole sport so you can't just have the big teams over there looking at strategies which suit them.
“But the whole step from taking a strategy to a forum where everyone discusses it, to decide it, has never taken place. It's either decided and take it or leave it or, at the moment, not even agreeing amongst themselves, which is even worse!”