Next FIA president? Next FOM CEO?

[mcdenife]

If you ask me, the named envelope thing really is a non issue. The Vatanen camp is milking this to death. All parties have agreed that this will be a secret ballot. Not even Vatanen himself makes a claim that the secrecy is violated.

Someone has to explain to me why it is relevant if the voting paper comes in an envelope with a name on it. The real question is wether the paper with the finished vote is marked with a name or has to be put in an envelope with a name on it. That would be a breach of secrecy. But that has never been reported. The whole thing is just a red herring IMO.

I would have thought it very very obvious that 'finished' votes are not marked for the very same reason that pre-vote envelopes should not be marked. That a vote is not marked with a name does not mean one cannot tell who was given what. If this is understood then the reason behind the suggestion to hand them out randomly is also understood. In interest of fairness and transparency, very reasonable.

[xpensive]

Reasonable indeed mcd.

Moreover, what is worrying is the amount of not very subtle intimidation from MrM, where first there was the letter of last week hinting at repercussions for those not voting for Todt, then the story of marked envelopes?

[ISLAMATRON]

No one has answered why secrecy is so important, why would the delegates be so afraid for anyone to know who they voted for? They represent a constituency who has every right to know who they voted for.

[Green Genes]

No one has answered why secrecy is so important, why would the delegates be so afraid for anyone to know who they voted for? They represent a constituency who has every right to know who they voted for.

I think the fear is that Todt/Mosely and Co. will extract some sort of revenge on clubs that do not vote as they are told.

[Richard]

No one has answered why secrecy is so important, why would the delegates be so afraid for anyone to know who they voted for? They represent a constituency who has every right to know who they voted for.

Depends on whether it is a representative democracy or a participatory one.

Participatory is based on everyone being involved as a crowd, so secrecy works.

Representative is based on a few people voting on behalf of their constituents. Those constituents have a right to know how their representative voted to ensure he/she represents their views. I think the FIA electin is in this category. I'd expect a national club to tell its members who they are supporting.

I can understand the implied threat of coercion making people ask for secrecy. However, Max thrives on secrecy (ie the secret Ferrari deal) so a secret vote may actually help him. In a secret vote, a national club can say they voted against a candidate, but secretly for him due to fear or favours.

Have a read of these two scenarios:

Why secret votes are needed - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotten_and_pocket_boroughs
Why secret votes can go wrong - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Winte ... id_scandal

[ISLAMATRON]

No one has answered why secrecy is so important, why would the delegates be so afraid for anyone to know who they voted for? They represent a constituency who has every right to know who they voted for.

I think the fear is that Todt/Mosely and Co. will extract some sort of revenge on clubs that do not vote as they are told.

They can only do that if they win so it is a moot point... When a new regime comes into power anywhere there are allways sweeping changes... the spoils go to the victors. I definatly want to know how the AAA delegate votes, and I'd also like to know why.... hmm maybe I should make a couple phone calls.

Every member of every automobile club has every right to know for whom their delegate voted and why, and for that reason alone there should NOT be a secret vote.

And the BS continues...
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/79447

"My answer is very simple: if I speak about change, democracy and transparency, it seems to be wrong and it is taken as a personal insult against all the people who have been involved with the FIA before these elections. It can be seen as an old school election tactics, but still amazing."

"democracy and transparency", but yet he calls for a secret vote... complete and utter BS.

[autogyro]

No one has answered why secrecy is so important, why would the delegates be so afraid for anyone to know who they voted for? They represent a constituency who has every right to know who they voted for.

I think the fear is that Todt/Mosely and Co. will extract some sort of revenge on clubs that do not vote as they are told.

They can only do that if they win so it is a moot point... When a new regime comes into power anywhere there are allways sweeping changes... the spoils go to the victors. I definatly want to know how the AAA delegate votes, and I'd also like to know why.... hmm maybe I should make a couple phone calls.

Every member of every automobile club has every right to know for whom their delegate voted and why, and for that reason alone there should NOT be a secret vote.

And the BS continues...
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/79447

"My answer is very simple: if I speak about change, democracy and transparency, it seems to be wrong and it is taken as a personal insult against all the people who have been involved with the FIA before these elections. It can be seen as an old school election tactics, but still amazing."

"democracy and transparency", but yet he calls for a secret vote... complete and utter BS.

Vatanen was put up by the big car manufacturers and the oil companies, he does not even believe in global warming!
He has run absolutely nothing and is just a failed Euro trough feeder.
Compared to Todt, he is a pygmy.
I have seen absolutely no policy statements from Vatanen, only silly platitudes and unfounded insults.
As you say asking for a secret vote is total hypocrisy from someone without a clue as to what the FIA is and what it does.
If Fota is allowed to rule the roost through Vatanen, it will destroy F1. It has already put at risk the participation of the new teams because of it's block on sensible cost cutting. Do not forget that a large number of the original Fota bully boys have gone mainly because of huge costs. What hypocrisy.

[WhiteBlue]

I would have thought it very very obvious that 'finished' votes are not marked for the very same reason that pre-vote envelopes should not be marked.

It is not obvious at all. It is nonsense. If you distribute 220 identical printed or copied ballot papers it makes no difference if they come in addressed envelopes or in used diapers. If you are insinuating that the ballot sheets or papers are tweaked to later reveal the identity of the voter I would call that bordering on paranoid. They have a French Hussier to sort these kind of things out and make sure the election is run in a secret and transparent way.

That a vote is not marked with a name does not mean one cannot tell who was given what. If this is understood then the reason behind the suggestion to hand them out randomly is also understood. In interest of fairness and transparency, very reasonable.

Sure and you can do all kind of things to make sure the moon doesn't fall on your head. But how big a danger is that in reality. Get a grip on reality and accept that there will be an outcome from that process which will be democratic. Whoever wins will have managed to get the delegates on his side by virtue of his stronger points, with or without public knowledge how they will be voting. As allways the loosers will be less well off and the winners will share the power positions.

We should be respecting what comes out of it and stop speculating about foul play. If there is dirt no doubt very soon one of the dirt lovers will pull it in the open. That is only natural in the democracy.

[WhiteBlue]

Reasonable indeed mcd.

Moreover, what is worrying is the amount of not very subtle intimidation from MrM, where first there was the letter of last week hinting at repercussions for those not voting for Todt, then the story of marked envelopes?

These accusations are silly. Read the letter and there is not a single intimidating word. It is all conjecture by interested parties. The letter is basically a complaint that Vatanen is driving a polarising campaign saying the past work of the FIA was all bad and that the current team must be thrown out of office to make it good and get things done the way Vatanen wants it.

Vatanen drives the typical political attack and the office holding party defends against it. All very usual. Nothing you would not expect.

The other myth you and your like minded friends at Pitpass are blowing around is the idea that the FIA president should be neutral in this. Why should he? He is partisan to the election and has thrown his hat into the ring for Todt. I don't like his choice but I respect it. He can recommend whoever he wants. No political president would do otherwise.

[tarzoon]

That is only natural in the democracy.

In my experience of democratic elections, insult is breakfast, coercing is lunch and calumny is dinner.


So whoever promises more pitbabes and bigger parties should be chosen. Usually they don't lie about these things.

[ISLAMATRON]

tarzoon for FIA Prez!!!!!

[Giblet]

Reasonable indeed mcd.

Moreover, what is worrying is the amount of not very subtle intimidation from MrM, where first there was the letter of last week hinting at repercussions for those not voting for Todt, then the story of marked envelopes?

These accusations are silly. Read the letter and there is not a single intimidating word. It is all conjecture by interested parties. The letter is basically a complaint that Vatanen is driving a polarising campaign saying the past work of the FIA was all bad and that the current team must be thrown out of office to make it good and get things done the way Vatanen wants it.

Vatanen drives the typical political attack and the office holding party defends against it. All very usual. Nothing you would not expect.

The other myth you and your like minded friends at Pitpass are blowing around is the idea that the FIA president should be neutral in this. Why should he? He is partisan to the election and has thrown his hat into the ring for Todt. I don't like his choice but I respect it. He can recommend whoever he wants. No political president would do otherwise.

I feel you may be looking at this through slightly skewed glasses, as you can't apply partisan politicks. You need a party to be partisan.

In a political drive to a premier position of a country, you have a party to stand on. Mosley can't really stand on his party, the FIA, as it his job to pas it along, intact and unbiased to the person who is democratically elected to this one (no) party system.

it's more akin to a board of directors deciding on a new CEO, which is more about cut throat backend personal politicks, which is what we are witnessing now.;

[WhiteBlue]

I feel you may be looking at this through slightly skewed glasses, as you can't apply partisan politicks. You need a party to be partisan.

In a political drive to a premier position of a country, you have a party to stand on. Mosley can't really stand on his party, the FIA, as it his job to pas it along, intact and unbiased to the person who is democratically elected to this one (no) party system.

it's more akin to a board of directors deciding on a new CEO, which is more about cut throat backend personal politicks, which is what we are witnessing now.;

You are in error when you assume that there is no party system at the FIA, it is clearly there. Each candidate has to have a full cabinet team already nominated for the top positions. How would you call such an organization? It is the complete party model copied from national democratic systems. It is not named Democrats vs Republicans but establishment vs new guys but to all intends and purposes it is nothing else but a party system.

And I maintain my view that nothing in the rules of the FIA requirers the Prez to be neutral. He can certainly support a candidate if he wants. All of Vatanen's efforts to convince us otherwise are pure bull ---. Why do you think he has waited for the last seven days with the legal fiction of an obligation of neutrality? Easy to spot, because the legal system will not determine the claim before the election. Mosley has openly supported Todt for three months. If he was obliged to neutrality under french law Vatanen could have made his complaint many months ago. He did not and for good reasons, because it is bullshit.

I give you another point which shows how Vatanen is politicking just like the old guard. He initially made big waves about the internal democracy of the FIA and how the small clubs have a massive over representation compared to the huge clubs in America or Germany. He said that all of this has to change. AAA and ADAC liked that talk and got some guys on his team (party). But then Vatanen discovered that his claim of making those changes pissed of the Saudis who also are very influential with their deep pockets. You do not have huge numbers of members in the SAF and SATA. So Vatanen changed his song and assured the Saudis that no representative system will be installed. How is this for honesty?

[Giblet]

Yeah, like a party, without the benefits of support that an actual party gives. It's all one fia wit supporters for different people, more like a large corporation. You have a very deep understanding of the fia, but vatenen has no party , just supporters. This is the difference I am pointing out.

There is no polling. Its just not the same, even if deep comparisons may be drawn.

OMG we said the word politicks, and there is an ad for Para Sailin's new book at the bottom the page.

Google u r so smrt.

[WhiteBlue]

Yeah, like a party, without the benefits of support that an actual party gives. It's all one fia wit supporters for different people, more like a large corporation. You have a very deep understanding of the fia, but vatenen has no party , just supporters. This is the difference I am pointing out.

There is no polling. Its just not the same, even if deep comparisons may be drawn

Agreed. There are differences between national elections and FIA presidential elections but it is clear from the statues that the encumbent is having a strong advantage. This advantage will also apply to a designated successor. If Vatanen wants to change this he first needs to win against the establishment. We will see then if he really is prepared to give up such an advantage when it benefits himself. There is no point to complain about this. It is the constitution that the FIA has agreed internally.

For me this is old against new and if the clubs want the new order - which is a bit diffuse IMHO - then nobody can stop them to elect Vatanen.

In the meantime Vatanen hones his skills at writing letters. Very important for an FIA prez.

http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pr ... to_fia.pdf
http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pr ... _to_av.pdf



BTW, I loved this reminder of the lunch where Vatanen asked to be supported. Is that double standards? Later it says that Vatanen used campaign funds from unknown sources but he likely ment Prince Faisal or Saudi oil money. LOL

How attractive would a president be who got into office by having the oil money finance and pay his campaign?