The inclusion of Singapore in the Formula One world motor racing championship from next year has many Singaporeans, including myself, cheering. I'm not a F1 fan, but it's always good for any world-class event to be held locally. The hospitality trade has been the most enthusiastic as the tourism-generating potential can be sizeable. But this is primarily a country-branding exercise, a marketing image job. Hence, the Government's involvement in the negotiations with the F1 franchise holders.

 

Although Singapore is not an unknown quantity in the world's tourism consciousness, exposure of this magnitude and over an event (the maritime equivalent is the America's Cup yatch race) known for its glitz and free spending will lend a bit of sophistication to our international image and standings. Strictly as a spectator sport, F1 has actually been losing a bit of its shine because one driver, Michael Schumacher, had been dominating the championship. He has retired, and this should restore some parity and bring back some bite to the competition but it also deprive the sport of a magnetic figure. It is reported that F1 franchise holders are eager to line up new entrants for the race calendar, such as Russia and South Africa, as older fixtures are deleted for various contractual reasons. This could suggest there is a fair  bit of political apple-polishing in the sport as new F1 events in recent years have all been from new-rich or prominent emerging countries (Bahrain, China, Malaysia, Turkey). On this basis, it is possible Singapore would have landed a slot eventually.

 

It nevertheless is a coup that the people can be glad about. Singaporeans are supportive of well-defined efforts to make the city a more spontaneous, less formulaic place. Although touted as a private-sector led venture, the Singapore Government had backed the effort right from the start as few events have such cachet and also bring about downstream benefits, and so much more intangible long term benefits. But there are bound to be questions raised by some people uncomfortable about excessive use of taxpayers' money in supporting what essentially is a private business venture. The Government's undertaking to meet 60% of staging costs - about $90 million of the estimated  hosting bill of $150 million - can be justified only as tourism promotion. It is big bucks, but cities everywhere are spending as much, and more, to get a bligger slice of the travel market.