One of his other ideas was splitting the single long Sunday race into two shorter ones, like some other series do. I wouldn't like that at all; there's something really enjoyable about watching the ebb & flow of a race across a large number of laps.
I don't believe some of the teams religiously stick to the current spending limits but I do think they should be allowed to do proper track testing. It seems a silly restriction to say, yeah you can wind tunnel as much as you like, but you can't track the cars for testing purposes. And the current aero testing also has silly restrictions that actually increase the overall costs (like only being allowed to use scale models; I think something like 50% of actual size?). Aero parts don't always scale, so the wind tunnel testing isn't perfect, which means you have the cost of the tunnel testing plus
then having to spend more redeveloping the parts once you get the car on the track.
Fundamentally, F1 has a problem deciding what it wants to be. Is it meant to be the pinnacle of motorsport technology & design (in which case most of the restrictions on spending/testing are illogical) or is it meant to be a relatively high-tech formula but an even playing field across the teams (in which case the current differences in car design between the teams is unfair and they should have standard base cars)?
I like it being the pinnacle, and would prefer it if it was run much more simply, with a much looser formula specification and a simple hard (but fairly high) cap on the total budget allowed per team. The more rules and restrictions, the more inefficient it becomes, leading to silly spending (like the aforementioned explosion in the cost of aero testing when track testing got limited).
Back on the actual racing, I'm actually enjoying the championship this year. Monza was quite a fun race.