As the recent Spanair tragedy again reminds us, and despite the incredible achievements in flight safety to date, our work in this area is never likely to be completed. Flying is certainly the safest way to travel on any number of methods of calculating this very small risk. And yet this very success seems to breed complacency in some quarters.

Flying is the safest means of transport because many knowledgeable and thoughtful experts with vast experience have refined the regulations and operating procedures to ensure it is as safe as it can be. The International Civil Aviation Organisation coordinates all the expertise and produces minimum regulatory standards to which all international aviation should be conducted. As a part of the ongoing effort to learn from every possible opportunity, ICAO annex 13 lays down minimum standards for any investigation following an accident or incident in civil aviation.

Following any tragedy, such as the loss of over 150 lives in Madrid recently, there is an understandable need of all those affected to understand why they have lost loved ones. The industry also has a very real desire to ensure that any mistakes are not repeated and all the lessons learned - aside from very real human suffering, accidents are not good for business. However, the analysis of a large amount of data, both objective (cockpit voice recording, flight data recording, video, etc.) and subjective (witness statements, expert testimony), can only be harmed by selective publication.

Immediately following an accident, Media companies are hungry for information - their role is to make a profit selling information and analysis - but a complete understanding of all the factors which lead to the accident must be the aim of the investigation. This can be irreparably damaged by the public speculation of commentators, politicians and other untrained lay opinions; particularly as it is inevitably based on less than all the available data. If the investigation is harmed by emotive and uninformed speculation, then potentially the victims' families may be denied a truthful explanation, the industry may be denied a full understanding and society could be denied the ability to prevent a future tragedy.

The first signs from Spain are not good, with crucial evidence being made available outside the investigating team of experts on a selective basis. Let us hope that as the investigation progresses, the regulator, politicians and all those involved recognise that unless there is a full investigation by the expert team - unhindered by outside interference and uninformed speculation - they potentially condemn others to suffer in accidents which might otherwise have been avoided.