Of course, what we really need, is a fully transparent process at the BSI where they publish their proceedings and are fully accountable for the decisions that they make.   We need a fair BSI whatever the standard is that they are reviewing and considering approval for.  Otherwise, the BSI will, unfortunately, continue to be seen (even if it is unfair) as a ‘for hire’ rubber stamp approvals agency.

What’s interesting is the reaction to it. John Pugh MP has already raised questions, the UKUUG is seeking legal advice of the matter and numerous people are asking “just what is going on”.

One thing seems clear though; in one stroke the BSI devalued itself, devalued the standards process and made themselves a bit less relevant in an open standards world. It also raises questions about how they make decisions. With corporate interests controlling how and what the BSI approves, can we trust any new or existing standards coming out of the BSI? They have questions to answer and the silence is deafening.