by David Buttle
Last week, Marcus Bokkerink, the Chair of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), was ousted by ministers. It was made known to the press that this occurred because the CMA had failed to convince the government that it was adequately serious about growth. His replacement, Doug Gurr, was former head of Amazon in the UK.
While the CMA Chair is a non-executive position - and it is not clear that this will have any immediate or direct impact on the organisation’s programme of work - this decision sends worrying signals about the Labour government’s competition policy and its understanding of the role of market regulation in driving economic growth.

Let’s start with some basics which the government would do well to consider. The purpose of competition regulation is to ensure markets function efficiently. A competitive marketplace incentivises innovation, fosters the emergence of new businesses, and ultimately stimulates economic expansion. By ensuring no business can dominate unfairly, competition policy creates opportunities for smaller firms and disruptors - engines of creativity and growth.
Weakening the CMA risks undermining this cause. The CMA, whilst not perfect, has played an important and proactive role in addressing issues in digital markets that are hugely consequential for publishers. In some areas it has truly led the world; its mobile ecosystems market study and Google Privacy Sandbox investigation and interventions, for example.
Labour’s decision appears to prioritise short-term political optics over long-term economic health and entails a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of the CMA in ensuring the UK economy is vibrant and thriving. Instead of safeguarding an institution designed to maintain fair market conditions, the government seems inclined to weaken it, misguided by the view that removing ‘regulation’ will stimulate growth. It is likely to have the opposite long-term effect, risking further entrenching the dominance of monopolists and stifling new venture creation. It could also directly harm businesses operating in digital markets that require intervention, such as publishers that rely on platforms to reach consumers and monetise their content.
More troublingly, the government appears heavily influenced by the U.S. tech lobby. The proposals for a relaxation of copyright point to an approach that prioritises Big Tech at the expense of UK businesses under the promise of jobs and investment. This is dangerously short-sighted, trading away domestic innovation and long-term economic resilience for fleeting gains and questionable commitments.
The Labour government must reassess its priorities. Instead of looking for quick wins by cosying-up to Big Tech, it should focus on fostering homegrown innovation. This requires a robust competition policy that levels the playing field so small and medium-sized enterprises can compete on equal terms.
Labour’s entire programme hinges on growth. Weakening the CMA undermines the very mechanisms that foster economic prosperity. If Labour is serious about delivering on its promises, it must strengthen, not sideline, the institutions that create the environment for enduring growth.
Comentários