Antitrust lawyers have questioned the “extraordinary” decision by ministers to force out the chair of Britain’s competition watchdog, suggesting that it could have a “chilling” effect on other UK regulators.
The government confirmed the departure of Marcus Bokkerink as chair of the Competition and Markets Authority on Tuesday evening, after the Financial Times reported that business secretary Jonathan Reynolds had intervened.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves, speaking to Bloomberg in Davos on Tuesday, implicitly criticised Bokkerink: “He recognised it was time for him to move on and make way for somebody who does share the mission and the strategic direction this government are taking.”
This month, ministers ordered 17 of Britain’s biggest regulators to set out how they intend to help boost UK economic growth. But a number of lawyers and lobbyists said Bokkerink’s resignation had come out of the blue.
“To be honest it was a bit of a surprise,” said one business lobbyist. “We’ve been in lots of discussions with the CMA . . . and they seemed to be really getting it and making changes.”
One antitrust lawyer at a London firm said the move would have a “chilling and intimidating effect” on independent regulators across the country.
“Although in the short term it seems reassuring for business, if competition policy is at the mercy of political fashion it becomes less stable and predictable, which undermines business confidence,” they said.
“It is an extraordinary move by the government to interfere so much in a competition authority,” they added.
Bokkerink’s departure raises questions over whether ministers are prioritising the demands of big business over competing priorities such as consumer rights and the environment.
The government has appointed as new interim CMA chair Doug Gurr, who ran Amazon’s UK business during the company’s tussle with the CMA over its minority investment in Deliveroo, which the regulator ultimately approved in 2020.
One person said the forced exit looked like a “desperate move from a struggling government” that was trying to win back popularity with business leaders after imposing extra regulations and taxes on corporations in last year’s Budget.
The move has also led to speculation about the fate of the CMA’s chief executive Sarah Cardell and whether she may also be replaced.
Andrew Griffith, shadow business secretary, told the House of Commons on Wednesday that the Conservative party wanted regulatory reform so businesses “carry less deadweight”.
“But dismissing the non-executive part-time chairman of the CMA seems a curious place to start,” he told the House of Commons. “He’s not responsible for day-to-day decision making at the CMA. That’s the job of the chief executive. Did they aim and miss?”
Cardell has been at pains in recent weeks to emphasise that the regulator is taking the government’s growth mandate seriously. In November, Cardell told the FT the agency was planning a review of its merger remedies, signalling more mergers could be approved based on undertakings such as price freezes rather than forcing the divestiture of assets.
One person familiar with the matter said Cardell has had “positive discussions” about her role with ministers since Bokkerink’s resignation”.
Max von Thun, Europe director at the Open Markets Institute, said the CMA had been at the forefront of global efforts to push back against rising market concentration, particularly in the “monopolistic” tech sector.
“The government’s decision to replace the authority’s chair with a former Amazon executive, at a time when a handful of US tech giants are tightening their grip over the future of artificial intelligence, is a major strategic blunder,” he said.
Lawyers and competition specialists noted that Clare Barclay, until recently Microsoft UK head and now in another senior role at the company, is chairing the government’s new Industrial Strategy Advisory Council.
In a two-page statement released on Tuesday night, Bokkerink said he had helped to refocus the CMA to ensure it delivered on empowering “consumers and effective competition — instead of being held back by a few powerful incumbents setting the rules for everyone else”.
Business groups welcomed the government’s intervention. Craig Beaumont, executive director at the Federation of Small Businesses, said he hoped the CMA “will now do more on growth”, while Stephen Phipson, head of manufacturing lobbying group Make UK, applauded ministers’ efforts to make regulation “fit for purpose”.
One banker said that the CMA had been seen as an obstacle and that the ousting of Bokkerink could be a way to send a message to the regulator’s staff.
His exit comes as the CMA has been handed new powers to regulate digital markets.
It announced last week that Google would be the first company the watchdog would investigate to decide if the tech giant warranted a special market status in light of its position in search services, which could see it bound by tougher conduct rules.
The government is due to issue a “strategic steer” to the CMA in the coming weeks, setting out its priorities for the regulator. However, beyond its desire for the watchdog to focus on growth, it was unclear what Labour actually wanted the CMA to do, lawyers said.
“The government is obviously unhappy with the CMA but doesn’t seem to have concrete views on what’s wrong,” said one senior antitrust lawyer.
Additional reporting by Ivan Levingston