
A coalition of technology firms and consumer advocacy groups has voiced apprehension over the U.K. government’s recent appointment of Doug Gurr, a former Amazon executive, as the interim chair of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). The group, which includes companies such as Yelp, DuckDuckGo, and Mozilla, emphasizes the necessity for the CMA to operate independently to effectively regulate major technology corporations and foster beneficial economic outcomes across the entire economy.
The CMA has been instrumental in scrutinizing Big Tech, investigating various violations, and, in collaboration with European Union counterparts, has taken actions such as blocking acquisitions and mandating divestitures to maintain market competition. However, the U.K. government is aiming to position the nation as a pro-growth, pro-technology hub by reducing regulatory hurdles, a strategy that includes restructuring its antitrust authority.
In January, reports indicated that the Department of Business and Trade had replaced CMA chair Marcus Bokkerink with Doug Gurr, who had a nearly decade-long tenure at Amazon overseeing operations in the U.K. and China before departing in 2020 to lead the Natural History Museum. The government asserted that Gurr’s experience in the technology sector would bring valuable insights to the role.
Related: Temu in the Spotlight as Part of Broader Amazon Pricing Probe
The coalition expressing concern argues that appointing an individual with close ties to a major technology company could compromise the CMA’s independence and its ability to impartially regulate the industry. They stress that the authority must remain free from political influence to effectively oversee Big Tech and promote positive economic outcomes.
Former CMA chair Marcus Bokkerink, following his unexpected dismissal, defended his tenure by highlighting his support for economic growth and the importance of maintaining the regulator’s independence from political intervention. He cautioned that undermining the CMA’s autonomy could negatively impact competition and consumer choice.
The government’s recent actions, including the replacement of the CMA chair, indicate a broader initiative to encourage regulators to prioritize economic growth and business investment. This shift has raised concerns about potential compromises in the rigorous enforcement of competition laws, particularly in relation to dominant technology firms.
Source: TechCrunch
Featured News
Australia’s Major Supermarkets Face Scrutiny Over Profit Margins Amid Rising Prices
Mar 21, 2025 by
CPI
Fired FTC Commissioners Warn of Potential White House Influence Over Mergers
Mar 20, 2025 by
CPI
Dr. Matthew Backus Joins Compass Lexecon as an Affiliate
Mar 20, 2025 by
CPI
UK to Boost Broadband Competition While Capping Openreach Charges, Says Ofcom
Mar 20, 2025 by
CPI
Singapore Competition Watchdog Yet to Receive Formal Notification on Grab-GoTo Merger
Mar 20, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Self-Preferencing
Feb 26, 2025 by
CPI
Platform Self-Preferencing: Focusing the Policy Debate
Feb 26, 2025 by
Michael Katz
Weaponized Opacity: Self-Preferencing in Digital Audience Measurement
Feb 26, 2025 by
Thomas Hoppner & Philipp Westerhoff
Self-Preferencing: An Economic Literature-Based Assessment Advocating a Case-By-Case Approach and Compliance Requirements
Feb 26, 2025 by
Patrice Bougette & Frederic Marty
Self-Preferencing in Adjacent Markets
Feb 26, 2025 by
Muxin Li