IN APRIL last year Marcus Bokkerink, then-chair of the Competition and Markets Authority, made a speech to mark its 10th anniversary.

He said: “I believe we should use milestone moments like this to look forward. So, with that in mind, on the CMA’s 10-year anniversary, the question I want to ask today is this: why is an independent, impartial CMA needed more than ever today and in the future?”

Clearly Chancellor Rachel Reeves disagrees with him. Apparently, the last thing we want is an impartial CMA. We need a CMA that promotes growth. 

Bokkerink was very far from being some red/green consumer champion. In a previous life he was managing director and senior partner at Boston Consulting Group.

In its blurb as a top consulting firm it says: “BCG helps clients with total transformation — driving complex change, enabling organisations to grow, and driving bottom-line impact.”

However, as a gamekeeper he was beginning to make an impact. In his speech he outlined three key priorities: first, to ensure people can be confident they are getting great choices and fair deals; second, for competitive, fair-dealing businesses to be free to innovate and thrive; and, third, to help the whole British economy grow productively and sustainably.

So what’s not to like in this agenda for Reeves? 

My suspicion is that it is the second objective. In the speech he says that a key threat to competitive markets are “the critical strategic advantages of data and computing power — particularly where these make it possible for a position of power in one market, or economic activity, to be leveraged into multiple others.”

Wonder who he could be talking about?

Well, he goes on to say: “For example, securing binding commitments from Amazon and Meta to ensure fair competition on online retail platforms, giving independent sellers a fair chance to compete on their platforms. Looking into mobile ecosystems and digital advertising to identify potential solutions to protect choice and offer a fair deal for consumers and business customers alike.”

It’s interesting who Bokkerink has been replaced by.

This is Doug Gurr — the former national leader of Amazon’s business in first China and, latterly, Britain. He left his post as the tech giant’s British chief in 2020 to take on a role as director of the Natural History Museum.

Gurr 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. 

So Reeves has sacked the gamekeeper and hired a poacher. I know you can’t make this stuff up. It seems the government does not want a competition environment for consumers but one for well-connected businesses. In the ministerial code it says ministers must scrupulously avoid any danger of an actual or perceived conflict of interest between their ministerial position and their private interests. 

This follows Sarah Cardell, chief executive officer of CMA, planning to slash its head count by around 10 per cent after overshooting its budget last year.

There is a pattern here as John Naughton pointed out in the Observer: “Within days of taking office, the PM had invited Matt Clifford, a smart tech bro from central casting, to think about ‘how we seize the opportunities of AI.’ Clifford came up with a 50-point AI Opportunities Action Plan that Starmer accepted in its entirety, saying that he would ‘put the full weight of the British state’ behind it. He also appointed Clifford as his AI Opportunities Adviser to oversee implementation of the plan and report directly to him.”

It seems to have passed Sir Keir by, but this technology is dominated by a few giant corporations, none of which is based in Britain. Their power resides not just in their resources of capital and talent but also in the vast physical infrastructures of datacentres that they own and control.

Labour seems to have decided the best approach to them is one of subservience. As Naughton points out “appeasement is the art of being nice to a crocodile in the hope that he will eat you last.”

The British government really needs to raise its game when it comes to the tech giants who behave like the robber barons of old.

We simply cannot afford to allow these businesses to take over huge chunks of our economy without paying their fair share of taxes and avoiding any meaningful regulation. Effective competition law and its enforcement are imperative. 

Meanwhile with what may be a Bokkerink legacy review, the CMA is to investigate Apple and Google’s mobile ecosystems. Investigations will determine if Apple and Google have strategic market status in their mobile ecosystems, including operating systems, app stores and mobile browsers.

Labour seems to be completely in the thrall of big tech. Who — if this week is anything to go by — are completely in the thrall of Donald Trump. This will not end well.