Digital Markets Bill - Second Reading (Entire Bill)

Asks about the final offer mechanism for dispute resolution, specifically if it can benefit industries beyond just news media. Concerned with ensuring the benefits of the legislation are broadened to multiple sectors.

Welcomes the Bill, noting it addresses many recommendations from his earlier report. Expresses concern about potential regulatory burden over time and asks how the Government will ensure that ex ante powers can be reviewed for replacement with pro-market reforms after a couple of years.

Asks if the DMU will have sufficient powers to recruit highly specialised individuals who understand digital markets. Worrying about potential limitations from civil service pay bands.

Suggests excluding subscription-based charity lotteries from the Gambling Commission's regulations under schedule 19, considering them as great fundraisers for community causes.

Highlights the need for a cultural change among regulators to ensure they support industry sustainability proactively and in a business-friendly manner. Acknowledges the Bill's impact on economic regulators but also calls for addressing regulatory burdens from non-economic bodies.

Asks about the direct impacts of the Bill on cost to state and business, seeking clarity on financial implications.

Malhotra supports the Bill, praising it for addressing consumer harm from digital market monopolisation. She notes concerns about potential watering down of CMA powers as the bill progresses, advocating for clear thresholds and appeals processes. While welcoming the approach taken to legislation being targeted to specific anti-competitive activities, she highlights gaps such as subscription traps, fake reviews, drip pricing, misleading green claims, and inadequate buyer awareness on seller status.

Emphasises the importance of competition as a regulator, citing cross-party agreement. Argues that online retailers should be subject to market challenges rather than detailed regulatory intervention. Raises concerns about excessive regulation stifling capacity and innovation in crucial sectors like energy and automotive. Criticises current government policies for imposing high taxes on industries, hindering competitiveness and causing job losses. Urges a review of subsidies and regulations to promote production capacity.

The SNP supports the aims of the Bill, acknowledging its importance in regulating online marketplaces. Richard Thomson highlights the need for enhanced protections against scams and unfair practices, citing figures such as £1 million daily losses by elderly people due to online frauds and an estimated cost of £54 billion annually from consumer problems. He emphasises that state regulation is essential for ensuring confidence in online transactions and welcomes provisions defining strategic market status with additional responsibilities. However, Thomson argues that the Bill should include a right to redress similar to EU regulations, ensuring consumers can be compensated when misled by traders. He also calls for measures against greenwashing, suggesting standards and practices should govern environmental claims to boost consumer confidence and competitiveness among businesses. Additionally, he expresses concern about clauses affecting charity lotteries and suggests exemptions for them from new requirements. Thomson supports tackling fake reviews through legislation but acknowledges it is challenging. He encourages open dialogue during consultations to address these issues effectively.

Supports the Digital Markets Bill, highlighting concerns over lack of competition in digital markets leading to higher prices for consumers. Cites examples from app stores and ad tech market studies by the Competition and Markets Authority indicating a consumer detriment of over £6 billion. Emphasises the strategic nature of digital markets where companies have significant control over access, impacting businesses and consumers negatively.

Agrees with Darren Jones and supports the proposal for a specialist committee to oversee regulators on an ongoing basis, alongside existing Select Committees.

Suggests that while Parliament should not interfere in individual regulatory decisions, it must regularly review overall performance and resource needs of regulators to ensure accountability without impeding independence.

Cautionary about the need for more committees, suggesting instead that tightening statutory duties could provide a clearer framework for regulator oversight and performance evaluation by Select Committees.

Supports the Digital Markets Bill, highlighting its importance in regulating digital markets and promoting competition. He suggests that auto-renewal should not be the default for subscription services to protect consumers. Warman also welcomes the new approach on protecting consumers from online scams but notes that the interaction with unsafe goods is a concern needing clarification. He further discusses the need for judicial review standards and emphasises the importance of appropriate regulation to prevent mission creep, advocating for future-proofing against monopolistic behavior in emerging technologies like the metaverse.

[INTERVENTION]: Supports the idea of a fair and level playing field for the economy. Mentioned alongside the Digital Markets Bill, there is ongoing work on the product safety review focusing on online marketplaces compared to high-street locations with stringent safety requirements.

Ms. Hodgson criticises the Government for failing to implement CMA recommendations that would have improved enforcement against professional touts in the ticketing market, leading to fraud and scamming on sites like Viagogo and StubHub. She highlights industrial-scale touting affecting live music, theatre, and sports events, with only two convictions in three years as ineffective deterrents. Ms. Hodgson also questions the Government's assessment of enforcement agency capacity and calls for more robust measures within the Bill to tackle illegal ticketing practices.

Mr. Hollinrake interjected briefly to thank Ms. Hodgson for her work on the all-party parliamentary group on ticket abuse, noting that a £6.1 million confiscation order was made in December last year from an earlier conviction, suggesting this sends a strong message against such activities.

Mr. Carter supports the Digital Markets Bill, particularly highlighting its provisions to address consumer scams and rogue traders, protect competition, and regulate big tech firms with market dominance. He cites an example of Amazon's impact on retailing in digital space over 25 years, suggesting that such platforms need legislative regulation due to their global influence. Mr. Carter also mentions the Competition and Markets Authority estimates showing Google and Meta made excess profits of about £4 billion in 2021 alone. He emphasises the importance of designated strategic market firms by the Digital Markets Unit for fair dealing and transparency, while questioning the Minister on specific issues such as local newspaper challenges and interim measures.

Supports the Digital Markets Bill's provisions for payments to publishers from tech giants and welcomes data provision efforts. Stresses that the provisions must be implemented without delay or weakening of conditions. Emphasises cross-party support and highlights several areas where the Government could strengthen the Bill, such as expediting the final offer mechanism process and clarifying clause 29 drafting.

[INTERVENTION] Suggests cross-party support for Rebecca Long-Bailey's points regarding strengthening the Bill and addressing clause 29.

Supports the Bill but raises concerns about giving too much power to the CMA without proper accountability. Argues that a judicial review standard for appeals is not sufficient and could harm UK's competitiveness compared to other countries. Emphasises the need for an enhanced oversight mechanism by both Houses of Parliament to ensure regulators are applying strategic policies correctly.

[INTERVENTION] Supports the legislation but suggests that there may be a misreading from Ofcom regarding the appeals mechanism, which should consider merit-based appeals rather than judicial review principles. Concerned about potential retrospective effects on undertakings prior to legislation coming into force.

Sarah Olney supports measures in the Digital Markets Bill that empower the Competition and Markets Authority to counter big tech dominance, encouraging competition. She welcomes consumer protections such as tackling subscription traps and clamping down on fake reviews. However, she raises concerns about the countervailing benefits exemption, fearing it may allow anti-competitive practices by large firms. Additionally, she is concerned about the future prediction aspect of designating strategic market status for tech firms. Olney also highlights the need to protect small businesses from intellectual property theft and calls for effective processes in handling disputes with users.

Supports the Bill, which aims to drive innovation and growth in digital markets. Argues for market-based solutions but emphasises the need for regulatory intervention where necessary. Highlights concerns about excessive concentration of power among large tech firms like Facebook and Google and supports the CMA's proposed conduct requirements for designated strategic market status firms. Condemns slow consumer protection enforcement by the CMA and welcomes new direct enforcement powers in the Bill. Advocates for protecting small businesses and consumers from abuses related to subscription services and fake reviews.

Supports the Bill's aim of restoring a balance between tech giants and journalists/publishers. Acknowledges the erosion of local media but welcomes measures in part 3 of the Bill that could help restore the power balance. Expresses concern about potential loopholes such as clause 29 and calls for proper implementation details, including guidelines and final offer mechanisms to ensure fair compensation for content creators.

Supports the Digital Markets Bill but raises concerns about the potential watering down of regulation that would negatively impact competition, innovation, and consumers. Highlights significant market dominance by tech giants like Google with over 90% share in search advertising and Facebook with over 50% in display advertising markets.

In support of the bill, Bim Afolami intervened, questioning whether companies with deep pockets can abuse judicial review standards. He acknowledges the need for a balance between appeal processes and rapid remediation in tech businesses.

Dominic Raab supports the bill, questioning whether AI will increase market concentration or competition over the next five to ten years. He asks for assurance that the CMA has the necessary tools to address any such changes.