Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Digital Markets: Competition

Thursday 18 May 2023 · 3 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 3 Not answered 0

Key points

  • The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill will establish a new pro-competition regime for digital markets.
  • The UK's recent intervention blocking the acquisition of Activision Blizzard by Microsoft has drawn attention for being based on potential market issues rather than existing dominance.
  • The UK Government is examining the crypto sector and considering appropriate regulation to keep pace with industry developments.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Context

The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill is being assessed for its impact on competition in digital markets.

Question

What assessment has the Department made of the potential impact of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill on levels of competition between businesses in digital markets?

Answer from Kevin Hollinrake

The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill will establish a new pro-competition regime for digital markets. This will boost competition between businesses in digital markets, driving productivity, growth and innovation.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Specific assessment details were not provided, only general statements about the bill's intent to boost competition.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email
Context

The Competition and Markets Authority's ruling blocking the acquisition of Activision Blizzard has made the UK an outlier in regulatory approach.

Question

The Competition and Markets Authority's recent ruling blocking the acquisition of Activision Blizzard has made us an outlier. Its intervention in the nascent, innovative cloud gaming market was based on potential rather than real market power. You will know, Mr Speaker, that regulators have as much of a lever on growth in the economy as the Government. As we are doing in financial services, all regulators should have a remit for growth, and maybe—just maybe—we can call them “regulators for growth”.

Answer from Kevin Hollinrake

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for his question. He may have noticed that we recently launched a paper, “Smarter Regulation to Grow the Economy”, so we absolutely agree with that point. Some of the measures it proposes are about ensuring that Ministers, officials and others look at alternatives to regulation, rather than jumping straight to regulation, and have an earlier impact assessment of what regulation would mean for businesses' costs, rather than just looking at other factors.

Partly answered

Not addressed: No concrete commitment was made beyond agreeing with the general principle that regulators should promote growth.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email
Context

The European Parliament has passed the Markets in Cryptoassets Regulation, providing the first rules for governing the crypto industry.

Question

A huge element of growth in the digital market is the crypto industry. The European Parliament has just signed off the Markets in Cryptoassets Regulation. That ambitious and forward-thinking law gives the European Union the first rules to govern the crypto industry. When will this Government do the same?

Answer from Kevin Hollinrake

We are looking at the crypto sector carefully, and there was a report yesterday from the Treasury Committee on that matter. The crypto sector is moving at pace, and it is important that regulation keeps up with that. We have regulated already on some of the promotions around cryptocurrency, and it is something we will keep under scrutiny.

Partly answered

Not addressed: No specific timeline or commitment was given for implementing regulations similar to those in the EU.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email