The UK government's decision to appoint a former Amazon executive as chair of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has sparked outrage among a coalition of organizations and individuals, who claim that the move undermines the regulator's independence and threatens to compromise competition enforcement.

The CMA, the UK's antitrust regulator, has been instrumental in investigating Big Tech companies for various contraventions, alongside its counterparts in the European Union (EU). However, the UK government's recent decision to appoint Doug Gurr, a former Amazon executive, as interim chair of the CMA has raised concerns about the regulator's ability to maintain its independence and effectively regulate the tech industry.

Gurr's appointment has been met with criticism from a group of over two dozen organizations and individuals, including tech companies such as Yelp, DuckDuckGo, and Mozilla, as well as civil society organizations and experts. In an open letter to senior government ministers, the group expressed concern that the government's decision could compromise the CMA's operational independence and undermine its ability to enforce competition laws.

The letter highlights the importance of maintaining the CMA's independence, particularly in the context of the Digital Markets Unit (DMU) regime, which was established to tackle Big Tech's dominance in the digital market. The signatories argue that the DMU regime must be trusted by the government and independent of political pressure if it is to unlock positive economic outcomes for the whole economy.

The UK government's decision to appoint Gurr has been seen as a move to reposition the country as a pro-growth, pro-tech nation, cutting red tape and bureaucracy to attract outside investment. However, critics argue that this approach could compromise the CMA's ability to effectively regulate the tech industry and promote competition.

The CMA's independence has been a key factor in its ability to take on Big Tech companies, and the regulator's recent investigations into Google and Apple's dominance in the digital market have been seen as a significant step forward in promoting competition. However, the appointment of a former Amazon executive as chair of the CMA has raised concerns that the regulator may become more lenient towards Big Tech companies, compromising its ability to effectively enforce competition laws.

The controversy surrounding Gurr's appointment has sparked a wider debate about the role of regulators in promoting competition and the need for independence in enforcing competition laws. As the UK government continues to grapple with the challenges of regulating the tech industry, the appointment of a former Amazon executive as chair of the CMA has raised important questions about the government's commitment to promoting competition and protecting consumers.

In response to the criticism, the UK government has defended its decision, citing Gurr's experience in the tech industry as a valuable asset in promoting growth and innovation. However, critics argue that the government's approach could have far-reaching consequences for competition enforcement and the wider economy.

The controversy surrounding Gurr's appointment is likely to continue, with many calling for greater transparency and accountability in the appointment process. As the UK government navigates the complex landscape of tech regulation, the independence of regulators like the CMA will be crucial in promoting competition and protecting consumers.