It's time for clarity: Protecting consumers is not anti-growth

The UK's weakening of its antitrust authority is bad economics

- CHRIS HUGHES

The forces protecting consumers from abuse by big business are in retreat. Former Italian Premier Mario Draghi last year called for reform of merger control in Europe to boost the region's global competitiveness. Consumer champion Lina Khan has, as expected, left the US Federal Trade Commission antitrust authority. And last week came a real shocker: The UK government ousted the chair of its Competition & Markets Authority (CMA) merger watchdog.

A problematic narrative is emerging that antitrust regulation needs a philosophical overhaul, and that its primary aim of protecting competition should give way to a more nuanced approach advancing multiple economic goals. Economics says competitive markets are good for consumers and leads to other benefits. If merger regulators focus on preserving competition and preventing future monopolies, the economy wins as a result. Healthy rivalry between companies spurs innovation and sees efficient firms take market share from inefficient peers. You don't need to directly target, say, growth.