Competition policy cannot be easily separated form other objectives, such as better and fairer labour markets, environmental plans or other social and political issues. Today, a strong competition policy is also an important pre-requisite for a well-functioning democracy, because it prevents strong concentrations of private power that can undermine free societies.
Acemoglu explains in his Nobel prize lecture that “by the end of the 19th century, US industry had reached a very high level
of concentration, with a few firms, such as Standard Oil, J.P. Morgan, and
Carnegie Steel, dominating their sectors, and also gaining greater political
power. It was not out of the question that this would lead to the consolidation
of political power in the hands of these companies and a closing of the economy
to new firms and ideas, for example, as Venice experienced in the 13th and 14th
centuries. In that instance, increasing concentration of economic power in the
hands of a few patrician families enabled them to further monopolize politics,
and this undermined the institutional foundations that had previously
underpinned remarkable innovativeness and prosperity in Venice. In the end,
this did not happen in early 20th-century United States, in part because
political power shifted away from these large corporations and their owners
during the Progressive Era. New politics led to institutional reforms, enacting
antitrust laws against monopolies and cartels, introducing new tools for
regulation and redistribution such as the Federal Reserve and the federal
income tax, and allowing greater room for collective bargaining for workers.”
Simon Kuper in a recent article in the
Financial Times (which could also be interpreted as a qualification to the Draghi Report) argues that “the EU has to weaponise its greatest strength: the
single market and its regulators. The European Commission is the institution on
earth best placed to take on US tech. It now also has an economic
“anti-coercion instrument”, known in Brussels as “the bazooka”, to fight trade
wars. The EU wishes it had a serious tech industry and trillion-dollar
companies, but there are upsides to not having them. As economist Joseph
Stiglitz argues, trillion-dollar companies tend to be the consequences of
monopoly. Without tech oligarchs of its own, the EU can confront the industry.
That’s a big bargaining chip, as Trump’s chief constituency now appears to be
Silicon Valley, not his voters who rendered themselves irrelevant when they
elected him one final time.”
The current calls for administrative simplification
and competitiveness in Europe should not be confused with deregulation. In the difficult
times that now Europe and the world are living, it is imperative to strengthen
the rule of law institutions which separate us from autocracies, and one of these
regulatory institutions is competition policy.
No comments:
Post a Comment