Science, Innovation and Technology

Paul Scully Excerpts

Monday 10th July 2023 Ministerial Corrections

The following is an extract from the fifth sitting of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Public Bill Committee on 20 June 2023.

[Paul Scully]

As the hon. Member for Pontypridd rightly says, and we have said all the way through, technology and digital markets move really quickly. That is why we want to make sure that decisions are out of the door as quickly as possible, so that people can see what is happening as soon as possible. The decisions will go to the appropriate persons as described, which are relevant third parties and the SMS firms themselves.

[Official Report, Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Public Bill Committee, 20 June 2023, Vol. 734, c. 132.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Paul Scully).

An error has been identified in my contribution. The correct information should have been:

[Paul Scully]

As the hon. Member for Pontypridd rightly says, and we have said all the way through, technology and digital markets move really quickly. That is why we want to make sure that decisions are out of the door as quickly as possible, so that people can see what is happening as soon as possible. Consultations on decisions will be brought to the attention of appropriate persons as described, which are relevant third parties and the SMS firms themselves.

The following is an extract from the seventh sitting of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Public Bill Committee on 22 June 2023.

[Paul Scully]

Clearly, we have safeguards in the process there, so the Secretary of State will need to consult the CMA. This is not just an isolated decision-making process; the CMA has expertise in this area, but it will be for the Secretary of State to focus on the decision. The CMA will be able to provide the expert advice, ensuring that amendments can correctly reflect the changing landscape, and Parliament will clearly need to approve any amendment.

[Official Report, Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Public Bill Committee, 22 June 2023, Vol. 734, c. 181.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Paul Scully).

An error has been identified in my contribution. The correct information should have been:

[Paul Scully]

Clearly, we have safeguards in the process there, so the Secretary of State will need to consult the CMA. This is not just an isolated decision-making process; the CMA has expertise in this area, but it will be for the Secretary of State to focus on the decision. The CMA will be able to provide the expert advice, ensuring that amendments can correctly reflect the changing landscape.

The following is an extract from the ninth sitting of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Public Bill Committee on 27 June 2023.

[Paul Scully]

Notices will be made public, and information about the groups will be reported online.

[Official Report, Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Public Bill Committee, 27 June 2023, Vol. 735, c. 220.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Paul Scully).

An error has been identified in my contribution. The correct information should have been:

[Paul Scully]

Notices will be made public, and information about the groups will be able to be reported online by the CMA.

The following is an extract from the 10th sitting of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Public Bill Committee on 27 June 2023.

[Paul Scully]

On microbusinesses and small business, this is effectively a standard definition that, yes, does exclude microbusinesses, because it replicates provisions in the Enterprise Act. The obvious question then is, “How do microbusinesses and small businesses get any redress in these examples?” but business protection regulations would cover that, and they are not within the scope of this change. However, any of the changes that the hon. Lady requested would largely come under the affirmative procedure.

[Official Report, Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Public Bill Committee, 27 June 2023, Vol. 735, c. 242.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Paul Scully).

An error has been identified in my contribution. The correct information should have been:

[Paul Scully]

On microbusinesses and small business, this is effectively a standard definition that, yes, does exclude microbusinesses, because it replicates provisions in the Enterprise Act. The obvious question then is, “How do microbusinesses and small businesses get any redress in these examples?” but business protection regulations would cover that, and they are not within the scope of this change. However, any of the changes to schedules 13 and 14 as requested by the hon. Lady would be by regulations under the affirmative procedure.

The following is an extract from the 10th sitting of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Public Bill Committee on 27 June 2023.

[Paul Scully]

The hon. Lady asked about the possibility of multiple enforcers in process at the same time. In effect, we are restating the existing arrangements, which have been working. They work with the CMA as the gatekeeper, so the CMA would have to be notified when action has been taken—it can filter anything going on in that regard—and it would have to co-ordinate the approach.

[Official Report, Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Public Bill Committee, 27 June 2023, Vol. 735, c. 249.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Paul Scully).

An error has been identified in my contribution. The correct information should have been:

[Paul Scully]

The hon. Lady asked about the possibility of multiple enforcers in process at the same time. In effect, we are restating the existing arrangements, which have been working. They work with the CMA as the gatekeeper, so the CMA would have to be notified before action has been taken—it can filter anything going on in that regard—and it would have to co-ordinate the approach.

The following is an extract from the 10th sitting of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Public Bill Committee on 27 June 2023.

[Paul Scully]

The hon. Lady also asked about the CMA being able to enforce and why private enforcers did not have the same powers. Only the CMA may impose penalties. Private enforcers may seek a penalty in court, but the CMA is the only body able to issue penalties directly.

[Official Report, Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Public Bill Committee, 27 June 2023, Vol. 735, c. 250.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Paul Scully).

An error has been identified in my contribution. The correct information should have been:

[Paul Scully]

The hon. Lady also asked about the CMA being able to enforce and why private enforcers did not have the same powers. Only the CMA may impose penalties. Public enforcers may seek a penalty in court, but the CMA is the only body able to issue penalties directly.