Controversy in the European Commission: 5 minutes to understand the appointment of Fiona Scott Morton

She already has detractors before she even started. Last Tuesday, the European Commission announced the appointment of American Fiona Scott Morton as the new Chief Economist of the Competition Authority.

Since then, resentment has increased both within the French government and among MEPs. This Friday, the presidents of the four largest political groups in the European Parliament wrote a letter to the Commission asking them to reconsider their decision. They were met with an end of unacceptability. The recruit will take office in early September.

Who is Fiona Scott Morton?

Fiona Scott Morton, 56, graduated from the prestigious Yale University, where she later became a teacher, and received her PhD from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

She served as head of economic analysis at the U.S. Justice Department’s Antitrust Division from May 2011 to December 2012—during the Obama era—and as a consultant to major technology groups such as Amazon, Apple, and Microsoft.

“Her resume is impressive and she has undeniable experience in managing large digital companies,” comments Suzanne Vergnol, Juris Doctor and lecturer at the National Conservatory of Arts and Crafts (Cnam). “This explains why economists consider her absolutely qualified for this position,” she continues. “His exact knowledge of Gatham (Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft) can offer a different perspective on the subject,” adds Claire Poirson, a lawyer and founder of Firsh, an emerging technology firm.

Is this a key position?

The DG Competition, under which Fiona Scott Morton will work, is responsible for ensuring the proper functioning of competition in the European Union and for investigating, inter alia, abuses of dominance by digital giants Alphabet (the parent company of Google), Apple, Meta, Microsoft…

As Claire Poirson reminds us, the chief economist “has no executive function and very little power,” unlike the body’s CEO, a position held by Frenchman Olivier Guersan. Fiona Scott Morton will essentially play an informational and advisory role.

But the temporality of his appointment still makes his future role important. The American’s arrival comes in the context of the recent adoption of the DSA (Digital Services Regulation) and DMA (Digital Markets Regulation), “two texts that call for greater accountability by platforms and companies,” the post reads. Suzanne Vergnol. This means that “the people who are currently joining the European Commission in Brussels will have a strategic influence on the implementation” of these new rules.

Why is this controversial?

Two main points are criticized. On the one hand, his nationality. Non-Europeans rarely occupy positions on the Commission, and the presence of Fiona Scott Morton raises fears of possible interference from Washington. But, according to Brussels, only a dozen applications were received. This raises the question of European skills in this area, even if, in the opinion of Claire Poirson, there were “many experts” on the old continent “who could perform these functions”.

Another problem is related to his previous jobs and the risks of conflict of interest associated with them. “She is a professor and researcher, not a lobbyist,” Suzanne Vergnol says indignantly. “But it’s true that in the past, she seems to have worked on topics without declaring specific ties of interest,” continues the Juris Doctor. Risks that have only grown over the years, with increased private sector research funding in the United States, and increasingly in Europe as well.

Are there any guarantees?

If the appointment Fiona Scott Morton raises a lot of concerns, the European Commission still has conflict of interest rules. Brussels, in particular, assured that the recruit will not work with files associated with his former employers, recalls Claire Poirson. “And if the Commission has an executive role, then the EU Court of Justice may come and censor certain decisions,” the lawyer continues. “There is a separation of powers.”

Moreover, the choice of the American may be a deliberate strategy on the part of Brussels to “build a bridge with the United States through a process of listening and compromise,” suggests Claire Poirson.