It’s good to see the CMA continuing to adapt its merger control processes with a view to making them work even better than they already do.

I’m hoping that the new processes will be a great success for UK consumers.

Most commentators seem to think, however, that the onus is solely on the CMA to make the system work better than before.

Really?

From what I’ve seen many of the problems experienced with the current system have occurred because of

• what some participants believe about how UK merger control works,
• the choices they have made (e.g. regarding merger notification) and
• the strategies and tactics they have chosen to deploy during and around the investigation.

Indeed, some of the problems encountered at Phase 2 go right back to choices made earlier in the merger process.

Through the changes it is making the CMA is providing different opportunities for interested parties to engage better with the investigation process.

It seems to me that an awful lot is riding on how well some companies and their advisers will use the changes being made and improve how they interact with the process more generally.

The new system won’t greatly benefit UK consumers unless some of those participants change too.

As the song once put it – ‘It takes two to tango”

So here’s a key question for companies and advisers as they approach future investigations under the revised investigation process:

What specifically will you do differently to make the new arrangements work well?

• In how you prepare for an investigation?

• In understanding how the UK system works?

• In how you assess your case prospects?

• In how you think about potential merger remedies?

• In how you use better the time available at investigation hearings?

And how will you go about reviewing and challenging your previous way of doing things?