Next time you plot a deal, don’t try to get one over on Stanley and his Commission – their laws are set in tablets of stone.BIOGRAPHYBorn: 1 November 1948.Education: Royal Grammar School, Newcastle upon Tyne; Oxford University.Career:1971: joined Inland Revenue, initially as a tax inspector.1978: moved to Department of Trade and Industry; became principal private secretary in 1990.1998: director of the Regulatory Impact Unit at the Cabinet Office.2000: chief executive of the new postal regulator, Postcomm, overseeing the opening of the UK market to competition.2004: chief executive of the Competition Commission.Author of How to be a Civil Servant (Politico’s Publishing).. “No one is saying to the British consumer, ‘You have to leave Royal Mail.’ If they want to switch to another supplier, who cares if it’s German? The most important thing is to put the consumer first. On the whole, British markets work better.”As well as investigating specific mergers, the Commission reviews industry-wide issues, such as whether supermarkets are ripping off consumers by charging high rates of interest on store cards. He is giving little away on the likely outcome of this review, or of the investigation into mergers between water companies, which should be made easier under new competition rules governing the water industry. All he will say is: “Each case will get a good hearing.”If ever he needs advice on impartiality, Stanley can always turn to How to Be a Civil Servant, a paperback guide he wrote after his long career in Whitehall.

On his accompanying light-hearted website ( .uk), he lauds, as the first advocate of the Civil Service, the father-in-law of Moses. In the Bible, the old man tells his son-in-law: “Select capable men from all the people … He says British governments are right not to create “national champions”, or strong monopolistic companies – such as those in France and Germany, whose governments are more protective of their domestic markets – even if it means British household names like Abbey increasingly end up in foreign hands.”It does not seem to have done the economy any harm,” he says, going back to the example of the liberalisation of the postal market when he was at Postcomm. It’s a transparency issue.”One criticism levelled at the Commission is that it is anti-profit.

Stanley dismisses this as a “ridiculous suggestion”, yet the interests of a company (and its shareholders) and those of consumers can clearly conflict. Stanley insists his team has not seen a big increase in referrals from the OFT since the dispute. But he admits: “The OFT must now explain more clearly why they are not referring It’s not enough for the OFT to say it’s not appropriate. In the end, the Court of Appeal quashed the CAT ruling, and the iSoft-Torex merger went through without being referred.The first challenge to the new competition regime has nevertheless lowered the bar for suitable grounds for reference by the OFT to the Commission. I am not saying you can’t make a mistake, but it’s damned difficult.”He admits that the Commission’s increased powers mean it now has a greater responsibility to explain its decisions. But his job has not been made easier by a Competition Appeal Tribunal ruling last year that heightened the uncertainty surrounding competition policy.