I'm not not sure that would be enough. He wasn't personnally damaged by microsoft or doesn't have any stakes in the competition. He acted as a representative at a time and today he has other responsibilities.
The CMA claims seem reasonable to me and if their government is backing them I guess it means that they have shown sufficient evidence of preparation, investigation and negotiation with Microsoft. Only a handful of countries voted against lootbox mechanics and I still think that more should have followed this decision. Being the only one who's made a specific choice doesn't make you wrong. It is risky and from the parliament video that was linked in the chat, it has been acknowledged