Sir Keir Starmer said it is “nonsense” to suggest he would duck TV debates with Rishi Sunak during the general election campaign.
The Labour leader insisted he was happy to exchange views with the prime minister at any time, following reports that Labour aides would prefer him to avoid televised clashes that could get personal in the fight for the keys to Number 10.
“I’ve been saying bring it on for a very, very long time. I’m happy to debate any time,” Sir Keir said.
Last week, a report in the Sunday Times claimed that Mr Sunak’s allies see TV debates as an opportunity to pitch him against Sir Keir in the choice between the two leaders.
According to the newspaper, the Tories will seek to paint the Labour leader as unprincipled and argue that despite the prime minister’s personal wealth and unpopularity, at least people “know what he believes in”.
The newspaper reported that conversations between Mr Sunak’s team and broadcasters have already begun.
But it suggested that Labour aides are less enthusiastic about the prospect of TV debates, and would prefer opposition leader Sir Keir to duck them.
Sir Keir’s comments came as Mr Sunak gave the clearest indication yet of when he will call the election, telling reporters his “working assumption” is that it will be held “in the second half of this year”.
Advertisement
What are the rules on TV debates?
Image: David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Gordon Brown faced off against each other in the 2010 debates
There is nothing in electoral law that requires televised election debates between party leaders.
If they take place, they are a matter for broadcasters and political parties.
The first general election TV debates in the UK took place in 2010 when three head-to-head clashes were held between Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg, then the leaders of the three main parties.
Before then, the UK was considered unusual in developed democracies in not holding televised debates between party leaders during general election campaigns (they are well established in the US, for example).
The first debate in 2010 was watched by 10 million people, and there was a perception that they were useful and might become a permanent feature of the election process.
However, in subsequent elections, broadcasters and politicians have failed to agree on terms. There were no head-to-head debates between the leaders of the main parties in 2015 or 2017.
In 2015 there was one seven-way debate with Mr Cameron, Labour’s Ed Miliband and the leaders of the smaller parties.
In 2017, then prime minister Theresa May infamously refused to debate with her Labour counterpart Jeremy Corbyn or other party leaders and her place was taken in one TV debate by then home secretary Amber Rudd.
Image: Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn
In 2019, there were, for the first time, two head-to-head debates between the prime minister and opposition leader, with Boris Johnson and Mr Corbyn facing off.
However a Sky News debate proposed for 28 November between Mr Johnson, Mr Corbyn and Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson was cancelled after neither Mr Johnson nor Mr Corbyn were willing to participate.
A US federal judge has agreed to pause a lawsuit filed by 18 state attorneys general and the crypto lobby group DeFi Education Fund against the Securities and Exchange Commission after all parties said new SEC leadership could make the action moot.
Kentucky District Court Judge Gregory Van Tatenhove ordered a 60-day stay on the case on April 16, noting a mid-March filing from the SEC that “this case could potentially be resolved” due to a leadership transition at the regulator.
He added that the parties must file a joint status report within 30 days.
Paul Atkins, a Wall Street adviser who has held board positions with crypto advocacy groups, was sworn in as the new SEC chair earlier this month, replacing acting chair Mark Uyeda and taking over from Gary Gensler.
The 18 attorneys general, all hailing from Republican states, filed the lawsuit with the DeFi Education Fund against the securities regulator in November, alleging that the SEC exceeded its authority when targeting crypto exchanges with lawsuits, accusing the regulator and then-chair Gensler of “gross government overreach.”
The plaintiffs included attorneys general from Nebraska, Tennessee, Wyoming, Kentucky, West Virginia, Iowa, Texas, Mississippi, Ohio, Montana, Indiana, Oklahoma and Florida, among others.
“Without Congressional authorization, the SEC has sought to unilaterally wrest regulatory authority away from the States through an ongoing series of enforcement actions,” the lawsuit stated.
Screenshot from filing ordering pause of proceedings. Source: CourtListener
DeFi groups drop case against IRS over killed broker rule
Meanwhile, the DeFi Education Fund, Blockchain Association, and Texas Blockchain Council dropped their lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service on April 16.
“The parties hereby stipulate to voluntary dismissal of this action without prejudice because the case has become moot,” stated the filing.
The lawsuit, filed in December, argued that the so-called IRS DeFi broker rule went beyond the agency’s authority and was unconstitutional.
Panama’s capital city will accept cryptocurrency payments for taxes and municipal fees, including bus tickets and permits, Panama City mayor Mayer Mizrachi announced on April 15, joining a growing list of jurisdictions globally that have voted to accept such payments.
Panama City will begin accepting Bitcoin (BTC), Ether (ETH), Circle’s USDC (USDC), and Tether’s USDt (USDT) stablecoin for payment once the crypto-to-fiat payment rails are established, Mizrachi posted on the X platform.
Mizrachi said previous administrations attempted to push through similar legislation but failed to overcome stipulations requiring the local government to accept funds denominated in US dollars.
In a translated statement, the Panama City mayor said that the local government partnered with a bank that will immediately convert any digital assets received into US dollars, allowing the municipality to accept crypto without introducing new legislation.
Panama City joins a growing list of global jurisdictions on the municipal and state level accepting cryptocurrency payments for taxes, exploring Bitcoin strategic reserves to protect public treasuries from inflation and passing pro-crypto policies to attract investment.
Several municipalities and territories around the globe already accept crypto for tax payments or are exploring various implementations of blockchain technology for government spending.
The US state of Colorado started accepting crypto payments for taxes in September 2022. Much like Panama City said it will do, Colorado immediately converts the crypto to fiat.
In December 2023, the city of Lugano, Switzerland, announced taxes and city fees could be paid in Bitcoin, which was one of the developments that earned it the reputation of being a globally recognized Bitcoin city.
The city council of Vancouver, Canada, passed a motion to become “Bitcoin-friendly city” in December 2024. As part of that motion, the Vancouver local government will explore integrating BTC into the financial system, including tax payments.
North Carolina lawmaker Neal Jackson introduced legislation titled “The North Carolina Digital Asset Freedom Act” on April 10. If passed, the bill will recognize cryptocurrencies as an official form of payment that can be used to pay taxes.
As digital assets gain mainstream adoption, establishing a legal framework for stablecoins is a “good idea,” said US Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell.
In an April 16 panel at the Economic Club of Chicago, Powell commented on the evolution of the cryptocurrency industry, which has delivered a consumer use case that “could have wide appeal” following a difficult “wave of failures and frauds,” he said.
Powell delivers remarks at the Economic Club of Chicago. Source: Bloomberg Television
During crypto’s difficult years, which culminated in 2022 and 2023 with several high-profile business failures, the Fed “worked with Congress to try to get a […] legal framework for stablecoins, which would have been a nice place to start,” said Powell. “We were not successful.”
“I think that the climate is changing and you’re moving into more mainstreaming of that whole sector, so Congress is again looking […] at a legal framework for stablecoins,” he said.
“Depending on what’s in it, that’s a good idea. We need that. There isn’t one now,” said Powell.
This isn’t the first time Powell acknowledged the need for stablecoin legislation. In June 2023, the Fed boss told the House Financial Services Committee that stablecoins were “a form of money” that requires “robust” federal oversight.
Washington’s formal embrace of cryptocurrency began earlier this year when Trump established the President’s Council of Advisers on Digital Assets, with Bo Hines as the executive director.
Hines told a digital asset summit in New York last month that a comprehensive stablecoin bill was a top priority for the current administration. After the Senate Banking Committee passed the GENIUS Act, a final stablecoin bill could arrive at the president’s desk “in the next two months,” said Hines.
Bo Hines (right) speaks of “imminent” stablecoin legislation at the Digital Asset Summit on March 18. Source: Cointelegraph
Stablecoins pegged to the US dollar are by far the most popular tokens used for remittances and cryptocurrency trading.
The combined value of all stablecoins is currently $227 billion, according to RWA.xyz. The dollar-pegged USDC (USDC) and USDt (USDT) account for more than 88% of the total market.