Electoral Dysfunction: Royals’ cancer diagnoses put struggling NHS in the spotlight

Published

1 year ago

March 28, 2024

admin

There is an edict in our democracy that politics and royalty must not mix.

Sure, we live in a “constitutional monarchy” where King Charles is head of state, wading through government papers and meeting the prime minister weekly.

But when it comes to the task of setting the political direction and framing our nation’s political debate, the Royal Family has to zip it and remain entirely neutral.

? Listen above then tap here to follow Electoral Dysfunction wherever you get your podcasts ?

And just as the royals don’t stray into political territory, political editors like myself and politicians don’t talk much about the Royal Family.

In fact, politicians actively swerve any questions inviting them to comment on the latest tabloid drama around the royals.

But this week on Electoral Dysfunction, we’ve broken with our own conventions to discuss the Princess of Wales’s announcement that she has cancer, and ask whether this might be a moment when the cultural and social role the Royal Family play in our national life takes a more political tilt.

Because the princess’s diagnosis – on the heels of King Charles’s announcement he has cancer – has started a conversation about cancer that the British people are perhaps taking into the political dimension.

The realisation that anyone can find themselves in this position is throwing into sharp relief the state of our healthcare system.

In the same way some people might be asking, “could I have cancer?”, so too are we assessing what the prognosis is for a creaking NHS to treat us in a timely way.

This was the point made to us by listener Sophie, who emailed in to say that while she had “every sympathy” with the Princess of Wales and King Charles, “I wonder if it is now an appropriate time to start a discussion about the reality of cancer treatment for the majority of people in the UK?”

Because while NHS waiting lists are at record high, the pandemic stalled so many patients presenting for cancer screening and testing.

NHS guidelines aim for 75% of patients with suspected cancer to receive a diagnosis within four weeks of a referral, while 85% should wait less than two months for their first treatment.

But the last time these targets were met was back in 2015.

In England and Wales, just over one in three people wait too long for treatment, while in Scotland – where targets are slightly different – a quarter wait more than two months to start treatment.

The public seem to have had enough, with The King’s Fund and Nuffield Trust think tanks’ annual report – out this week – finding that public confidence in the NHS is at its lowest level since polling began in 1983, with approval ratings dropping for almost all NHS services.

Long waits for a GP or a hospital appointment were cited by 71% of people as a key reason for their dissatisfaction.

Half of those surveyed supported rising taxes and spending more on the NHS, as we gear up for a general election in which the state of our health service will be the subject of very national debate.

Labour MP Jess Phillips says “everybody feels nothing but sympathy” for Princess Catherine. But she also voices on our podcast perhaps what many of our listeners will be feeling if they are watching someone struggle with this awful disease and frustrated that treatment came too late.

“[The royals] are going to be treated a lot better in their cancer diagnosis than my family and my sister-in-law who is currently dying of cancer and has small children just like Catherine,” she said.

“The reality is that not everybody has vigilance on them [in screening and testing for cancer]. I’m not saying for a second that the Royal Family shouldn’t have vigilance and everybody in the country knows they will have more vigilance.”

But Jess also thinks that the royals should perhaps give “some nod of recognition to the fact its not as easy for others”.

She added: “I think that if they don’t address that particular issue, I just think that it’s dangerous and people like me who feel sympathy for them start to feel a bit hurt by it.”

Political territory that the Royal Family will be loath to touch, let alone try to traverse.

But as figureheads of the nation, their diagnoses, as well as opening up a well of sympathy, puts a struggling NHS into the national spotlight again.

Tap here to follow Electoral Dysfunction and get it every Friday from wherever you get your podcasts

Politics

Crypto stocks down, IPOs punted amid tariff tumult

Published

2 hours ago

April 4, 2025

admin

Crypto stocks down, IPOs punted amid tariff tumult

Cryptocurrency firms felt the heat from US President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariff rollout this week as market turbulence sent share prices tumbling and foiled initial public offering (IPO) plans.

From exchanges to Bitcoin (BTC) miners, crypto stocks suffered as much, if not more, than shares of other companies — despite the industry’s warm relationship with the US president.

On April 2, Trump announced he was placing tariffs of at least 10% on practically all imports into the United States and adding additional “reciprocal” tariffs on some 57 countries.

Since then, major US stock indices — including the S&P 500 and Nasdaq — tumbled by roughly 10% as traders braced for a looming trade war.

Sharp selloffs

Crypto exchange Coinbase — a prominent ally of Trump during the November US elections — experienced a similarly severe sell-off, with its stock price dropping by roughly 12% during the same period, according to data from Google Finance.

Bitcoin miners are also taking a hit. The CoinShares Crypto Miners ETF (WGMI) — which tracks a diverse basket of Bitcoin mining stocks — has lost roughly 13% of its value since immediately prior to Trump’s April 2 announcement, according to data from Morningstar.

Even Strategy, one of the best-performing stocks of 2024, wasn’t immune. Its share price has fallen by around 6% on the news, Google Finance data showed.

According to Reuters, investment bank JPMorgan has raised its estimated odds of a global economic recession in 2025 to 60% from 40% previously.

“Disruptive U.S. policies have been recognized as the biggest risk to the global outlook all year,” JP Morgan reportedly said.

“The effect … is likely to be magnified through (tariff) retaliation, a slide in U.S. business sentiment and supply-chain disruptions.”

IPO delays

The impact of US tariffs hasn’t been limited to stock price volatility. Stablecoin issuer Circle has reportedly paused plans for a 2025 IPO, citing market turbulence.

According to The Wall Street Journal, Circle is “waiting anxiously” before taking further steps after filing to take the company public on April 1.

It is among several companies — including fintech Klarna and ticketing service StubHub — reportedly considering altering or shelving IPO plans.

One exception may be Bitcoin itself, which some analysts say is finally “decoupling” from the broader market.

Bitcoin’s spot price has held above $82,000 this week, even as US equities markets collapsed.

Magazine: Unstablecoins: Depegging, bank runs and other risks loom

Politics

Brazilian court authorizes crypto seizure for debt collection — Report

Published

3 hours ago

April 4, 2025

admin

Brazilian court authorizes crypto seizure for debt collection — Report

Brazilian judges have been authorized to seize cryptocurrency assets from debtors who owe money and are behind on their payments, signaling a growing recognition that digital assets can be both a form of payment and a store of value.

According to local media reports, the Third Panel of Brazil’s Superior Court of Justice unanimously authorized judges to send letters to cryptocurrency brokers informing them about their intent to seize an account holder’s assets to repay creditors.

The report was confirmed by the Superior Court of Justice, which issued a notice on its website.

The decision was reached unanimously by the Third Panel, which reviewed a case brought forward by a creditor.

“Although they are not legal tender, crypto assets can be used as a form of payment and as a store of value,” a translated version of the Superior Court of Justice’s memo read.

Under existing rules, Brazilian judges are allowed to freeze bank accounts and order fund withdrawals, even without a debtor’s knowledge, should they rule that a creditor is owed money.

Following the recent decision, crypto assets now fall under the same purview.

Minister Ricardo Villas Bôas Cueva, who voted in the five-person panel, said cryptocurrencies still lack formal regulation in Brazil but noted certain bills have recognized the asset class as “a digital representation of value.”

Despite regulatory uncertainty, Brazil is a major hub for crypto

Although Brazil still lacks an overarching framework for digital assets, with the country’s central bank divvying up the regulatory processes into phases, crypto adoption is surging across the country.

Brazil ranks second among all Latin American countries in terms of “crypto value received,” which is a key benchmark for adoption, according to an October report by Chainalysis.

Earlier this year, crypto exchange Binance was granted approval to operate in the country after it acquired a São Paulo-based investment company.

A Binance executive told Cointelegraph at the time that Brazil was making “significant strides” in regulating the industry and expects a comprehensive framework to be finalized “by mid-year.”

Nevertheless, not all of Brazil’s regulatory proposals have been favorable for the industry.

In December, the country’s central bank proposed banning stablecoin transactions on self-custodial wallets at a time when more locals were using dollar-pegged tokens to hedge against the devaluation of the Brazilian real.

Industry observers told Cointelegraph at the time that such a ban would be difficult to enforce.

“Governments can regulate centralized exchanges, but P2P transactions and decentralized platforms are much harder to control, which means the ban would likely only affect part of the ecosystem,” said Lucien Bourdon, an analyst with Trezor.

Politics

‘Will the PM side with parents or tech bros?’: Labour peer demands action on children’s smartphone safety

Published

4 hours ago

April 4, 2025

admin

'Will the PM side with parents or tech bros?': Labour peer demands action on children's smartphone safety

Sir Keir Starmer needs to choose between parents who want stronger action to tackle harmful content on children’s phones, or the “tech bros” who are resisting changes to their platforms, Baroness Harriet Harman has said.

Speaking to Beth Rigby on Sky News’ Electoral Dysfunction podcast, the Labour peer noted that the prime minister met with the creators of hit Netflix drama Adolescence to discuss safety on social media, but she questioned if he is going to take action to “stop the tech companies allowing this sort of stuff” on their platforms where children can access it.

Sir Keir hosted a roundtable on Monday with Adolescence co-writer Jack Thorne and producer Jo Johnson to discuss issues raised in the series, which centres on a 13-year-old boy arrested for the murder of a young girl, and the rise of incel culture.

Politics latest: Could the UK retaliate against Trump?

The aim was to discuss how to prevent young boys being dragged into a “whirlpool of hatred and misogyny”, and the prime minister said the four-part series raises questions about how to keep young people safe from technology.

Sir Keir has backed calls for the four-part drama to be shown in all schools across the country, but Baroness Harman questioned what is going to be achieved by having young people simply watch the show.

“Two questions were raised [for me],” she said. ” Firstly – after they’ve watched it, what is going to be the discussion afterwards?

“And secondly, is he going to act to stop the tech companies allowing this sort of stuff to go online into smartphones without protection of children?

“Because if the tech companies wanted to do this, they could actually protect children. They can do everything they want with their tech.”

She acknowledged there are “very big public policy challenges” in this area, but added of the prime minister: “Is he going to side with parents who are terrified and want this content off their children’s phones, or is he going to accept the tech bros’ resistance to having to make changes?”

👉 Click here to listen to Electoral Dysfunction on your podcast app 👈

Can parliament keep up?

The Labour peer backed the Conservative Party’s call for a ban on smartphones in schools to be mandated from Westminster, saying it would “enable all schools not to have a discussion with their parents or to battle it out, but just to say, this is the ruling” from central government, which Ofsted would then enforce.

“I’m sensitive to the idea that we shouldn’t constantly be telling schools what to do,” she continued. “And they’ve got a lot of common sense and a lot of professional experience, and they should have as much autonomy as possible.

“But perhaps it’s easier for them if it’s done top down.”

Baroness Harman also questioned the speed with which parliament is actually able to legislate to deal with the very rapid development of new technologies, and posits that it could “change its processes to be able to legislate in real time”.

She suggested that a “powerful select committee” of MPs could be established to do that, because “otherwise we talk about it, and then we’re not able to legislate for 10 years – by which time that problem has really set in, and we’ve got a whole load more problems”.

On the podcast, the trio also discussed the 10% tariffs imposed on the UK by Donald Trump and the government’s efforts to strike a trade deal with the US to mitigate the impact of the levy.

The government has refused to rule out scrapping the Digital Services Tax, a 2% levy on tech giants’ revenues in the UK, as part of the negotiations with the Trump administration – a move Baroness Harman said would be “very heartbreaking”.

👉 Click here to listen to Electoral Dysfunction on your podcast app 👈