Connect with us

Published

on

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.

More on Cancer

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?”

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

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.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Satisfaction with NHS slumps

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

Continue Reading

Politics

Crypto banking rule withdrawal by Fed ‘not real progress’ — Senator Lummis

Published

on

By

Crypto banking rule withdrawal by Fed ‘not real progress’ — Senator Lummis

Crypto banking rule withdrawal by Fed ‘not real progress’ — Senator Lummis

United States Senator Cynthia Lummis suggests the crypto industry may be celebrating too soon over the US Federal Reserve softening its crypto guidance for banks.

“The Fed withdrawing crypto guidance is just noise, not real progress,” Lummis said in an April 25 X post. Lummis called the Fed’s April 24 announcement — withdrawing its 2022 supervisory letter that had discouraged banks from engaging with crypto and stablecoin activities — “just lip service.”

Lummis’ tone was different from the rest of the crypto industry

Lummis, a pro-crypto advocate known for introducing the Bitcoin (BTC) Strategic Reserve Bill in July 2024, pointed out several flaws in the Fed’s announcement, even as Strategy founder Michael Saylor and crypto entrepreneur Anthony Pompliano suggested it was a step forward for banks and crypto.

Cryptocurrencies, United States
Source: Anthony Pompliano

She argued that the Fed continues to “illegally flout the law on master accounts” and still relies on reputational risk in its bank supervision practices. It comes as the Federal Insurance Deposit Corporation (FDIC) is working on a rule to stop examiners from considering reputational risk when reviewing a bank’s operations, according to a recent Bloomberg report.

Lummis also highlighted the Fed’s policy statement in Section 9(13), which hasn’t been withdrawn, stating that Bitcoin and digital assets are considered “unsafe and unsound.”

She also reiterated many of the same staff behind Operation Chokepoint 2.0 are still involved in crypto policy today.

“We are NOT fooled. The Fed assassinated companies within the industry and hurt American interests by stifling innovation and shuttering businesses. This fight is far from over.”

“I will continue to hold the Fed accountable until the digital asset industry gets more than a life jacket, Chair Powell — they need a fair shake,” Lummis said.

Related: If Trump fired Powell, what would happen to crypto?

Custodia Bank founder and CEO Caitlin Long seemed to share a similar view to Lummis.

“THANK YOU for seeing this for what it is,” Long said.

Cryptocurrencies, United States
Source: David Sacks

However, many crypto executives praised the Fed’s announcement as a positive development for the industry. Saylor said in an April 25 X post that the Fed’s move means that “banks are now free to begin supporting Bitcoin.”

Anastasija Plotnikova, co-founder and CEO of blockchain regulatory firm Fideum, said the Fed’s decision “is a significant development, as it will simplify the path to institutional adoption.”

Magazine: Ethereum is destroying the competition in the $16.1T TradFi tokenization race

Continue Reading

Politics

SEC chair suggests ‘huge benefits’ in agency’s third crypto roundtable

Published

on

By

<div>SEC chair suggests 'huge benefits' in agency's third crypto roundtable</div>

<div>SEC chair suggests 'huge benefits' in agency's third crypto roundtable</div>

In one of his first appearances as the recently sworn-in chair of the US Securities and Exchange Commission, Paul Atkins delivered remarks to the agency’s third roundtable discussion of crypto regulation. 

In the “Know Your Custodian” roundtable event on April 25, Atkins said he expected “huge benefits” from blockchain technology through efficiency, risk mitigation, transparency, and cutting costs. He reiterated that among his goals at the SEC would be to facilitate “clear regulatory rules of the road” for digital assets, hinting that the agency under former chair Gary Gensler had contributed to market and regulatory uncertainty. 

“I look forward to engaging with market participants and working with colleagues in President Trump’s administration and Congress to establish a rational fit-for-purpose framework for crypto assets,” said Atkins.

SEC chair suggests 'huge benefits' in agency's third crypto roundtable
SEC chair Paul Atkins addressing the April 25 crypto roundtable. Source: SEC

Some critics of US President Donald Trump see Atkins’ nomination to lead the SEC as a nod to the crypto industry, acting on campaign promises to remove Gensler — the former chair resigned the day Trump took office — and cut back on regulation. Democratic lawmakers on the Senate Banking Committee questioned Atkins on his ties to the industry, potentially presenting conflicts of interest in his role regulating crypto.

Related: Atkins SEC era sparks massive industry optimism, crypto execs speak out

The direction of the SEC under new leadership

“We’ve noticed that we don’t have to be as concerned […] about being accused of things that we’re not doing, like being broker-dealers for securities,” Exodus chief legal officer Veronica McGregor, who participated in the roundtable, told Cointelegraph on April 24.”It’s just a less scary regulatory environment in general. It is, however, still unclear what the ultimate regs are going to look like for crypto.” 

The SEC crypto task force is scheduled to hold two more roundtables in May and June to discuss tokenization and decentralized finance, respectively. Commissioner Hester Peirce, who leads the task force, told Cointelegraph in March that she welcomed the opportunity to work with Atkins to “reorient the agency,” hinting at an SEC with regulations more favorable to the crypto industry.

In addition to the roundtables, the crypto task force has reported several meetings with digital asset firms to discuss various policies and considerations in developing a regulatory framework.

Magazine: SEC’s U-turn on crypto leaves key questions unanswered

Continue Reading

Politics

Nasdaq urges SEC to treat certain digital assets as ‘stocks by any other name’

Published

on

By

<div>Nasdaq urges SEC to treat certain digital assets as 'stocks by any other name'</div>

<div>Nasdaq urges SEC to treat certain digital assets as 'stocks by any other name'</div>

Nasdaq has urged the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to hold digital assets to the same regulatory standards as securities if they constitute “stocks by any other name,” according to an April 25 comment letter. 

The exchange said the US financial regulator needs to establish a clearer taxonomy for cryptocurrencies, including categorizing a portion of digital assets as “financial securities.” Those tokens, Nasdaq argued, should continue to be regulated “as they are regulated today regardless of tokenized form.”

“Whether it takes the form of a paper share, a digital share, or a token, an instrument’s underlying nature remains the same and it should be traded and regulated in the same ways,” the letter said. 

It also proposed categorizing a portion of cryptocurrencies as “digital asset investment contracts,” to be subject to “light touch regulation” but still overseen by the SEC.

Nasdaq urges SEC to treat certain digital assets as 'stocks by any other name'
Nasdaq’s April 25 letter to the SEC. Source: Nasdaq

Related: Certain stablecoins aren’t securities, SEC says in new guidance

Regulatory U-turn

The SEC has dramatically pivoted its stance on cryptocurrency oversight since US President Donald Trump took office in January. 

Under the leadership of former Chair Gary Gensler, the SEC took the position that practically all cryptocurrencies, with the exception of Bitcoin (BTC), represent investment contracts and therefore qualify as securities. 

This stance led the agency to bring upwards of 100 lawsuits against crypto firms for alleged securities law violations.

However, under Trump nominee Paul Atkins, who was sworn in as chair on April 21 after a lengthy Senate confirmation, the SEC has claimed jurisdiction over a narrower segment of cryptocurrencies. 

In February, the agency issued guidance stating that memecoins — if clearly identified as purely speculative assets with no intrinsic value — do not qualify as investment contracts pursuant to US law. 

In April, the SEC said that stablecoins — digital tokens pegged to the US dollar — similarly do not qualify as securities if they are marketed solely as a means of making payments.

Nasdaq urges SEC to treat certain digital assets as 'stocks by any other name'
Stablecoin market overview. Source: RWA.xyz

Integrating crypto into TradFi

In its April 21 letter, Nasdaq said existing financial infrastructure “can readily absorb digital assets by establishing the proper taxonomy and calibrating certain rules to reflect what is truly new and novel about digital assets.”

The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC) — a private US securities clearinghouse closely overseen by the SEC — has been laying the foundation for integrating blockchain technology into regulated financial markets.

In March, the DTCC committed to promoting Ethereum’s ERC-3643 standard for permissioned securities tokens.

Magazine: Ethereum is destroying the competition in the $16.1T TradFi tokenization race

Continue Reading

Trending