Sir Jeffrey Donaldson has been an ever-present feature of the political landscape in Northern Ireland for several decades.
But his leadership of the Democratic Unionist Party came to an end on 29 March, when it revealed Donaldson had resigned as chief after he was charged with sexual offences of a “historical nature”.
Born in County Down in the 1960s, he was raised during the Troubles and has been a vocal campaigner for unionism throughout his life.
Donaldson came to the fore after the UK left the EU for his opposition to the Northern Ireland Protocol – which he believed undermined Northern Ireland‘s place in the United Kingdom.
Image: DUP leader Sir Jeffrey Donaldson did not endorse the Windsor Framework
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Donaldsonwas born in 1962 and raised in Kilkeen in County Down alongside four brothers and three sisters in what he described as “a traditional, rural, home-centred upbringing”.
As a boy, his “childhood innocence was shattered” by the Troubles – in 1970 his cousin Samuel Donaldson, a member of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, was killed in an IRA car bombing.
More on Dup
Related Topics:
As a young man, he joined the Orange Order, a protestant group in which he later became an Assistant Grand Master.
He was at one point chairman of the Ulster Young Unionist Council, and also joined the Ulster Defence Regiment – a part of the British Army which mainly consisted of volunteers, who largely spent their time guarding key points, patrolling, carrying out surveillance, and manning vehicle checkpoints.
Advertisement
In 1985 Samuel’s brother, Alex, was also killed by the IRA, in a mortar attack on a police station.
Image: Alex Donaldson was killed in a mortar attack on Newry police station
Run up to the Good Friday Agreement and defection
In the early 1980s, Donaldson worked on Enoch Powell’s campaigns to be elected as an Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) MP for South Down.
Donaldson was later elected as a UUP member of the Northern Ireland Assembly in 1985 at the age of 22.
He was elected to the House of Commons in 1997 and was a member of the UUP’s negotiating team for what became the Good Friday Agreement.
However, he voted against the deal in the subsequent referendum and warned UUP leader David Trimble against supporting it.
In 1998, he was blocked from standing in the elections for the Stormont assembly.
Having continued to agitate under Lord Trimble’s leadership, Donaldson left the UUP in 2003 and joined the DUP, having been re-elected to Stormont.
Image: Sir Jeffrey, left, with Lord Trimble, during Northern Ireland peace negotiations in Downing Street in 1997
Brexit, Northern Ireland Protocol and the party leadership
Donaldson has served consistently as the DUP MP for Lagan Valley, but stood down from the Northern Ireland Assembly in 2010, having served in government in Belfast.
He was notable for his opposition to same-sex marriage and abortion – which Westminster legalised in Northern Ireland.
In 2016 he was knighted in the birthday honours list for political service.
In the same year, he supported Brexit, and became associated with the Theresa May administration in 2017 as part of the confidence and supply arrangement which saw the DUP support Mrs May’s government in key votes.
However, the party opposed the deal Mrs May put to parliament in 2019.
Since the implementation of Brexit, Donaldson has opposed the Northern Ireland Protocol, which he says undermines the Good Friday Agreement he voted against.
In 2019 he became the leader of the DUP at Westminster, and was elected leader of the party as a whole in 2021.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:12
Donaldson on DUP’s deal decision
He successfully stood in the 2022 Northern Ireland Assembly elections, but has said he will not take up the seat until the situation with the Northern Ireland Protocol can be resolved.
Last year, Donaldson refused to endorse the Windsor Framework, which was intended to resolve issues with the Protocol – and is still sitting as an MP at Westminster.
The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) published a crypto wallet and custody guide investor bulletin on Friday, outlining best practices and common risks of different forms of crypto storage for the investing public.
The SEC’s bulletin lists the benefits and risks of different methods of crypto custody, including self-custody versus allowing a third-party to hold digital assets on behalf of the investor.
If investors choose third-party custody, they should understand the custodian’s policies, including whether it “rehypothecates” the assets held in custody by lending them out or if the service provider is commingling client assets in a single pool instead of holding the crypto in segregated customer accounts.
The Bitcoin supply broken down by the type of custodial arrangement. Source: River
Crypto wallet types were also outlined in the SEC guide, which broke down the pros and cons of hot wallets, which are connected to the internet, and offline storage in cold wallets.
Hot wallets carry the risk of hacking and other cybersecurity threats, according to the SEC, while cold wallets carry the risk of permanent loss if the offline storage fails, a storage device is stolen, or the private keys are compromised.
The SEC’s crypto custody guide highlights the sweeping regulatory change at the agency, which was hostile to digital assets and the crypto industry under former SEC Chairman Gary Gensler’s leadership.
The crypto community celebrates the SEC guide as a transformational change in the agency
“The same agency that spent years trying to kill the industry is now teaching people how to use it,” Truth For the Commoner (TFTC) said in response to the SEC’s crypto custody guide.
The SEC is providing “huge value” to crypto investors by educating prospective crypto holders about custody and best practices, according to Jake Claver, the CEO of Digital Ascension Group, a company that provides services to family offices.
SEC regulators published the guide one day after SEC Chair Paul Atkins said that the legacy financial system is moving onchain.
On Thursday, the SEC gave the green light to the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (DTCC), a clearing and settlement company, to begin tokenizing financial assets, including equities, exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and government debt securities.
Greens leader Zack Polanski has rejected claims his party would push for open borders on immigration, telling Sky News it is “not a pragmatic” solution for a world in “turmoil”.
Mr Polanski distanced himself from his party’s “long-range vision” for open borders, saying it was not in his party’s manifesto and was an “attack line used by opponents” to question his credibility.
It came as Mr Polanski, who has overseen a spike in support in the polls to double figures, refused to apologise over controversial comments he made about care workers on BBC Question Time that were criticised across the political spectrum.
Mr Polanski was speaking to Sky News earlier this week while in Calais, where he joined volunteers and charities to witness how French police handle the arrival of migrants in the town that is used as a departure point for those wanting to make the journey to the UK.
He told Sky News he had made the journey to the French town – once home to the “Jungle” refugee camp before it was demolished in 2016 – to tackle “misinformation” about migration and to make the case for a “compassionate, fair and managed response” to the small boats crisis.
He said that “no manifesto ever said anything about open borders” and that the Greens had never stood at a general election advocating for them.
“Clearly when the world is in political turmoil and we have deep inequality, that is not a situation we can move to right now,” he said.
More on Green Party
Related Topics:
“That would also involve massive international agreements and cooperation. That clearly is not a pragmatic conversation to have right now. And very often the government try to push that attack line to make us look not pragmatic.”
The party’s manifesto last year did not mention open borders, but it did call for an end to the “hostile environment”, more safe and legal routes and for the Home Office to be abolished and replaced with a department of migration.
Asked why the policy of minimal restrictions on migration had been attributed to his party, Mr Polanski said open borders was part of a “long-range vision of what society could look like if there was a Green government and if we’d had a long time to fix some of the systemic problems”.
‘We should recognise the contribution migrants make’
Mr Polanski, who was elected Green Party leader in September and has been compared to Nigel Farage over his populist economic policies, said his position was one of a “fair and managed” migration system – although he did not specify whether that included a cap on numbers.
He acknowledged that there needed to be a “separate conversation” about economic migration but that he did not believe any person who boarded a small boat was in a “good situation”.
While Mr Polanski stressed that he believed asylum seekers should be able to work in Britain and pay taxes, he also said he believed in the need to train British workers in sectors such as care, where one in five are foreign nationals.
Asked what his proposals for a fair and managed migration system looked like, and whether he supported a cap on numbers, Mr Polanski said: “We have 100,000 vacancies in the National Health Service. One in five care workers in the care sector are foreign nationals.
Image: Zack Polanski speaks to Sky News from a warehouse in Calais where charities and organisations provide migrants with essentials.
“Now, of course, that is both British workers and we should be training British workers, but we should recognise the contribution that migrants and people who come over here make.”
I’m not going to apologise’
Mr Polanski also responded to the criticism he attracted over his comments about care workers on Question Time last week, where he told the audience: “I don’t know about you, but I don’t particularly want to wipe someone’s bum” – before adding: “I’m very grateful for the people who do this work.”
His comments have been criticised by a number of Labour MPs, including Wes Streeting, the health secretary, who said: “Social care isn’t just ‘wiping someone’s bum’. It is a hard, rewarding, skilled professional job.
Asked whether he could understand why some care workers might feel he had talked down to them, the Greens leader replied: “I care deeply about care workers. When I made those comments, it’s important to give a full context. I said ‘I’m very grateful to people who do this important work’ and absolutely repeat that it’s vital work.”
“Of course, it is not part of the whole job, and I never pretended it was part of the whole job.”
Mr Polanski said he “totally” rejected the suggestion that he had denigrated the role of care workers in the eyes of the public and said his remarks were made in the context of a “hostile Question Time” where he had “three right-wing panellists shouting at me”.
Pressed on whether he wanted to apologise, he replied: “I’m not going to apologise for being really clear that I’m really grateful to the people who do this really vital work. And yes, we should be paying them properly, too.”
A group of crypto organizations has pushed back on Citadel Securities’ request that the Securities and Exchange Commission tighten regulations on decentralized finance when it comes to tokenized stocks.
Andreessen Horowitz, the Uniswap Foundation, along with crypto lobby groups the DeFi Education Fund and The Digital Chamber, among others, said they wanted “to correct several factual mischaracterizations and misleading statements” in a letter to the SEC on Friday.
The group was responding to a letter from Citadel earlier this month, which urged the SEC not to give DeFi platforms “broad exemptive relief” for offering trading of tokenized US equities, arguing they could likely be defined as an “exchange” or “broker-dealer” regulated under securities laws.
“Citadel’s letter rests on a flawed analysis of the securities laws that attempts to extend SEC registration requirements to essentially any entity with even the most tangential connection to a DeFi transaction,” the group said.
The group added they shared Citadel’s aims of investor protection and market integrity, but disagreed “that achieving these goals always necessitates registration as traditional SEC intermediaries and cannot, in certain circumstances, be met through thoughtfully designed onchain markets.”
Citadel’s ask would be impractical, group says
The group argued that regulating decentralized platforms under securities laws “would be impracticable given their functions” and could capture a broad range of onchain activities that aren’t usually considered as offering exchange services.
The letter also took aim at Citadel’s characterization that autonomous software was an intermediary, arguing it can’t be a “‘middleman’ in a financial transaction because it is not a person capable of exercising independent discretion or judgment.”
“DeFi technology is a new innovation that was designed to address market risks and resiliency in a different way than traditional financial systems do, and DeFi protects investors in ways that traditional finance cannot,” the group argued.
In its letter, Citadel had argued that the SEC giving the green light to tokenized shares on DeFi “would create two separate regulatory regimes for the trading of the same security” and would undermine “the ‘technology-neutral’ approach taken by the Exchange Act.”
Citadel argued that exempting DeFi platforms from securities laws could harm investors, as the platforms wouldn’t have protections such as venue transparency, market surveillance and volatility controls, among others.
The letter initially drew considerable backlash, with Blockchain Association CEO Summer Mersinger saying Citadel’s stance was an “overbroad and unworkable approach.”
The letters come as the SEC looks for feedback on how it should approach regulating tokenized stocks, and agency chair Paul Atkins has said that the US financial system could embrace tokenization in a “couple of years.”
Tokenization has exploded in popularity this year, but NYDIG warned on Friday that assets moving onchain won’t immediately be of great benefit to the crypto market until regulations allow them to more deeply integrate with DeFi.