As AI deepfakes cause havoc during other elections, experts warn the UK’s politicians should be prepared.
“Just tell me what you had for breakfast”, says Mike Narouei, of ControlAI, recording on his laptop. I speak for around 15 seconds, about my toast, coffee and journey to their offices.
Within seconds, I hear my own voice, saying something entirely different.
In this case, words I have written: “Deepfakes can be extremely realistic and have the ability to disrupt our politics and damage our trust in the democratic process.”
Image: Tamara Cohen’s voice being turned into a deepfake
We have used free software, it hasn’t taken any advanced technical skills, and the whole thing has taken next to no time at all.
This is an audio deepfake – video ones take more effort to produce – and as well as being deployed by scammers of all kinds, there is deep concern, in a year with some two billion people going to the polls, in the US, India and dozens of other countries including the UK, about their impact on elections.
London mayor Sadiq Khan was also targeted this year, with fake audio of him making inflammatory remarks about Remembrance weekend and calling for pro-Palestine marches going viral at a tense time for communities. He claimed new laws were needed to stop them.
Advertisement
Ciaran Martin, the former director of the UK’s National Cyber Security Centre, told Sky News that expensively made video fakes can be less effective and easier to debunk than audio.
“I’m particularly worried right now about audio, because audio deepfakes are spectacularly easy to make, disturbingly easy”, he said. “And if they’re cleverly deployed, they can have an impact.”
Those which have been most damaging, in his view, are an audio deepfake of President Biden, sent to voters during the New Hampshire primaries in January this year.
A “robocall” with the president’s voice told voters to stay at home and “save” their votes for the presidential election in November. A political consultant later claimed responsibility and has been indicted and fined $6m (£4.7m).
Mr Martin, now a professor at the Blavatnik School of Government at Oxford University, said: “It was a very credible imitation of his voice and anecdotal evidence suggests some people were tricked by that.
“Not least because it wasn’t an email they could forward to someone else to have a look at, or on TV where lots of people were watching. It was a call to their home which they more or less had to judge alone.
“Targeted audio, in particular, is probably the biggest threat right now, and there’s no blanket solution, there’s no button there that you can just press and make this problem go away if you are prepared to pay for it or pass the right laws.
“What you need, and the US did this very well in 2020, is a series of responsible and well-informed eyes and ears throughout different parts of the electoral system to limit and mitigate the damage.”
He says there is a risk to hyping up the threat of deepfakes, when they have not yet caused mass electoral damage.
A Russian-made fake broadcast of Ukrainian TV, he said, featuring a Ukrainian official taking responsibility for a terrorist attack in Moscow, was simply “not believed”, despite being expensively produced.
The UK government has passed a National Security Act with new offences of foreign interference in the country’s democratic processes.
The Online Safety Act requires tech companies to take such content down, and meetings are being regularly held with social media companies during the pre-election period.
Democracy campaigners are concerned that deepfakes could be used not just by hostile foreign actors, or lone individuals who want to disrupt the process – but political parties themselves.
Polly Curtis is chief executive of the thinktank Demos, which has called on the parties to agree to a set of guidelines for the use of AI.
Image: Polly Curtis, the chief executive of Demos
She said: “The risk is that you’ll have foreign actors, you’ll have political parties, you’ll have ordinary people on the street creating content and just stirring the pot of what’s true and what’s not true.
“We want them to come together and agree together how they’re going to use these tools at the election. We want them to agree not to create generative AI or amplify it, and label it when it is used.
“This technology is so new, and there are so many elections going on, there could be a big misinformation event in an election campaign that starts to affect people’s trust in the information they’ve got.”
Deepfakes have already been targeted at major elections.
Last year, within hours before polls closed in the Slovakian presidential election, an audio fake of one of the candidates claiming to have rigged the election went viral. He was heavily defeated and his pro-Russian opponent won.
The UK government established a Joint Election Security Preparations Unit earlier this year – with Whitehall officials working with police and security agencies – to respond to threats as they emerge.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
A UK government spokesperson said: “Security is paramount and we are well-prepared to ensure the integrity of the election with robust systems in place to protect against any potential interference.
“The National Security Act contains tools to tackle deepfake election threats and social media platforms should also proactively take action against state-sponsored content aimed at interfering with the election.”
A Labour spokesperson said: “Our democracy is strong, and we cannot and will not allow any attempts to undermine the integrity of our elections.
“However, the rapid pace of AI technology means that government must now always be one step ahead of malign actors intent on using deepfakes and disinformation to undermine trust in our democratic system.
“Labour will be relentless in countering these threats.”
Homelessness charities have warned that ministers are “falling short of what is desperately needed to end Britain’s homelessness crisis”.
It comes as the government published its new plan to tackle rough sleeping in Britain, which pledges £3.5bn of funding to crackdown on the issue.
But charities have said Labour’s National Plan to End Homelessness “falls short” and contains “important gaps”, meaning the party will not be able to achieve their stated goal of halving the number of homeless people by 2029/30.
Crisis, an organisation that supports the homeless, also argues that only £100m of the funding announced in the strategy is new.
Meanwhile, Labour MP Paula Barker, who co-chairs the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for ending homelessness, has told Sky News that the strategy has a “depressing lack of meat on the bone”, looks like it has been “rushed out”, and has left her “disappointed”.
It comes as Shelter warns that 382,618 people in England – including a record 175,025 children – will be homeless this Christmas, equivalent to one in every 153 people.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:44
Working but homeless: Daniel’s story
What does the government’s plan to reduce rough sleeping involve?
The government has made three key pledges in its new plan, unveiled on Wednesday evening.
It says that it is aiming to halve the number of long-term rough sleepers by the end of the parliament, reduce the time families spend living in bed and breakfasts (B&Bs), and prevent more people from becoming homeless in the first place.
To achieve this, the party has set out numerous new measures, schemes and extra funding.
The main measures in the strategy are:
Getting prisons, hospitals and social care services to work together better by passing a “duty to collaborate”;
Halving the number of people made homeless on their first night out of prison;
Preventing people being discharged from hospital straight to the street;
Helping the 2,070 households currently living for more than six weeks in B&Bs;
Giving councils an extra £50m – with the demand they create tailored actions plans.
A new £124m supported housing scheme is also being established, and the government hopes that it will help get 2,500 people in England off the streets.
Housing Secretary Steve Reed said homelessness is “one of the most profound challenges we face”, and suggested that the strategy will build “a future where homelessness is rare, brief, and not repeated”.
How has the plan been received?
Ms Barker told Sky News she welcomes “the scale of investment”, but is “disappointed by what I have seen”.
The Labour MP explained: “From what I have seen so far, it leaves more questions than it answers – where are the clear measures around prevention? Where is the accommodation for people sleeping rough coming from – has it already been built? What about specialised provision for those fleeing domestic abuse?
“We needed this strategy to be bold.”
Image: MP Paula Barker is ‘disappointed’ by what she has seen
Meanwhile, organisations working to support those on the streets have welcomed the plan for its focus on the issue, but warn it leaves it “almost impossible” for many families to avoid homelessness.
Matt Downie, the chief executive of Crisis, said: “Housing benefit remains frozen until at least 2030; there is no coherent approach for supporting refugees and stopping them becoming homeless; and we hear no assurances that the new homes government has pledged to build will be allocated to households experiencing homelessness at the scale required.
“There is a long way to go. Ministers are taking steps in the right direction, but falling short of what’s desperately needed to end Britain’s homelessness crisis.”
Image: An exhibit organised to highlight the contrast between the Christmas period and an estimated 23,500 young people who will homeless. Pic: PA
Sarah Elliott, head of Shelter, also warned the proposals do not go far enough, saying: “Until a lot more of these social homes are built, one of the only ways to escape homelessness is if you can afford to pay a private rent.
“We know from our frontline services this is almost impossible to do when housing benefit remains frozen, and that is where the homelessness strategy falls short.”
Centrepoint, a charity that supports young people facing homelessness, said that the strategy is “an important step”, and could be “transformative”. But it added that “gaps in the government’s approach remain”, and said increases in funding “don’t face up to the scale of homelessness”.
The Conservatives have said that the strategy means Labour “has completely failed on homelessness”.
Paul Holmes, shadow housing minister, said the number of households and children in temporary accommodation has risen to “record levels”, and pointed to the government’s “abysmal record on house-building” and tackling immigration.
Australia’s securities regulator has finalized exemptions that will make it easier for businesses to distribute stablecoins and wrapped tokens.
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) on Tuesday announced the new measures, aimed at fostering innovation and growth in the digital assets and payment sectors.
It stated that it was “granting class relief” for intermediaries engaging in the secondary distribution of certain stablecoins and wrapped tokens.
This means that companies no longer need separate, and often expensive, licenses to act as intermediaries in these markets, and they can now use “omnibus accounts” with proper record-keeping.
The new exemptions extend the earlier stablecoin relief by removing the requirement for intermediaries to hold separate Australian Financial Services (AFS) licenses when providing services related to stablecoins or wrapped tokens.
Leveling the playing field for stablecoin issuers
The regulator stated that these omnibus structures were widely used in the industry, offering efficiencies in speed and transaction costs, and helping some entities manage risk and cybersecurity.
“ASIC’s announcement helps level the playing field for stablecoin innovation in Australia,” said Drew Bradford, CEO of Australian stablecoin issuer Macropod.
“By giving both new and established players a clearer, more flexible framework, particularly around reserve and asset-management requirements, it removes friction and gives the sector confidence to build,” he continued.
The old licensing requirements were costly and created compliance headaches, particularly for an industry awaiting broader digital asset reforms.
“This kind of measured clarity is essential for scaling real-world use cases, payments, treasury management, cross-border flows, and onchain settlement,” added Bradford.
“It signals that Australia intends to be competitive globally, while still maintaining the regulatory guardrails that institutions and consumers expect.”
Angela Ang, head of policy and strategic partnerships at TRM Labs, also welcomed the development, stating, “Things are looking up for Australia, and we look forward to digital assets regulation crystallizing further in the coming year — bringing greater clarity to the sector and driving growth and innovation.”
Global stablecoin growth surges
Total stablecoin market capitalization is at a record high of just over $300 billion, according to RWA.xyz.
It has grown by 48% since the beginning of this year, and Tether remains the dominant issuer with a 63% market share.
Stablecoin markets have surged in 2025, and Tether remains dominant. Source: RWA.xyz
A group of Republicans has called foul after the US House passed a massive defense spending bill on Wednesday that omitted a ban on central bank digital currencies despite promises it would be included.
“Conservatives were promised — explicitly — that strong anti-Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) language would be included in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). That promise was broken,” GOP Representative Keith Self wrote to X on Wednesday.
The House voted 312-112 to pass the NDAA on Wednesday, sending the $900 billion annual military funding bill to the Senate in a bid to have it passed before the end of the year.
Self had filed an amendment on Tuesday to include a CBDC ban, which had been removed from the bill, but it failed to advance and did not see a vote on the House floor.
Self said a group of Republicans was “assured that anti-CBDC language would be included. Instead, we have been forced into a take-it-or-leave-it bill that breaks that promise. Without that language, I’m inclined to leave it.”
The more than 3,000-page bill is considered must-pass legislation and typically sees non-defense-related amendments that could otherwise be stalled or heavily revised if passed as standalone bills.
In July, House Republican leaders cut a deal with a group of party hardliners to put a CBDC ban in the defense spending bill after the group refused to move forward with three crypto bills unless a CBDC ban was guaranteed.
The bills had been held up in a record-long nine-hour procedural vote and included the stablecoin-regulating GENIUS Act, which President Donald Trump had pressured the GOP to quickly pass.
GOP Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene slammed Speaker Mike Johnson on Monday for not keeping his promise of a CBDC ban, adding she supports crypto but “will never support giving the government the ability to turn off your ability to have full control of your money and to buy and sell.”
An early House version of the bill shared in August had included a CBDC ban, before it was subjected to amendments via multiple markups and committees.
The language of the provision banned the Federal Reserve from testing, studying, developing or issuing any digital currency or asset. It would have also stopped the central bank from offering financial products or services directly to individuals.
In July, the House passed a bill banning CBDCs, the Anti-CBDC Surveillance State Act, with a slim vote of 219-210, which has stalled in the Senate.
Self said he would “fight on in the next must-pass bill to ensure a CBDC never sees the light of day. Financial freedom isn’t negotiable.”