It is not hard to see why Sir Keir Starmer ends up doing quite so many foreign trips.
On the road to Mumbai, India, from the airport there were giant pictures of the British prime minister looming over the sealed-off roads cleared for his special VIP convoy.
There was nothing short of a carnival along the roadside to greet the cars.
Image: Sir Keir Starmer during a visit to an FA Premier League training facility in Mumbai. Pic: PA
People who knew nothing about Sir Keir – and were happy to admit so to me – dressed up for the occasion in plumes of feathers and chicken costumes and danced to music. The Labour conference does not come close to that.
This trip has a big first – 125 blue chip business leaders, more than any business delegation in history – are here. The enthusiasm to take advantage of the signed, though not completed, free trade deal is clear.
“I think the importance of this trip is reflected by the huge British delegation we’ve got here today,” said Shevaun Haviland, director general of the British Chambers of Commerce.
More on India
Related Topics:
“A hundred and twenty five businesses, biggest UK names Beattie, BP, British Airways, Diageo, Virgin, huge businesses all the way through to incredible AI and energy start-ups from around the UK.”
But business leaders have been clear to me that they haven’t simply joined the delegation to further their activities in India. They want to raise their profile with the prime minister, in order to ensure their voice is heard when it needs to be by the government.
Image: Sir Keir Starmer at a Diwali ceremony in Mumbai. Pic: PA
And the picture some paint of life back in the UK is more challenging. CEO of leading architecture firm Benoy, Tom Cartledge, said how 10 to 15 years ago their business was 90% UK activity, and now it is 90% overseas. He said markets like India are important in part because the UK environment is challenging.
“We’re having to go and find new markets because what we do is design big projects, infrastructure, real estate towers, residential, retail,” he told me.
He went on: “There really is a perception of overseas markets that we are sluggish, low productivity, high tax rates. And that does nothing for the confidence. And in fact, I spoke to an Indian client this morning who said that they are relocating from the head offices to Dubai, because the perception is it’s going to get harder, it’s going to get tougher in the UK and we just do not need that.”
It is rare for business figures on a PM delegation to speak so openly.
Image: The PM visits a Premier league youth training facility with ex-England footballer Michael Owen. Pic: PA
Ms Haviland told me that business figures are using this trip to pass a message to the prime minister.
“We want to see no more tax for business,” she told me, saying that’s the message being conveyed right now in India. I asked what they say back? “They hear us,” she replied. “I think we’ll have to wait and see.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:49
Starmer visits Bollywood
Another important voice is Rohan Malik, managing partner of EY. He says there’s an optimistic case for the UK over the medium term but suggested short-term challenges for the government.
“No one likes taxes, but at the same time, they are a necessary way for the government to balance the books.
“If I take a five or seven-year view, I feel more optimistic about the future, because I do think some short-term pain will lead to some long-term gains.”
Does he think the business community could bear paying a bit more?
“I think it’s going to be tricky for the chancellor,” he said.
“I don’t envy her position at all to be looking at different, but she’s got other of disposal businesses, but not like more taxation. At the same time, we have to be prepared to understand how do we try and contribute more towards economic growth?”
The candour is not something I can remember from business delegations in the past. That’s a response to the nervousness about a £20bn-£30bn black hole Chancellor Rachel Reeves will have to fill in the November budget. Overall the delegates remain on side – for now.
A growing rift has emerged in Washington, D.C., between the cryptocurrency industry and labor unions as lawmakers debate whether to ease rules allowing cryptocurrencies in 401(k) retirement accounts.
The dispute centers on proposed market structure legislation that would allow retirement accounts to gain exposure to crypto, a move labor groups say could expose workers to speculative risk. In a letter sent on Wednesday to the US Senate Banking Committee, the American Federation of Teachers argued that cryptocurrencies are too volatile for pension and retirement savings, warning that workers could face significant losses.
The letter drew immediate pushback from crypto investors and industry figures. “The American Federation of Teachers has somehow developed the most logically incoherent, least educated take one could possibly author on the matter of crypto market structure regulation,” a crypto investor said on X.
The AFT letter to Congress opposes regulatory changes that would allow 401(k) retirement accounts to hold alternative assets, including cryptocurrency. Source: CNBC
In response to the letter, Castle Island Ventures partner Sean Judge said the bill would improve oversight and reduce systemic risk, while enabling pension funds to access an asset class that has delivered strong long-term returns.
Consensys attorney Bill Hughes said the AFT’s opposition to the crypto market structure bill was politically motivated, accusing the group of acting as an extension of Democratic lawmakers.
Funds held in US retirement accounts by type of account plan. Source: ICI
Opposition to crypto in retirement and pension funds mounts
Proponents of allowing crypto in retirement portfolios, on the other hand, argue that it democratizes finance, while trade unions have voiced strong opposition to relaxing current regulations, claiming that crypto is too risky for traditional retirement plans.
“Unregulated, risky currencies and investments are not where we should put pensions and retirement savings. The wild, wild west is not what we need, whether it’s crypto, AI, or social media,” AFT president Randi Weingarten said on Thursday.
The AFT represents 1.8 million teachers and educational professionals in the US and is one of the largest teachers’ unions in the country.
According to Better Markets, a nonprofit and nonpartisan advocacy organization, cryptocurrencies are too volatile for traditional retirement portfolios, and their high volatility can create time-horizon mismatches for pension investors seeking a predictable, low-volatility retirement plan.
Bitcoin and Ether volatility compared to other asset classes and stock indexes. Source: US Federal Reserve
In October, the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) also wrote to Congress opposing provisions within the crypto market structure regulatory bill.
The AFL-CIO, the largest federation of trade unions in the US, wrote that cryptocurrencies are volatile and pose a systemic risk to pension funds and the broader financial system.
The US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has conditionally approved five national bank charter applications for companies tied to the digital assets industry.
In a Friday notice, the OCC said it had conditionally approved BitGo, Fidelity, and Paxos to convert their existing state-level trust companies into federally chartered national trust banks. In the same announcement, the regulator said it had conditionally approved new applications from Circle and Ripple for national trust bank charters.
“New entrants into the federal banking sector are good for consumers, the banking industry and the economy,” said Jonathan Gould, the Comptroller of the Currency, adding: “The OCC will continue to provide a path for both traditional and innovative approaches to financial services to ensure the federal banking system keeps pace with the evolution of finance and supports a modern economy.”
Europe’s crypto regulatory framework is entering a new phase of scrutiny as policymakers weigh whether enforcement of the Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation should remain with national authorities or be centralized under the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA).
MiCA, which came largely into force at the beginning of 2025, was designed to create a unified rulebook for crypto-asset service providers across the European Union.
But as implementation progresses, disparities between member states are becoming harder to ignore. Some regulators have approved dozens of licenses, while others have issued only a handful, prompting concerns about inconsistent supervision and regulatory arbitrage.
In this week’s episode of Byte-Sized Insight, Cointelegraph explored what those growing pains mean for Europe’s crypto market with Lewin Boehnke, chief strategy officer at Crypto Finance Group — a Switzerland-based digital asset firm with operations across the EU.
Uneven enforcement fuels calls for oversight
According to Boehnke, the core challenge facing Europe isn’t the MiCA framework itself, but rather how it is being applied differently across jurisdictions.
“There is a very, very uneven application of the regulation,” he said, pointing to stark contrasts between member states. Germany, for example, has already granted around 30 crypto licenses, many to established banks, while Luxembourg has approved just three, all to major, well-known firms.
The ESMA released a peer review of the Malta Financial Services Authority’s authorization of a crypto service provider, finding that the regulator only “partially met expectations.”
Those disparities have helped fuel support among some regulators and policymakers for transferring supervisory powers to ESMA, which would create a more centralized enforcement model similar to the US Securities and Exchange Commission.
France, Austria and Italy have all signaled support for such a move, particularly amid criticism of more permissive regimes elsewhere in the bloc.
From Boehnke’s perspective, centralization could be less about control and more about efficiency.
“From just purely the practical point of view, I think it would be a good idea to have a unified… application of the regulation,” he said, adding that direct engagement with the ESMA could reduce delays caused by back-and-forth between national authorities.
MiCA’s design praised, but technical questions remain
Despite criticism from some corners of the crypto industry, Boehnke said MiCA’s overarching structure is sound, particularly its focus on regulating intermediaries rather than peer-to-peer activity.
“I do like MiCA regulation… the overarching approach of regulating not necessarily the assets, not the peer-to-peer use, but the custodians and the ones that offer services… that is the right approach.”
However, he also noted that unresolved technical questions are slowing adoption, especially for banks. One example is MiCA’s requirement that custodians be able to return client assets “immediately,” a phrase that remains open to interpretation.
“Does that mean withdrawal of the crypto? Or is it good enough to sell the crypto and withdraw the fiat immediately?” Boehnke asked, noting that such ambiguities are still being worked through and are awaiting clarity from ESMA.
To hear the complete conversation on Byte-Sized Insight, listen to the full episode on Cointelegraph’s Podcasts page, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And don’t forget to check out Cointelegraph’s full lineup of other shows!