
Terrorism & Israel-Gaza war weaponized to destroy crypto
More Videos
Published
2 years agoon
By
adminThe Israel-Gaza war has once again thrown the spotlight on crypto, with anti-crypto politicians seizing on exaggerated reports of crypto being used to finance terrorism to introduce harsh new legislation with the potential to crush the industry.
Three days after Hamas carried out its brutal Oct. 7 attack, The Wall Street Journal published an inflammatory article stating that in the past three years, U.S.-designated terrorist organizations such as Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah had raised $134 million in crypto.
The article — later corrected following an online backlash — became ammunition for the anti-crypto army in Washington, which cited it to push for ever greater restrictions on crypto.
That came to a head over the past week with a bipartisan bill called the Terrorism Financing Prevention Act, introduced on Dec. 8. It obliges the Treasury to identify foreign financial institutions and crypto platforms that have knowingly conducted transactions with U.S.-designated terrorist outfits and enables it to impose sanctions to restrict U.S. bank accounts and block transactions.
Senator Mitt Romney tied the bill specifically to the Israel-Gaza war:
“The Oct. 7 attacks on Israel perpetrated by Hamas have made it more urgent and necessary for the U.S. to counter the role that cryptocurrency plays in the financing of terrorism.”
The war has also given new impetus to Senator Elizabeth Warren’s bipartisan Digital Asset AML Act (DAAMLA), which would extend the Bank Secrecy Act to cryptocurrencies. Five more senators signed up to cosponsor this bill on Dec. 11, and there are now 19 senators in total backing the legislation — or one in five senators — meaning it has gained serious traction. Galaxy’s head of firmwide research, Alex Thorn, argues “Warren’s bill would effectively outlaw crypto in America.”
Thorn believes that despite Warren’s poor record in getting bills passed, this one has a chance, given the “potent terrorism narrative post 10/7” and the “razor-thin R majority in House makes hard to thwart.”
Another earlier bill is also in play, the Crypto Asset National Security Enhancement (CANSEE) Act, which would dramatically increase surveillance over crypto transactions.
Warren appeared on CNBC’s Squawk Box last week to claim that all the major bank CEOs agreed with her on the need for urgent action.
“We have a serious problem in this country,” she said. “And that is a part of the financial system is being used by terrorists, by drug traffickers, by rogue nations, in order to launder money, move money through the system and finance their illegal activities.”
She said Congress needed to update the Bank Secrecy Act to cover crypto “because there’s a new threat out there — it’s crypto, and it is being used for terrorist financing. It is being used for drug trafficking. North Korea is using it to pay for about half of its nuclear weapons program. We can’t allow that to continue.”
Of course, cutting off funding to terrorists and preventing money laundering are laudable aims. But the unintended consequences (some argue they are intentional) pose a serious threat to the industry.
Read also
The Blockchain Association’s Kristin Smith argues that applying the Bank Secrecy Act to crypto defeats “the entire purpose of blockchains” and believes the legislative clampdowns would push the vast majority of the industry overseas.
Referring to CANSEE and DAAMLA bills, Smith says, “Following any crisis — or sensational media report — Washington feels the urge to do something, which is understandable,” But, she warned:
“If enacted, these bills would effectively destroy the American digital asset industry.”
Crypto terrorism links sexed up
The link between terrorism and crypto is invariably hyped up by opponents. For example, Warren’s claim that “half” of North Korea’s nukes are financed by crypto hacks comes from a recent Recorded Future report. However, the report clearly shows the figure is speculative, and the authors admit “it is unclear exactly how much of the stolen cryptocurrency ends up directly financing ballistic missile launches.”
The original WSJ article was also wrong, as demonstrated by a more careful analysis of the methodology of WSJ’s sources from Castle Island Ventures’ Nic Carter, as well as Chainalysis. Most of the terror financing goes through crypto service providers, and the analysis confused the much larger pool of funds on the platform with the amount received by terrorism-linked addresses.

In one instance, it appeared the WSJ had likely confused the total amount in a crypto service provider’s address ($82 million) with the funds probably unwittingly sent to a terror-affiliated wallet ($450,000). According to Chainalysis, the analysis had been conducted by amateurs:
“To the untrained eye, it might appear that $82 million worth of cryptocurrency was raised for terror financing in the example above. But it is much more likely that a small portion of these funds were intended for terrorist activity, and a majority of the funds processed through the suspected service provider were unrelated.”
The actual amount of crypto raised and received by terrorists in total was much smaller than the “as much as” $134 million cited. The WSJ reluctantly corrected its article but remained adamant that its main points were true.
One reason the story is such a beat-up is that U.S. regulators and Israel’s National Bureau for Counter Terror Financing (NBCTF) seized most crypto wallets used to launder the Hamas donations back in 2021.
They successfully identified donors, froze accounts, and shut down fundraising websites, which led Hamas to view cryptocurrency as “inconvenient” for its purposes and to limit itself to more traditional means of fundraising.
“In fact, it’s possible that no one understands the challenges of using cryptocurrency for fundraising better than Hamas,” notes Chainalysis. In April this year, Al-Qassam Brigades, the military wing of Hamas, announced the shutdown of their longstanding cryptocurrency donation program, citing the likelihood of donors being caught and prosecuted.
Mati Greenspan, the Tel Aviv-based founder and CEO of Quantum Economics, explains, “It’s the very nature of the blockchain that allowed the Mossad to crack down on Hamas’ crypto activities in the first place.”
Andrew Fierman, the head of sanctions strategy at Chainalysis, agrees, noting that Hamas would happily raise money via any method it could, but crypto had not proved to be a good choice:
“Hamas has historically used and likely will continue to facilitate financing via traditional methods through the use of money services businesses (MSB), hawala and shell companies. Cryptocurrency is just another attempted method of financing. However, it has been shown time and time again to not be an effective approach.”
Crypto is involved in some terrorism funding
Nevertheless, the problem of crypto-terrorism funding exists, even if the media and its anti-crypto activists overstate it. Not only terrorist organizations but whole countries are involved. Fierman points out that “Iran has a sizable crypto economy, including many regional exchanges, and it has historically used all different kinds of financial mechanisms to fund groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.”
Iran is a major geopolitical player in the region that has been engaged in a proxy war with Israel for almost 40 years with a declared intention of getting rid of the Jewish state. In June 2023, Israel’s National Bureau for Counter Terror Financing (NBCTF) seized about $1.7 million worth of cryptocurrency from Hezbollah, a Lebanon terrorist group, and from their brothers in arms, Iran’s Quds Force.
Rather than use major currencies like Bitcoin and Ether, terrorists prefer smaller chains, and according to the Reuters analysis, NBCTF froze 143 wallets on Justin Sun’s Tron blockchain between July 2021 and October 2023 that it believed were connected to terrorists.

The battle is ongoing regarding donations to Hamas-linked charities, which raised an estimated 70% more than the period before the 7/10 attack (though there is no estimate for how much of that increase was in crypto). Fierman says that “blockchain analysis should be a constant work to get a whole-of-ecosystem understanding of threat actors.”
Regulators’ crypto/terrorism fears
Meanwhile, a raft of anti-crypto politicians in Washington — where crypto is rapidly turning into another front in the culture war — see blockchain itself as dangerous.
Senator Elizabeth Warren has proudly advertised her “anti-crypto army,” and the WSJ’s inaccurate reporting gave the army the ammunition it needs to once again push for greater regulations to crack down on the use of cryptocurrency for money laundering and terrorism financing.
Senator Warren, along with her colleague Roger Marshall, immediately wrote a letter to the president asking for stricter regulation of the crypto market: “As The Wall Street Journal reports, researchers who study Hamas’s financing said crypto remains one of a number of tools the group uses to raise funds […] We urge you to swiftly and categorically act to meaningfully curtail illicit crypto activity and protect our national security and that of our allies.”
Read also
The fact that the article was inaccurate did not give these legislators any pause for thought, and the Department of Justice’s subsequent $4.3-billion money-laundering settlement with Binance added fuel to the fire.
The attacks by Senators Warren, Chris Van Hollen and Lindsey Graham on the crypto market have been relentless, and they use any pretext to accuse the crypto industry of helping “bad countries” evade sanctions, fund weapons programs, support spying and enable cyberattacks. In that sense. the Israel-Gaza war is just the latest pretext, and if not that, it would be something else.
And it seems that regulators are going to press further. In late November, Deputy Treasury Secretary Wally Adeyemo wrote in a letter to Congress:
“As terrorists, transnational criminals, and rogue states turn to digital assets to finance their activities, we need to build an enforcement regime that is capable of preventing this activity.”
He asked for more power to crack down on illicit activity in crypto, such as jurisdiction over USD stablecoins, new crypto financial institution category under BSA and new secondary sanctions.
It was a pleasure to speak at today’s Blockchain Association Policy Summit, where I focused on the steps we must take to prevent bad actors from using the digital asset ecosystem for illicit activity. pic.twitter.com/HQpwDyFBla
— Deputy Secretary Wally Adeyemo (@TreasuryDepSec) November 30, 2023
For some market players, that means an unprecedented level of transparency. For example, the Binance exchange will have to submit to a “crazy” regulation for the sake of preserving its business. “What was once a haven for anarchic crypto commerce is about to be transformed into the opposite: perhaps the most fed-friendly business in the cryptocurrency industry, retroactively offering more than a half-decade of users’ transaction records to U.S. regulators and law enforcement,” writes Andy Greenspan in Wired.
Proponents argue that the example of Hamas, which was forced to drop crypto donations due to the danger of prosecution, shows that the transparency of blockchain is itself a weapon against terrorism financing. Government agencies and private sector organizations should use blockchain analysis to trace terrorism financing and focus on safety and compliance on the part of all market participants.
There is a certain irony in freedom-hating terrorists embracing crypto, which was created by libertarians, says Quantum Economics’ Greenspan.
“Ultimately, Hamas hates freedom. In Hamas-controlled Gaza, there is no freedom of religion or women’s rights. Gays are executed publicly on a regular basis, and there have not been any elections or even opinion polls since they took control of the strip since they defeated Fatah in 2007.”
“The notion that they are using Bitcoin, which is a monetary system based on freedom, is a bit ironic. It’s as Milton Friedman famously said when predicting Bitcoin in 1999: ‘Of course it has its negative side, the gangsters, people engaged in illegal transactions will have an easier way to carry out their business,’ but ultimately, good always triumphs over evil.”
Community building and cybersecurity
While the terrorist attack and the fears of regulators have a negative impact on the industry, there is also a positive side to crypto, which has made it easier to get aid to victims of the Oct. 7 atrocities.
Immediately after Hamas’ attack, the crypto and Web3 communities created the humanitarian decentralized initiative Crypto Aid Israel. Itai Elizur, the chief operating officer and partner at MarketAcross/InboundJunction and a contributor to Crypto Aid, explains, “It has not only collected money but also increased awareness and made the local system excited by working together.”
While there are other numerous Jewish funds raising money in crypto, they were established prior to the conflict, unlike Crypto Aid Israel. The platform is organized as a multisignature wallet, and it collects donations in Bitcoin, Ether and stablecoins.
Funds are used to rebuild settlements in southern Israel and help the families of those killed and kidnapped, of soldiers, and of those who repelled terrorist attacks in the early days of the conflict. Over $240,000 was collected in less than a month.
Non-institutional cryptocurrency fundraising first came to prominence to raise donations for Ukraine. As of July, $227 million in cryptocurrency has been raised for Ukraine, including $134 million for humanitarian needs and $91 million for military-oriented campaigns.
Elizur says, “The first issue for us was to create trust because there are bad actors doing the same, but there are a lot of mechanisms now with which people are trying to stop them.” Banks and regulators in Israel act as intermediaries between the platform and the recipients’ bank accounts, though Elizur says it was not easy to get permission to transfer the money into Israeli banks.
The furor over Hamas raising funds in crypto has stymied any chance of a similar fund being set up to aid civilians in Gaza affected by the war. Very few charity funds helping people in Gaza (Islamic Aid, Medical Aid for Palestinians, etc.) suggest donating in crypto, except Save The Children, which gathers not only for Gaza but also for Somalia and other countries at risk.
Other ramifications of the war… on crypto
Just like the aftermath of the Russia-Ukraine invasion in 2022, which saw the global cybersecurity market grow 11.6% in the second quarter of 2023, the latest Israel-Hamas conflict could boost the cybersecurity industry. Intelligence agencies are closely watching the blockchain for suspicious transfers, bad actors and illicit funds.
Global tensions ramping up due to the conflict have the potential to stimulate demand for Bitcoin as a safe-haven asset, a hedge against economic downturns. While the price has certainly skyrocketed 55% since the start of the conflict, most observers believe the main factor is speculation over the imminent approval of a Bitcoin ETF in the United States.
But as Greenspan points out, it’s not a bad use case: “The longer the war goes on and the more it spreads, the more this dynamic is likely to play out. I can emphatically say that the correlation between Bitcoin and the stock market that developed during COVID and the 2021 bull run has now broken down completely.”
As for Israel, the conflict is not long and widespread enough yet to raise the need for BTC as a decentralized payment tool beyond governments, although Iran has already been using BTC as a tool for evading sanctions while making oil transactions during the U.S.-Iran conflict in 2021.
The country is so far spared from the scale of inflation that would incentivize people to switch to BTC from the national currency, like in Turkey, where the national currency crashed in 2021 and has not recovered since. And the Middle East conflict so far has not seen a stream of migrants with a need for substitute banking instruments, as we saw in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. Nevertheless, if the conflict becomes more intense, with multiple parties involved, it may have a bigger impact on BTC demand.
Subscribe
The most engaging reads in blockchain. Delivered once a
week.

Ksenia Buksha
You may like
Politics
Rachel Reeves hints at tax rises in autumn budget after welfare bill U-turn
Published
3 hours agoon
July 5, 2025By
admin
Rachel Reeves has hinted that taxes are likely to be raised this autumn after a major U-turn on the government’s controversial welfare bill.
Sir Keir Starmer’s Universal Credit and Personal Independent Payment Bill passed through the House of Commons on Tuesday after multiple concessions and threats of a major rebellion.
MPs ended up voting for only one part of the plan: a cut to universal credit (UC) sickness benefits for new claimants from £97 a week to £50 from 2026/7.
Initially aimed at saving £5.5bn, it now leaves the government with an estimated £5.5bn black hole – close to breaching Ms Reeves’s fiscal rules set out last year.
Read more:
Yet another fiscal ‘black hole’? Here’s why this one matters
Success or failure: One year of Keir in nine charts
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
6:36
Rachel Reeves’s fiscal dilemma
In an interview with The Guardian, the chancellor did not rule out tax rises later in the year, saying there were “costs” to watering down the welfare bill.
“I’m not going to [rule out tax rises], because it would be irresponsible for a chancellor to do that,” Ms Reeves told the outlet.
More on Rachel Reeves
Related Topics:
“We took the decisions last year to draw a line under unfunded commitments and economic mismanagement.
“So we’ll never have to do something like that again. But there are costs to what happened.”
Meanwhile, The Times reported that, ahead of the Commons vote on the welfare bill, Ms Reeves told cabinet ministers the decision to offer concessions would mean taxes would have to be raised.
The outlet reported that the chancellor said the tax rises would be smaller than those announced in the 2024 budget, but that she is expected to have to raise tens of billions more.
It comes after Ms Reeves said she was “totally” up to continuing as chancellor after appearing tearful at Prime Minister’s Questions.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:16
Why was the chancellor crying at PMQs?
Criticising Sir Keir for the U-turns on benefit reform during PMQs, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said the chancellor looked “absolutely miserable”, and questioned whether she would remain in post until the next election.
Sir Keir did not explicitly say that she would, and Ms Badenoch interjected to say: “How awful for the chancellor that he couldn’t confirm that she would stay in place.”
In her first comments after the incident, Ms Reeves said she was having a “tough day” before adding: “People saw I was upset, but that was yesterday.
“Today’s a new day and I’m just cracking on with the job.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:21
Reeves is ‘totally’ up for the job
Sir Keir also told Sky News’ political editor Beth Rigby on Thursday that he “didn’t appreciate” that Ms Reeves was crying in the Commons.
“In PMQs, it is bang, bang, bang,” he said. “That’s what it was yesterday.
“And therefore, I was probably the last to appreciate anything else going on in the chamber, and that’s just a straightforward human explanation, common sense explanation.”
Politics
OKX CEO apologizes after ‘false positives’ lock users out of accounts
Published
8 hours agoon
July 5, 2025By
admin
The CEO of OKX says that “false positives” are among the biggest challenges the crypto exchange faces in ensuring global compliance.
Politics
One year of Starmer: Nine charts that tell us whether Labour’s first year has been a success or failure
Published
12 hours agoon
July 5, 2025By
admin
It might feel like it’s been even longer for the prime minister at the moment, but it’s been a whole year since Sir Keir Starmer’s Labour Party won a historic landslide, emphatically defeating Rishi Sunak’s Conservatives and securing a 174-seat majority.
Over that time, Sir Keir and his party have regularly reset or restated their list of milestones, missions, targets and pledges – things they say they will achieve while in power (so long as they can get all their policies past their own MPs).
We’ve had a look at the ones they have repeated most consistently, and how they are going so far.
Overall, it amounts to what appears to be some success on economic metrics, but limited progress at best towards many of their key policy objectives.
From healthcare to housebuilding, from crime to clean power, and from small boats to squeezed budgets, here are nine charts that show the country’s performance before and after Labour came to power, and how close the government are to achieving their goals.

Sir Keir Starmer has been in office for a year. Pic Reuters
Cost of living
On paper, the target that Labour have set themselves on improving living standards is by quite a distance the easiest to achieve of anything they have spoken about.
They have not set a specific number to aim for, and every previous parliament on record has overseen an increase in real terms disposable income.
The closest it got to not happening was the last parliament, though. From December 2019 to June 2024, disposable income per quarter rose by just £24, thanks in part to the energy crisis that followed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
By way of comparison, there was a rise of almost £600 per quarter during the five years following Thatcher’s final election victory in 1987, and over £500 between Blair’s 1997 victory and his 2001 re-election.
After the first six months of the latest government, it had risen by £144, the fastest start of any government going back to at least 1954. As of March, it had fallen to £81, but that still leaves them second at this stage, behind only Thatcher’s third term.
VERDICT: Going well, but should have been more ambitious with their target
Get inflation back to 2%
So, we have got more money to play with. But it might not always feel like that, as average prices are still rising at a historically high rate.
Inflation fell consistently during the last year and a half of Rishi Sunak’s premiership, dropping from a peak of 11.1% in October 2022 to exactly 2% – the Bank of England target – in June 2024.
It continued to fall in Labour’s first couple of months, but has steadily climbed back up since then and reached 3.4% in May.
When we include housing costs as well, prices are up by 4% in the last year. Average wages are currently rising by just over 5%, so that explains the overall improvement in living standards that we mentioned earlier.
But there are signs that the labour market is beginning to slow following the introduction of higher national insurance rates for employers in April.
If inflation remains high and wages begin to stagnate, we will see a quick reversal to the good start the government have made on disposable income.
VERDICT: Something to keep an eye on – there could be a bigger price to pay in years to come
‘Smash the gangs’
One of Starmer’s most memorable promises during the election campaign was that he would “smash the gangs”, and drastically reduce the number of people crossing the Channel to illegally enter the country.
More than 40,000 people have arrived in the UK in small boats in the 12 months since Labour came to power, a rise of over 12,000 (40%) compared with the previous year.
Labour have said that better weather in the first half of this year has contributed to more favourable conditions for smugglers, but our research shows crossings have also risen on days when the weather is not so good.
VERDICT: As it stands, it looks like “the gangs” are smashing the government
Reduce NHS waits
One of Labour’s more ambitious targets, and one in which they will be relying on big improvements in years to come to achieve.
Starmer says that no more than 8% of people will wait longer than 18 weeks for NHS treatment by the time of the next election.
When they took over, it was more than five times higher than that. And it still is now, falling very slightly from 41.1% to 40.3% over the 10 months that we have data for.
So not much movement yet. Independent modelling by the Health Foundation suggests that reaching the target is “still feasible”, though they say it will demand “focus, resource, productivity improvements and a bit of luck”.
VERDICT: Early days, but current treatment isn’t curing the ailment fast enough
Halve violent crime
It’s a similar story with policing. Labour aim to achieve their goal of halving serious violent crime within 10 years by recruiting an extra 13,000 officers, PCSOs and special constables.
Recruitment is still very much ongoing, but workforce numbers have only been published up until the end of September, so we can’t tell what progress has been made on that as yet.
We do have numbers, however, on the number of violent crimes recorded by the police in the first six months of Labour’s premiership. There were a total of 1.1m, down by 14,665 on the same period last year, a decrease of just over 1%.
That’s not nearly enough to reach a halving within the decade, but Labour will hope that the reduction will accelerate once their new officers are in place.
VERDICT: Not time for flashing lights just yet, but progress is more “foot patrol” than “high-speed chase” so far
Build 1.5m new homes
One of Labour’s most ambitious policies was the pledge that they would build a total of 1.5m new homes in England during this parliament.
There has not yet been any new official data published on new houses since Labour came to power, but we can use alternative figures to give us a sense of how it’s going so far.
A new Energy Performance Certificate is granted each time a new home is built – so tends to closely match the official house-building figures – and we have data up to March for those.
Those numbers suggest that there have actually been fewer new properties added recently than in any year since 2015-16.
Labour still have four years to deliver on this pledge, but each year they are behind means they need to up the rate more in future years.
If the 200,000 new EPCs in the year to March 2025 matches the number of new homes they have delivered in their first year, Labour will need to add an average of 325,000 per year for the rest of their time in power to achieve their goal.
VERDICT: Struggling to lay solid foundations
Clean power by 2030
Another of the more ambitious pledges, Labour’s aim is for the UK to produce 95% of its energy from renewable sources by 2030.
They started strong. The ban on new onshore wind turbines was lifted within their first few days of government, and they delivered support for 131 new renewable energy projects in the most recent funding round in September.
But – understandably – it takes time for those new wind farms, solar farms and tidal plants to be built and start contributing to the grid.
In the year leading up to Starmer’s election as leader, 54% of the energy on the UK grid had been produced by renewable sources in the UK.
That has risen very slightly in the year since then, to 55%, with a rise in solar and biomass offsetting a slight fall in wind generation.
The start of this year has been unusually lacking in wind, and this analysis does not take variations in weather into account. The government target will adjust for that, but they are yet to define exactly how.
VERDICT: Not all up in smoke, but consistent effort is required before it’s all sunshine and windmills
Fastest economic growth in the G7
Labour’s plan to pay for the improvements they want to make in all the public services we have talked about above can be summarised in one word: “growth”.
The aim is for the UK’s GDP – the financial value of all the goods and services produced in the country – to grow faster than any other in the G7 group of advanced economies.
Since Labour have been in power, the economy has grown faster than European rivals Italy, France and Germany, as well as Japan, but has lagged behind the US and Canada.
The UK did grow fastest in the most recent quarter we have data for, however, from the start of the year to the end of March.
VERDICT: Good to be ahead of other similar European economies, but still a way to go to overtake the North Americans
No tax rises
Without economic growth, it will be difficult to keep to one of Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ biggest promises – that there will be no more tax rises or borrowing for the duration of her government’s term.
Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said last month that she is a “gnat’s whisker” away from being forced to do that at the autumn budget, looking at the state of the economy at the moment.
That whisker will have been shaved even closer by the cost implications of the government’s failure to get its full welfare reform bill through parliament earlier this week.
And income tax thresholds are currently frozen until April 2028, meaning there is already a “stealth” hike scheduled for all of us every year.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:03
One year of Keir: A review of Starmer’s first 12 months in office
But the news from the last financial year was slightly better than expected. Total tax receipts for the year ending March 2025 were 35% of GDP.
That’s lower than the previous four years, and what was projected after Jeremy Hunt’s final Conservative budget, but higher than any of the 50 years before that.
The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) still projects it to rise in future years though, to a higher level than the post-WWII peak of 37.2%.
The OBR – a non-departmental public body that provides independent analysis of the public finances – has also said in the past few days that it is re-examining its methodology, because it has been too optimistic with its forecasts in the past.
If the OBR’s review leads to a more negative view of where the economy is going, Rachel Reeves could be forced to break her promise to keep the budget deficit from spiralling out of control.
VERDICT: It’s going to be difficult for the Chancellor to keep to her promise
OVERALL VERDICT: Investment and attention towards things like violent crime, the NHS and clean energy are yet to start bearing fruit, with only minuscule shifts in the right direction for each, but the government is confident that what’s happened so far is part of its plans.
Labour always said that the house-building target would be achieved with a big surge towards the back end of their term, but they won’t be encouraged by the numbers actually dropping in their first few months.
Where they are failing most dramatically, however, appears to be in reducing the number of migrants making the dangerous Channel crossing on small boats.
The economic news, particularly that rise in disposable income, looks more healthy at the moment. But with inflation still high and growth lagging behind some of our G7 rivals, that could soon start to turn.
The Data and Forensics team is a multi-skilled unit dedicated to providing transparent journalism from Sky News. We gather, analyse and visualise data to tell data-driven stories. We combine traditional reporting skills with advanced analysis of satellite images, social media and other open source information. Through multimedia storytelling we aim to better explain the world while also showing how our journalism is done.
Trending
-
Sports3 years ago
‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year ago
Story injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years ago
Game 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years ago
MLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years ago
Japan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports2 years ago
Button battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years ago
Game-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike