MPs are set to hold another debate on a ceasefire in Gaza after the SNP said it would take up the Speaker’s offer following last week’s chaotic scenes in parliament.
It comes after Sir Lindsay Hoyle faced a backlash last week for breaching convention by allowing a vote on a Labour amendment to an SNP opposition motion calling for an immediate halt to the fighting.
His move was interpreted by critics as an “overtly political decision” designed to help Sir Keir Starmer fend off a rebellion from his own backbenchers, and there were angry scenes as both SNP and Conservative MPs stormed out of the Commons chamber in protest.
Sir Lindsay denied the claims and insisted the safety of MPs was the main reason for his move.
But he apologised twice and offered to grant an emergency debate on a fresh ceasefire motion in acknowledgement that MPs never got a chance to vote on the SNP’s amendment amid the chaos.
The party’s wording last week called for the release of all hostages held by Hamas, but also accused Israel of the war crime of “collective punishment” of the Palestinian people – which Labour’s amendment did not do.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:08
What happened in the House of Commons?
On Sunday the SNP’s Westminster leader Stephen Flynn confirmed he would take up the debate offer and table a motion this week that will press the Commons to back “concrete actions” to achieve an end to the fighting via pressure at the United Nations.
He said: “More than 29,000 Palestinian children, women and men have been killed, huge swathes of Gaza have been obliterated, and the population faces a worsening humanitarian crisis.
“The SNP will seek to refocus the discussion away from the Westminster circus and on to what really matters – doing everything we can to actually secure an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and Israel.”
Advertisement
Mr Flynn added: “While the appalling spectacle at Westminster has been deeply unedifying, some progress has been made. Public and SNP pressure has forced the next prime minister, Sir Keir Starmer, into a U-turn – now we need to work together to force the UK government to change its position too.”
The SNP said it would publish details of its new motion following discussions with the Speaker on the terms of the debate.
However, it is not clear what the format of the debate will be and if the SNP will be allowed to force a vote.
Sir Lindsay’s offer on Thursday came under the Standing Order 24 rule of the Commons – which grants an emergency debate for MPs to “consider” a topic – which may not be enough to satisfy the party.
More than 70 MPs have signed a no confidence motion in Sir Lindsay following last week’s scenes.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:11
Speaker sorry over ceasefire vote
Critics of the Speaker included Mr Flynn, who said last week that his position was “untenable” and said he “no longer retains the confidence of SNP MPs”.
Meanwhile a fresh debate on the issue could renew and heighten divisions within Labour over its stance on the war.
Labour’s amendment last week called for an “immediate humanitarian ceasefire” but avoided accusing Israel of war crimes.
Israel has faced growing criticism of its actions in Gaza and there are fears over civilian causalities if it launches a ground offensive in the southern Gazan city of Rafah, where around 1.4 million Palestinians have sought refuge.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:15
Gaza: Moment crowds flee as gunfire heard
More than 29,000 Palestinians have died, according to the Hamas-run healthy ministry in the region, since Israel launched its latest military action in Gaza last year.
It came following Hamas’s attack on 7 October, in which around 1,200 people were killed, including more than 800 civilians, according to Israeli officials.
The elections watchdog has criticised the government for offering to consider delaying 63 local council elections next year – as five authorities confirmed to Sky News that they would ask for a postponement.
On Thursday, hours before parliament began its Christmas recess, the government revealed that councils were being sent a letter asking if they thought elections should be delayed in their areas due to challenges around delivering local government reorganisation plans.
The chief executive of the Electoral Commission, Vijay Rangarajan, hit out at the announcement on Friday, saying he was “concerned” that some elections could be postponed, with some having already been deferred from 2025.
“We are disappointed by both the timing and substance of the statement. Scheduled elections should, as a rule, go ahead as planned, and only be postponed in exceptional circumstances,” he said in a statement.
“Decisions on any postponements will not be taken until mid-January, less than three months before the scheduled May 2026 elections are due to begin.
“This uncertainty is unprecedented and will not help campaigners and administrators who need time to prepare for their important roles.”
Mr Rangarajan added: “We very much recognise the pressures on local government, but these late changes do not help administrators. Parties and candidates have already been preparing for some time, and will be understandably concerned.”
He said “capacity constraints” were not a “legitimate reason for delaying long planned elections”, which risked “affecting the legitimacy of local decision-making and damaging public confidence”.
The watchdog chief also said there was “a clear conflict of interest in asking existing councils to decide how long it will be before they are answerable to voters”.
Four mayoral elections due to take place in May 2026 set to be postponed
Sky News contacted the 63 councils that have been sent the letter about potentially delaying their elections.
At the time of publication, 17 authorities had replied with their decisions, while 33 said they would make up their minds before the government’s deadline of 15 January.
Many councils told Sky News they were surprised at yesterday’s announcement, saying that they had been fully intending to hold their polls as scheduled.
They said they were now working to understand the appropriate democratic mechanism for deciding whether to request a postponement of elections. Some local authorities believe it should be a decision made by their full council, while others will leave it up to council leaders or cabinet members to decide.
Multiple councils also emphasised in statements to Sky News that the ultimate decision to delay elections lay with the government.
X
This content is provided by X, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable X cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to X cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow X cookies for this session only.
Reform UK has threatened legal action against ministers, accusing Labour and the Tories of “colluding” to postpone elections in order to lock other parties out of power – a sentiment echoed by Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey.
But shadow local government secretary Sir James Cleverly told Sky News this morning that the Conservative Party “wants these elections to go ahead”. Sky News understands that the national party is making that position clear to local leaders.
A spokesperson for the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government, said it was taking a “locally-led approach”, and emphasised that “councils are in the best position to judge the impact of postponements on their area”.
They added: “These are exceptional circumstances where councils have told us they’re struggling to prepare for resource-intensive elections to councils that will shortly be abolished, while also reorganising into more efficient authorities that can better serve local residents.
“There is a clear precedent for postponing local elections where local government reorganisation is in progress, as happened in 2019 and 2022.”
The five councils that confirmed they would be seeking postponements were:
Blackburn with Darwen Council (Labour);
Chorley Borough Council (Labour);
East Sussex County Council (Conservative minority);
Hastings Borough Council (Green minority);
West Sussex County Council (Conservative).
The councils in Chorley, and East and West Sussex, had decided prior to Thursday’s government announcement that they would request a delay.
Can the Conservatives make ground at the local elections in 2026?
An East Sussex County Council spokesperson told Sky News: “It is welcome that the government is listening to local leaders and has heard the case for focussing our resources on delivery in East Sussex, particularly with devolution and reorganisation of local government, as well as delivering services to residents, such high priorities.”
They also pointed to the cost of electing councillors for a term of just one year, and argued that it would be “more prudent for just one set of elections to be held in 2027”.
West Sussex County Council echoed those reasons and said it would cost taxpayers across the county £9m to hold elections in 2026, 2027, and 2028, as currently planned.
Chorley and Blackburn councils also cited the cost of delivering elections, and said they would prefer that money be spent on delivering the local government reorganisation and delivering services to local residents.
Meanwhile, 12 councils confirmed to Sky News that they would not be requesting delays:
Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council (Liberal Democrat-Independents);
Broxbourne Borough Council (Conservative);
Colchester City Council (Labour-Liberal Democrat);
Eastleigh Borough Council (Liberal Democrat);
Essex County Council (Conservative);
Hart District Council (Liberal Democrat-Community Campaign);
Hastings Borough Council (Green minority);
Isle of Wight Council (no overall control);
Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council (Conservative);
Portsmouth City Council (Liberal Democrat minority);
Keonne Rodriguez, who pleaded guilty to one felony count related to his role at Samourai Wallet, is calling on US President Donald Trump to pardon him, citing similar language that has been successful in previous pardon applications.
In a Thursday X post, Rodriguez said he would report to prison on Friday, where he will serve a five-year sentence for operating an illegal money transmitter. The Samourai co-founder claimed there were no “victims” to his crime, and blamed his incarceration on “lawfare perpetrated by a weaponized Biden DOJ.”
In a message tagging Trump, Rodriguez expressed hope that the US president would issue a federal pardon for him and William “Bill” Lonergan Hill, another Samourai executive who pleaded guilty and was sentenced to four years. Rodriguez blamed “activist judges” for his legal troubles, claiming he was targeted by a “political anti-innovation agenda.”
“I maintain hope that [Trump] is a fair man, a man of the people, who will see this prosecution for what it was: an anti innovation, anti american, attack on the rights and liberties of free people,” said Rodriguez. “I believe his team […] and others truly want to end the weaponization of the DOJ that the previous administration wielded so effectively […] I believe he will continue to wield that power for good and pardon me and Bill.”
Rodriguez’s public plea followed Trump’s statement that he would “take a look” at a pardon for the Samourai co-founder, claiming that he had no knowledge of the case. It’s unclear whether Rodriguez filed an official application for a pardon or is relying on public statements to get the president’s attention.
Other crypto execs successfully lobbied for a Trump pardon
One of Trump’s first acts as president in January was to issue a pardon for Silk Road founder Ross Ulbricht, who had been serving a life sentence for his role in creating and operating the darknet marketplace.
Former Binance CEO Changpeng “CZ” Zhao, who pleaded guilty to one felony in 2023 related to the exchange’s Anti-Money Laundering program, served four months in prison but also received a pardon from the president. Trump later said he “[knew] nothing about” Zhao when asked about the pardon in a November interview.
Rodriguez’s language addressing Trump mirrored comments from the White House on previous pardons. For example, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said it was a “weaponization of justice from the previous administration” when the president commuted the sentence of David Gentile, who was convicted of defrauding “thousands of individual investors in a $1.6 billion” scheme in 2024.
Crypto users on Polymarket were not given the choice of betting on the odds of a Trump pardon of Rodriguez as of Friday. At the time of publication, Trump ally Steve Bannon had the highest odds, at 9%.
The United Kingdom is taking a decisive step toward fully regulating its crypto market. This week, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) launched a wide-ranging consultation outlining proposed rules for crypto exchanges, staking services, lending platforms and decentralized finance.
The proposals follow new secondary legislation from the UK Treasury that formally brings crypto activities into the country’s financial services framework, with a target implementation date of Oct. 25, 2027.
In this week’s episode of Byte-Sized Insight, Cointelegraph explored what this consultation signals for the UK crypto market and how industry leaders are interpreting the regulator’s direction. We spoke with Perry Scott, head of UK policy at Kraken and chair of the UK Cryptoasset Business Council, to break down what’s new and what’s at stake.
From fragmented oversight to full market structure
Until now, the UK’s approach to crypto regulation has been piecemeal. Companies have operated under anti-money laundering rules and strict financial promotion requirements, but there has been no unified framework governing how crypto markets should function.
Scott described the moment as long anticipated.
“Christmas has come early for policy nerds like me,” he said, pointing to the scale of the proposals, which span “around 700 pages to sink our teeth into.”
More importantly, the consultation comes with a firm timeline. “Mark your calendars because the firing gun has been fired,” Scott said, referring to the 2027 go-live date, which gives a signal that the industry is moving from waiting to preparing.
At the core of the consultation is market structure, particularly how exchanges are regulated and how they access liquidity. Scott welcomed the FCA’s recognition that crypto markets are inherently global, saying that “accessing global liquidity will support better execution outcomes for consumers.”
The UK is also carving out a distinct approach to staking. Earlier this year, it became one of the first major jurisdictions to separate staking from traditional financial services rules. Under the consultation, staking would be governed by bespoke requirements, a move Scott called “world leading.”
The consultation is open until Feb. 12, and companies are already adjusting.
“UK firms aren’t going to sit around and wait,” Scott said.
He said regulatory certainty could create “hundreds, if not thousands of jobs” across compliance, legal and technical roles.
As the UK positions itself between the EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) regime and renewed regulatory momentum in the US, the outcome of this process could determine whether it emerges as a competitive crypto hub or struggles to keep pace.
To hear the complete conversation on Byte-Sized Insight, listen to the full episode on Cointelegraph’s Podcasts page, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And remember to check out Cointelegraph’s full lineup of other shows!