Labour must explain fuzzy policy detail to get conference out of donation row’s shadow

Published

7 months ago

September 23, 2024

admin

Arguably, there’s a much much bigger problem for Sir Keir Starmer at the Labour conference than the freebies, the briefings and the incessant chatter about an absent chief of staff.

As you go round the Liverpool conference centre, ask Labour MPs and members of the cabinet what they want to be talking about today.

What do they want the country to hear during the next four days – the most important moment they have to communicate with voters since the general election itself?

Politics live: ‘Britain is back’, claims Lammy

It is the responses to this – and the lack thereof – that is privately unnerving so many on the conference centre floor.

But first, you get the grumbling.

One source told me Sir Keir is irritated that his family has been dragged into the media as part of this ruckus – despite the prime minister’s wife’s conscious choice to attend London fashion week after the furore about donations for clothes emerged.

Some put the leader’s failure to appear at a Saturday evening National Executive Committee (NEC) down to this grumpiness, though party sources deny this.

But it is noticeable his unyielding stubbornness in interviews – saying stopping him going to the football would be a step “too far” would suggest he does not see a problem in his approach.

It is increasingly easy to find Labour figures railing about “disproportionate” focus in the media on donors and gifts and freebies as new stories arrive hourly.

Yet, they have come unprepared to answer questions; cabinet teams still making up contradictory answers on the fly.

On Sunday morning, Education Secretary Bridget Philipson said taking donations from Lord Alli was fine because the birthday party he funded was a work event.

An hour later and Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner is saying that taking donations in kind – namely the New York apartment – is fine because the holiday was a private event.

How do we reconcile both? And everyone is grumpy.

Party figures are also cross because they are being surprised by events.

Sky News understands the Labour Party’s donors department was unaware of some of the freebies being handed directly to Labour MPs – they knew about the ones handed to the central party, but have not been across the full scale and detail of donations handed to individuals.

This has meant a lack of central intelligence on the critical issue of conference and meant they have been surprised by stories those thrown up by the Westminster Accounts database and the weekend papers about freebies. Not the backdrop they wanted.

And all of this is making the relationship between the Labour family and the fourth estate more corrosive.

It has been interesting to watch in recent days parts the party turning against the media – a trend unlikely to help ease Labour’s communications challenges in the months ahead.

The growing hostility is visible on social media, but it exists in person in Liverpool too.

However, if you press members of this government on what they would prefer the conversation to be – beyond freebies and power tussles – the answer is much more fuzzy.

Ministers and advisors will all tell you this conference is about communicating hope, telling the country that things aren’t so gloomy.

They talk about a house on a hill – a metaphor likely to be expanded on later in the week.

And of course there’s a desire to blame the Tories.

There’s promise of detail too, more specifics to come, starting in Chancellor Rachel Reeves’s speech on Monday, then Sir Keir’s on Tuesday, but we’re almost halfway through the conference and they haven’t come through yet.

Somehow they are struggling to communicate how they are changing the country – a problem that risks undermining so much of their agenda if they can’t get this fixed.

Take the announcements this weekend. Today’s policy was “planning passports” for brownfield sites, yet one cabinet minister admitted to me they couldn’t explain it.

The party literature says it changes the presumption so that proposals that meet certain design and quality standards will be automatically approved.

But if this can’t be communicated, and people can’t explain why this measure – amongst many – is critical to the planning reform project, will anyone notice?

Then there’s another big policy announcement from the deputy prime minister today – the investment zones for the West Midlands and West Yorkshire.

Ms Rayner said she would “move forward” with those zones in her speech, but study the words closely.

She omitted to say what a casual observer might have thought – that these zones aren’t new as they build on investment zones announced last year in the same areas by the then Tory Chancellor Jeremy Hunt.

Asked what the difference is, I was told that the Labour ones “will go further”, building from existing investment zones “but tied in to Labour’s new Local Growth Plans”.

Can incremental reform really shake up and excite the conference and the country beyond?

Labour is promising massive change to the country, but if it is struggling to explain what it is doing and why, will it be able to bring the party and voters along with it?

And if they can’t explain why they are doing what they are doing, can we be really sure they know where they are going?

Politics

America’s crypto renaissance is already failing; but we can fix it

Published

2 hours ago

May 5, 2025

admin

America’s crypto renaissance is already failing; but we can fix it

Opinion by: Shane Molidor, Founder, Forgd

For years, launching a crypto project in the United States has been a maze of uncertainty. Legal ambiguity and a hostile regulatory environment have driven founders offshore, turning places like Switzerland and the Cayman Islands into global hubs for blockchain innovation.

With Trump’s election, things finally started to change, with a US administration openly declaring its intention to be crypto-friendly. Yet, despite the rhetoric, nothing concrete has changed so far.

Launching a crypto project in the US is just as difficult as ever. US regulatory agencies continue to offer nothing but vague threats and “regulation by enforcement” lawsuits. America wants to be a leader in crypto, but, even under the Trump administration, it isn’t taking action to create the conditions that would make that happen.

Killing crypto in America

Every crypto project faces the same fundamental problem: Achieving decentralization is critical to avoid regulatory scrutiny, but until a project launches its token, a degree of centralization is unavoidable.

The SEC’s outdated Howey test ensures that nearly every legitimate crypto project gets classified as a security. The logic is self-defeating. Projects can’t decentralize without launching a token, but launching a token in the US instantly puts them in the SEC’s crosshairs.

This isn’t just a theoretical issue; it has real consequences. Liquidity providers, essential for all new token launches, won’t engage with US-based projects because they assume their tokens will be classified as securities. Centralized exchanges refuse to list tokens issued from US entities for the same reason. Even decentralized exchanges face pressure from their legal teams to avoid actively seeding liquidity for American projects. The result? US founders are boxed out of the global crypto economy before they even get started.

Offshore jurisdictions are winning

This regulatory failure has spawned an entire cottage industry of offshore legal firms specializing in setting up token-issuing entities. With its FINMA no-action letter system, Switzerland has become a hotbed for crypto projects because it offers one of the few structured ways to get legal clarity on a token’s classification. The Cayman Islands and British Virgin Islands have also established themselves as crypto safe havens, providing flexible corporate structures that allow projects to operate with far less regulatory risk.

Recent: US Treasury wants to cut off Huione over ties to crypto crime

The absurdity is that the actual work — the development, the hiring, the innovation — still happens in the US. The token issuance gets pushed offshore via “Associations” and “Foundations,” which serve non-profits operating independently of US-based development shops. American founders are forced to funnel money into unnecessary legal fees, overseas operators, and shell foundations to avoid the inevitable crackdown from US regulators. This isn’t just bad for crypto; it’s bad for America. Until it can be solved, the US will continue to hemorrhage talent, investment, and influence to less myopic jurisdictions.

Make America crypto-friendly

The US has spent years fumbling crypto policy, and now, even with an administration that claims to be pro-crypto, it’s still failing to deliver real change. The solution isn’t to promise capital gains tax exemptions on crypto, as some have suggested. That does little to ameliorate the punishing regulatory landscape US-based projects are forced to navigate. If the US truly wants to lead in crypto, it also must take the lead in providing regulatory clarity.

That means finally recognizing that the same regulations that have governed traditional financial markets can’t always be applied to crypto. The Howey test doesn’t work. Instead, the government must provide a new and functional legal framework for the crypto industry.

It’s time for US legislators and regulators to acknowledge that crypto tokens can’t achieve decentralization instantaneously and almost always require the efforts of a team of core contributors to bootstrap initial growth and development. The federal government must devise a version of the Howey test that does not automatically classify every new crypto token as a security but instead allows tokens a grace period to decentralize. In conjunction with this, the US must establish new protections to ensure insiders aren’t unduly benefiting from crypto projects while they scale.

In addition to swiftly ending the “regulation by enforcement” approach employed under Gary Gensler’s SEC, a tactic seemingly designed to gradually smother crypto activity in the US, the government must provide clear guidelines. It needs to be feasible for market makers to evaluate whether US tokens are commodities or securities with a degree of stability and predictability. This is the only way to end the blanket bans market makers have placed on US tokens and bring crypto development back to America.

America’s window of opportunity is closing

Crypto founders aren’t waiting for Washington to figure it out. Every day, without clear regulations, more crypto projects are incorporated offshore. The US doesn’t even need to “embrace” crypto. It just needs to stop actively driving it away.

If this administration truly wants to make the US the leader in crypto, it needs to move beyond campaign slogans and start fixing the fundamental problems that forced this industry offshore in the first place. And it needs to act fast.

Opinion by: Shane Molidor, Founder, Forgd.

This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

Politics

Indonesia suspends WorldID over alleged registration violations

Published

5 hours ago

May 5, 2025

admin

Indonesia suspends WorldID over alleged registration violations

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman’s digital identity project World, formerly Worldcoin, is facing challenges in Indonesia amid local regulators temporarily suspending its registration certificates.

The Indonesian Ministry of Communications and Digital (Komdigi) has halted the Electronic System Operator Certificate Registration (TDPSE) for World and World ID over suspicious activity and alleged registration violations, the authority announced on May 4.

After the suspension, Komdigi plans to summon World’s local subsidiaries, PT Terang Bulan Abadi and PT Sandina Abadi Nusantara, to provide clarification on the alleged violations, it said.

According to a preliminary investigation, World’s PT Terang Bulan Abadi was allegedly operating without TDPSE, while PT Sandina Abadi Nusantara — the one World was using for providing its services — is allegedly involved in legal misrepresentation.

Indonesian law requires registration by all digital service providers

In the statement, Komdigi emphasized that all digital service providers in Indonesia must receive electronic registration in accordance with local laws.

Additionally, using another entity’s registration is considered a major breach of Indonesian digital operations law, the authority noted.

“Worldcoin services are recorded using TDPSE in the name of another legal entity, namely PT Sandina Abadi Nusantara,” Alexander Sabar, the Komdigi’s director general for digital supervision, said in the announcement, adding:

“Noncompliance with registration obligations and the use of the identity of another legal entity to carry out digital services is a serious violation.”

Community action required

According to Sabar, World’s temporary suspension in Indonesia is a measure taken to prevent potential risks to the community.

He mentioned that the digital ministry is committed to overseeing the digital ecosystem fairly and strictly to ensure the security of the national digital space.

A proper supervision would require active participation from the community, Sabar added, stating:

“We invite the public to help maintain a safe and trusted digital space for all citizens. Komdigi also appeals to the public to remain vigilant against unauthorized digital services, and to immediately report suspected violations through the official public complaint channel.”

In the meantime, the community has apparently been divided over action by Komdigi.

“Good job Indonesia — at least somebody is standing up to that scam,” one commentator wrote on Reddit.

Others fired back, hinting at potential benefits stemming from World’s offering in Indonesia for the general public.

“If giving up your iris biometrics means you can feed your loved ones for a few weeks, that might be a trade worth making. In the end, it all depends on what matters most to you,” another Redditor said.

World’s latest news from Indonesia follows World’s debut in the United States in May 2025, with the platform rolling out its digital identity tech in six cities initially.

A number of global regulators were pushing back on World’s operations since its launch in July 2023, with governments like Germany, Kenya and Brazil expressing concerns over potential risks to the security of biometric data passed by users.

Magazine: Crypto wanted to overthrow banks, now it’s becoming them in stablecoin fight

Politics

Donald Trump gives conflicting answers over memecoin profits

Published

8 hours ago

May 5, 2025

admin

Donald Trump gives conflicting answers over memecoin profits

US President Donald Trump gave clashing answers to whether he has profited from the crypto memecoin he launched in January, just days before he re-entered the White House.

In a wide-ranging interview with Kristen Welker on NBC News’ Meet the Press released on May 4, Trump said he was “not profiting from anything” when asked to respond to critics who said he’s profiting from the presidency through the memecoin.

“So you’re not profiting off of the cryptocurrency at all?” Welker asked Trump.

“I haven’t even looked,” Trump admitted.

“But I’ll tell you what. Look, if I own stock in something and I do a good job, and the stock market goes up, I guess I’m profiting.”

Trump launched his memecoin, Official Trump (TRUMP), on Jan. 17, which hit a peak of $73.43 two days later, just a day before he was inaugurated as president on Jan. 20, according to CoinGecko.

The token has been in a steady decline since launch, but it surged late last month after its website offered top holders a chance to dine with Trump on May 22. It’s currently trading at $11.35, down nearly 85% from its peak.

Trump was apparently unaware of his token’s recent surge, repeatedly asking how much it was now worth.

Two companies, CIC Digital LLC, an affiliate of Trump’s sprawling Trump Organization, and Fight Fight Fight LLC, which is co-owned by CIC Digital, together own 80% of the token’s total 1 billion supply.

Most of those tokens are locked up and will be released over the next three years. The first unlock on April 18 saw 40 million tokens, worth $454 million, go to CIC Digital.

Trump’s memecoin project has made at least $350 million so far, according to a March analysis from the Financial Times, which found those behind the token made $314 million from selling them and $36 million from fees.

Trump has been criticized over his many crypto dealings, which his opponents say are a conflict of interest as he looks to unburden the sector from regulators.

Even those in his own party, Republican Senators Cynthia Lummis and Lisa Murkowski, have criticized Trump’s dinner offer to his top tokenholders.

Trump said during the interview that he would contribute his presidential salary “back to the government,” prompting Welker to ask if he would also contribute any potential crypto earnings.

“I never thought of that,” Trump answered. “I mean, should I contribute all of my real estate that I’ve owned for many years if it goes up a little bit because I’m president and doing a good job? I don’t think so.”

Trump reiterates crypto commitment

In a part of the interview, Trump made a meandering statement that reiterated his campaign promise to support crypto.

“I want crypto. I think crypto’s important because if we don’t do it, China’s going to. And it’s new, it’s very popular, it’s very hot,” he said.

Trump claimed former President Joe Biden “went after it violently, and then, before the election, he changed his tune entirely” to garner the crypto vote. Biden did not run against Trump in the last election, instead handing the baton to then-Vice President Kamala Harris.

The president again made his point when speaking to reporters on the White House South Lawn on May 4.

CBS News’ Jennifer Jacobs reported on X that Trump said “crypto is very important,” and wanted “to keep it away from China.”

He claimed China “will take it over, just like AI, just like so many other industries, or whatever you want to call them.”

Magazine: Trump’s crypto ventures raise conflict of interest, insider trading questions