Keir Starmer’s first 100 days in office: The verdict is in, and it isn’t good

Published

7 months ago

October 12, 2024

admin

Sir Keir Starmer will mark his first 100 days in office this Sunday. When his press spokesperson was asked ahead of the big day if the prime minister thought it had been a successful start, he simply said: “It’s up to the public to decide that.”

The verdict is in, and it isn’t good: Sir Keir’s approval poll ratings last week fell to -33 – a drop of 44 points since his post-election high, while one poll put Labour just one point ahead of the Tories.

A poll out this weekend by YouGov finds nearly half of those who voted Labour in the last general election feel let down so far, while six in 10 disapprove of the government’s record so far, against one in six who approve of the Starmer government.

Sir Keir will no doubt say it’s not about the first 100 days, it’s about the “next decade of national renewal”. And perhaps he has a point. How can you foretell the fortunes of a political leader from 100 days?

Read the latest political news and analysis in the Politics Hub

The great late Alistair Cooke in one of his Letter from America dispatches said making a big deal out of the first 100 days was a “foolish custom”.

And in some ways he is right. For a start, how can anyone measure up to the leader this mythic yardstick was used for, Franklin D Roosevelt? He pushed through a record number of laws in his first 100 days in office as he sought to pull America out of the clutches of the Great Depression and confront a national crisis.

Nothing like it has been seen before or since. You can understand why the vainglorious Donald Trump dismissed the 100 days notion as a “ridiculous standard” (while simultaneously caring ever so much and setting up a website dedicated to his first 100 days).

Putting FDR aside, there are reasons why the first 100 days are a useful yardstick. It sets the tone of a premiership and tells us something about a leader’s momentum.

In these early weeks, fresh from an election victory, a prime minister is at the height of their popularity and political capital.

The first 100 days then can be seen as a staging post in which we can take stock and ask whether a leader has met the moment or fallen short.

100 days Sir Keir might want to forget

For Sir Keir it’s been 100 days he might in many ways want to forget. By pretty much any measure, it’s been a disappointing start. From opinion polls to party management to the operation of No 10, Sir Keir has been in difficulty.

That a prime minister felt compelled to overhaul his top team and replace his chief of staff Sue Gray on the eve of his 100-day anniversary says it all.

Instead of using the first 100 days marker to shout about all the things this Labour government has done, the prime minister has triggered a reset of his government.

The fresh start promised in the election campaign has given way to a false start after his No 10 operation became paralysed by infighting, his personal ratings plummeted after rows over freebies and his government got so lost in itself it forgot to tell the story of change and show that story to the public.

An ‘incredibly frustrating’ start

It has been, admits one senior government figure, an “incredibly frustrating” period in which the work of government has been drowned out by the mess around Downing Street power struggles and rows over concert tickets, spectacles and suits.

“A lot of Starmer’s early decisions have been designed to deliver on the manifesto promises and the economy. We have pushed through renters reform, making work pay, we are setting up GB Energy and pushing through planning reform,” says another senior figure.

“A lot of what we have done is to get things going on that path to deliver for the people. It’s the worst thing for everyone and every member of cabinet not to be talking about the change the country elected us for.

“We have taken a bit of a hit [over freebies] but I think it’s fixable because it’s optics rather than wasting taxpayer’s money. It’s more about a country that wants to see the PM lead on issues they care about – the cost of living, the NHS, the economy – and when they don’t see that, it’s frustrating.”

‘What poor conditions the country is in’

It has also been, admit No 10 and No 11 insiders, much more difficult than they anticipated.

Be it the race riots that ripped through our cities shortly after Labour was elected, to the crisis of prison places or the problems of immediate funding shortfalls the chancellor says she’s identified, the new administration has been beset by challenges.

“It’s been very clear this first 100 days what poor conditions the country’s in,” says one senior government figure.

Overlay that with the crisis in the Middle East and the ongoing Ukraine war, and this is a prime minister and new team with a very full plate indeed.

But what has also been clear these first 100 days is what poor condition the prime minister’s operation is in.

The prime minister has taken a huge gamble

You may not know the characters behind the big black door of No 10, or what they do, but what will be obvious to you is that having to overhaul the operation within the first three months of government because it has become dysfunctional, toxic and not fit for purpose, doesn’t bode well.

Because it raises a very acute question: if a prime minister can’t run Downing Street, how the hell is he going to run the country?

That Sir Keir moved to clean up his No 10 operation last week was a defining moment for his first term in office.

By moving out Sue Gray as his chief of staff – the most powerful unelected figure in government – and replacing her with his trusted ally and key political aide Morgan McSweeney, the prime minister has taken a huge gamble.

That’s because he’s swapped out an experienced Whitehall operator with over 30 years of experience in government with a political strategist who is the brains behind the election victory. But the big unknown is whether Mr McSweeney can run the government like he ran the election.

Has McSweeney got the experience to run the government?

The whole point of bringing Ms Gray into the No 10 operation is because she understood the machinery of government and how to pull the levers of Whitehall to get things done.

Mr McSweeney might be a brilliant political operator but has he got the experience to actually run government? Sir Keir presumably in the past concluded he had not, which is why he hired Ms Gray.

Friends of Ms Gray tell me she thought Sir Keir needed to pad out the team who ran his office as leader of the opposition with more big beasts now he was running the government.

They say she pushed to bring in new people who she thought had the necessary experience – the reason Sir Keir didn’t have a principal private secretary, a crucial mandarin for any prime minister, until Ms Gray was removed was because she and others were locked in a turf war over it.

You know the tensions that ensued as Ms Gray went to war with advisors – over their job titles, their access to the prime minister, their salaries, their readiness for government – because she became the subject of endless briefings.

The more Ms Gray was in the press, the more untenable she knew her position would become with a prime minister running out of patience.

Sir Keir did move and moved decisively. But that his operation got so toxic, and that some on his team kept up the briefing wars despite him absolutely hating it, doesn’t bode well for the prime minister: it speaks to dysfunction in his operation – and it is rarely one individual from which that dysfunction flows.

Starmer would probably like to start again

The prime minister can at least take comfort from the fact much of the criticism a leader faces in the first 100 days doesn’t have to define the success of a leader.

👉 Click here to follow Politics at Jack and Sam’s wherever you get your podcasts 👈

President Bill Clinton got off to a shaky start in his first term and went on to become the second Democrat president since Roosevelt to win a second term.

But if, as one of Sir Keir’s allies tells me, “every day in government matters”, then you also have to conclude Sir Keir’s first 100 days have been a horrible waste as the prime minister scrambled to set the agenda and keep his own house in order.

He is a prime minister who would probably like to forget his first 100 days entirely and start again.

There will be an investment summit on Monday and the budget later this month. The goal of this government is to “be boring” and get back to the business of governing.

The next election is a long way off, Sir Keir has a big majority and a massive megaphone.

He can perhaps afford to write off these first three months if he gets the next few right. But after one false start, he can’t afford another.

Politics

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

Published

16 mins 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

3 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

6 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