There was much excitement when, in April, the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, announced the launch of a new taskforce between the Treasury and the Bank of England to co-ordinate exploratory work on a potential central bank digital currency.
The currency was immediately nicknamed ‘Britcoin‘ although it is unlikely to take that name if or when it is eventually launched.
As part of the work, the Bank was asked to consult widely on the benefits, risks and practicalities of doing so.
That work is ongoing but, in the meantime, the Bank has published a discussion paper aiming to broaden the debate around new forms of digital money.
The issue is of huge importance to the Bank because its two main functions, as an institution, are to maintain both the monetary and financial stability in the UK. The rise of digital money has implications for both.
Advertisement
The Bank has already made clear that it is sceptical about cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin, which its governor, Andrew Bailey, has said “has no intrinsic value”.
Yet these currencies must be differentiated from a central bank digital currency.
More on Bank Of England
The concept of a central bank digital currency may be confusing to some but Sir Jon Cunliffe, the Bank’s deputy governor for financial stability, said it was actually quite straightforward.
Image: The Bank of England is responsible for UK monetary policy and financial stability
He told Sky News: “At the Bank of England, we issue banknotes, the notes that everybody holds in their pocket, but we don’t issue any money in digital form.
“So when you pay with a card or with your phone on a digital transaction, you’re actually using your bank account, you’re transferring money from your bank account to somebody else’s.
“A central bank digital currency, a digital pound, would actually be a claim on the Bank of England, issued by us, directly to the public.
“At the moment we only issue digital money to banks, we don’t issue to the general public, so it will be a digital pound – and it will be similar to some of the proposals being developed in the private sector.”
Sir Jon, who is co-chairing the taskforce with the Treasury’s Katharine Braddick, said that, while a central bank digital currency and a cryptocurrency like Bitcoin might use the same technology, there were big differences.
He went on: “[Central bank digital currencies] use the same technology but…they aim to have a stable value. They’re called stable coins and some of the technology companies, the big tech platforms, are just thinking about developing digital coins of that sort.
Image: The European Central Bank is exploring a similar digital currency for the euro area
“A central bank digital currency would be a digital coin, actually a digital note, issued by the Bank of England.”
Sir Jon said such currencies would have to the potential to bring down costs for businesses depending on how they were developed.
He added: “They do offer the potential to bring down cost. At the moment the average cost, I think, for a credit card transaction is about just over half a per cent, but of course if you’re a small tea room in Shoreham-on-Sea, you’re going to be paying more than that in some cases, well over 1% for that transaction.
“So it could be cheaper, it could be more convenient. These new forms of money offer the ability for them to be integrated more with other things through their software. So you can think of smart contracts, in which the money would be programmed to be released only when something happened. You could think, for example, of giving the children pocket money but programming the money so that it couldn’t be used for sweets.
“There’s a whole range of things that money could do – programmable money, as it’s called – which we can’t do with the current technology.
“Now whether there’s a market, whether there’s a demand for that, whether that’s something people want in their lives, I think is another question – but we need to stay at the forefront of thinking.
“We need to stay ahead of these issues because we’ve seen changes can happen really fast in the digital world – people didn’t think smartphones had much or a market when the iPhone was first introduced – and it’s important we keep abreast of those issues.”
He noted that, under one ‘illustrative scenario’ set out in the Bank’s discussion paper, the cost of credit could rise in the event of people withdrawing deposits from the banking sector and migrated to a form of digital money.
This is why the Bank is seeking, in this discussion paper, to establish the conditions under which people might prefer using new forms of digital money to existing forms, such as cash or ‘private money’ like bank deposits. But that is easier said than done.
Sir Jon added: “It’s very difficult to know what the demand for something like this will be. It could be quite small – people might just want to keep a small wallet of digital coins for use on the internet, or whatever, but it could be quite large.
“That’s one of the things we want to try and understand better and [that’s why] we want to get views on how it would operate.
Image: The value of cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin have fluctuated wildly since their conception
“It’s important to say, given that it’s so difficult to estimate whether something like this would take off, that, if it were introduced, I think one would have to be quite careful at the beginning – you wouldn’t want to be in a position where something became very popular and had impacts that you hadn’t foreseen.”
To that end, the Bank’s discussion paper also considers the potential risks posed to economic stability by new forms of digital money.
The deputy governor went on: “It’s really fundamental that people can trust the money they use every day in the economy, that they don’t have to think about ‘I’m holding one form of money rather than another form of money, is this one more safe than another?’
“So the regulation is going to have to make sure – and the Financial Policy Committee of the Bank of England made this really clear – that if you issue these new forms of money, the users have to have the same level of confidence and security that they have in the money that circulates in this country at the moment, either Bank of England cash or commercial bank money in the form of bank accounts.
“It’s really crucial that people trust the money they use – we’ve seen from history that when confidence in money breaks down, for whatever reason, the social cost is enormous.”
All of which explains that, while most analysts assume the Bank will ultimately launch its own digital currency, it is taking its time to assess what the impact may be.
It is also clearly giving much thought to how it explains to households and businesses why such a move may be necessary.
The government is preparing to sell the final publicly owned shares in NatWest Group on Friday, drawing a line under one of the world’s biggest bank bailouts after nearly 17 years.
Sky News understands that the Treasury is preparing to offload its remaining stake – which is down to roughly 0.1% – in the coming hours, with a public statement likely either later on Friday or on Monday morning.
Sources cautioned that the timings were still subject to change.
The final disposal of a stake which at one point represented more than 80% of NatWest’s share capital has been anticipated for weeks.
Last week, Sky News reported that British taxpayers were heading for a loss of just over £10bn on the 2008 rescue of NatWest, then known as Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), having pumped £45.5bn into the lender to prevent it – and the wider UK financial system – collapsing.
Confirmation of the sale of the Treasury’s final interest in NatWest will come almost 17 years after the then chancellor, Lord Darling, conducted what RBS’s boss at the time, Fred Goodwin, labelled “a drive-by shooting”.
Total proceeds from a government trading plan launched in 2021 to drip-feed NatWest stock into the market have so far reached about £13bn, with the final tally likely to be about £13.2bn.
More from Money
In addition, institutional share sales and direct buybacks by NatWest of government-held stock have yielded a further £11.5bn.
Dividend payments to the Treasury during its ownership have totalled £4.9bn, while fees and other payments have generated another £5.6bn.
In aggregate, that means total proceeds from NatWest since 2008 are expected to hit £35.3bn.
Under Rick Haythornthwaite and Paul Thwaite, now the bank’s chairman and chief executive respectively, NatWest is now focused on driving growth across its business.
It recently tabled an £11bn bid to buy Santander UK, according to the Financial Times, although no talks are ongoing.
Mr Thwaite replaced Dame Alison Rose, who left amid the crisis sparked by the debanking scandal involving Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader.
Sky News recently revealed that the bank and Mr Farage had reached an undisclosed settlement.
During the first five years of NatWest’s period in majority state ownership, the bank was run by Sir Stephen Hester, now the chairman of easyJet.
Sir Stephen stepped down amid tensions with the then chancellor, George Osborne, about how RBS – as it them was – should be run.
Lloyds Banking Group was also in partial state ownership for years, although taxpayers reaped a net gain of about £900m from that period.
Other lenders nationalised during the crisis included Bradford & Bingley, the bulk of which was sold to Santander UK, and Northern Rock, part of which was sold to Virgin Money – which in turn has been acquired by Nationwide.
A trade court in the US has blocked President Donald Trump from imposing sweeping global tariffs on imports.
The ruling from a three-judge panel at the Court of International Trade came after several lawsuits arguing Trump has exceeded his authority, left U.S. trade policy dependent on his whims and unleashed economic chaos.
“The Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariff Orders exceed any authority granted to the President by IEEPA to regulate importation by means of tariffs,” the court wrote, referring to the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
The White House is yet to respond.
The Trump administration is expected to appeal.
This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.
You probably recall the stories about Leicester’s clothing industry in recent years: grim labour conditions, pay below the minimum wage, “dark factories” serving the fast fashion sector. What is less well known is what happened next. In short, the industry has cratered.
In the wake of the recurrent scandals over “sweatshop” conditions in Leicester, the majority of major brands have now abandoned the city, triggering an implosion in production in the place that once boasted that it “clothed the world”.
And now Leicester faces a further existential double-threat: competition from Chinese companies like Shein and Temu, and the impending arrival of cheap imports from India, following the recent trade deal signed with the UK. Many worry it could spell an end for the city’s fashion business altogether.
Gauging the scale of the recent collapse is challenging because many of the textile and apparel factories in Leicester are small operations that can start up and shut down rapidly, but according to data provided to Sky News by SP&KO, a consultancy founded by fashion sector veterans Kathy O’Driscoll and Simon Platts, the number has fallen from 1,500 in 2017 to just 96 this year. This 94% collapse comes amid growing concerns that British clothes-making more broadly is facing an existential crisis.
Image: A trade fair tries to reignite enthusiasm for the local clothing industry
In an in-depth investigation carried out over recent months, Sky News has visited sites in the city shut down in the face of a collapse of demand. Thousands of fashion workers are understood to have lost their jobs. Many factories lie empty, their machines gathering dust.
The vast majority of high street and fast fashion brands that once sourced their clothes in Leicester have now shifted their supply chains to North Africa and South Asia.
And a new report from UKFT – Britain’s fashion and textiles lobby group – has found that a staggering 95% of clothes companies have either trimmed or completely eliminated clothes manufacturing in the UK. Some 58% of brands, by turnover, now have an explicit policy not to source clothes from the UK.
Image: Seamstresses in one of the city’s former factories
Image: Clothing industry workers in Leicester
Jenny Holloway, chair of the Apparel & Textile Manufacturers Association, said: “We know of factories that were asked to become a potential supplier [to high street brands], got so far down the line, invested on sampling, invested time and money, policies, and then it’s like: ‘oh, sorry, we can’t use you, because Leicester is embargoed.'”
Tejas Shah, a third-generation manufacturer whose family company Shahtex used to make materials for Marks & Spencer, said: “I’ve spoken to brands in the past who, if I moved my factory 15 miles north into Loughborough, would be happy to work with me. But because I have an LE1, LE4 postcode, they don’t want to work for me.”
Image: Shahtex in Leicester used to make materials for Marks & Spencer
Image: Tejas Shah, of Leicester-based firm Shahtex
Threat of Chinese brands Shein and Temu
That pain has been exacerbated by a new phenomenon: the rise of Chinese fast fashion brands Shein and Temu.
They offer consumers ultra-cheap clothes and goods, made in Chinese factories and flown direct to UK households. And, thanks to a customs loophole known as “de minimis”, those goods don’t even incur tariffs when they arrive in the country.
Image: An online advert for Chinese fast fashion company Shein
According to Satvir Singh, who runs Our Fashion, one of the last remaining knitwear producers in the city, this threat could prove the final straw for Leicester’s garments sector.
“It is having an impact on our production – and I think the whole retail sector, at least for clothing, are feeling that pinch.”
Image: Inside one of the city’s remaining clothesmakers
While Donald Trump has threatened to abolish the loophole in the US, the UK has only announced a review with no timeline.
“If we look at what Trump’s done, he’s just thinking more about his local economy because he can see the long-term effects,” said Mr Singh. “I think [abolishing de minimis exceptions] will make a huge difference. I think ultimately it’s about a level playing field.”
A spokesperson for Temu told Sky News: “We welcome UK manufacturers and businesses to explore a low-cost way to grow with us. By the end of 2025, we expect half our UK sales to come from local sellers and local warehouses.”