Nigel Farage calls for more NatWest resignations – as data privacy watchdog writes to banks

Published

2 years ago

July 27, 2023

admin

Bank bosses have made a commitment to free speech, according to the government, in the wake of the Nigel Farage de-banking row that claimed the scalp of NatWest chief executive Dame Alison Rose.

On Wednesday afternoon the Information Commissioner’s Office announced it has written to banks to remind them of their “responsibility to the public”.

“Banks should not be holding inaccurate information, they should not be using information in a way that is unduly unexpected, and they should not be holding any more information than is necessary,” the Information Commissioner John Edwards said.

Dame Alison’s four-year tenure as chief executive ended in ignominy last night following her admission that she had discussed Mr Farage’s bank details with a BBC journalist, suggesting too that his account at the bank’s Coutts division had been closed only for commercial, rather than any political, reasons.

“Any suggestion that this trust has been betrayed will be concerning for a bank’s customers, and for regulators like myself,” Mr Edwards said.

Number 10 said Dame Alison had “done the right thing” by resigning and confirmed she was no longer a member of the prime minister’s business council. She has also left two roles she had with the department for energy after the secretary of state asked her to step down from both positions.

Treasury minister Andrew Griffith met 19 bank bosses for a summit on Wednesday to discuss concerns other figures, not just Mr Farage, were being denied access to banking due to their politics or perceived beliefs.

Mr Griffith said afterwards: “It’s not the job of banks to tell us what to think, or what political party we should support.

“The government’s been extremely clear on this, in a democracy that relies upon freedom of expression… that is not a legitimate thing for a bank to remove someone’s access to a bank account.”

A readout of the meeting’s conclusions suggested the industry had agreed to work with government and regulators on the implementation of new rules aimed at strengthening protections on account terminations or access to accounts.

“Attendees from the sector acknowledged that recent events had impacted upon public trust for the whole sector and expressed their clear commitment to government policy on account closure and to act quickly to restore confidence,” the document said.

Mr Farage told Sky News “the whole board needs to go” at NatWest following the resignation of Dame Alison.

The former Brexit campaigner said Sir Howard Davies, chairman of the NatWest Group, had continued to endorse Dame Alison even after it emerged she was the person who had leaked to the BBC.

Sky’s City editor Mark Kleinman suggested it was unlikely Sir Howard would follow her out of the bank despite intense pressure on his own position, saying it could even be prolonged beyond his planned departure next year given the search for Dame Alison’s successor and the need for stability at the top of the bank.

“The first rule of banking is you have to obey client confidentiality. So they have made a complete and utter mess of this,” Mr Farage said, adding he had not decided whether he will seek compensation and the row over his account closure has “absorbed my life for many months”.

He said a subject access request from the NatWest Group revealed his account was “commercially viable” and its closure was a “political decision”.

The former UKIP leader also said he hadn’t been able to open another bank account and claimed he has been turned down by 10 banks.

Mr Farage also claimed he has been “approached by literally thousands of people all over this country that have been unfairly closed down by NatWest”.

NatWest’s shares were down by 4% following the news of Dame Alison’s resignation and were leading the fallers on the FTSE 100.

Mr Griffith earlier tweeted it is “right that the NatWest CEO has resigned”.

He added: “This would never have happened if NatWest had not taken it upon itself to withdraw a bank account due to someone’s lawful political views. That was and is always unacceptable.”

NatWest chairman says resignation is a ‘sad moment’

Sir Howard said earlier the board and Dame Alison agreed by “mutual consent” that she would step down from her role.

He said it was a “sad moment” and that Dame Alison has “dedicated all her working life so far to NatWest”.

In a statement, Dame Alison said: “I remain immensely proud of the progress the bank has made in supporting people, families and business across the UK, and building the foundations for sustainable growth.

“My NatWest colleagues are central to that success, and so I would like to personally thank them for all that they have done.”

The resignation was expected in the wake of briefings by Downing Street that she had lost the confidence of the prime minister and chancellor

Their concerns were echoed by Mr Farage, who accused the management of Coutts bank – which is owned by NatWest – of a “serious breach” and called Dame Alison’s position “totally untenable”.

The story first came to light when the BBC inaccurately reported Mr Farage’s account was closed as he did not meet Coutts’s financial thresholds.

Documents obtained by Mr Farage subsequently showed his political beliefs and connections formed part of the rationale.

Mr Farage told Sky News he has written to Peter Flavell, head of NatWest’s Coutts unit, “three times” since his account was closed and had not even had the “courtesy of an acknowledgement”.

Dame Alison had said she believed it was public knowledge Mr Farage was a customer of private bank Coutts and had been offered a NatWest account, and so confirmed these details to BBC business editor Simon Jack.

She later called her actions a “serious error of judgement” but reiterated the bank saw the account closure as a commercial decision and she was not part of the decision-making process.

On Monday, the BBC apologised for the report, following earlier apologies from both Coutts and Dame Alison.

Paul Thwaite, the current chief executive of the company’s commercial and institutional business, was announced as an interim chief executive, for an initial period of 12 months, pending regulatory approval.

The board said a process to appoint a permanent successor will take place in due course.

Politics

Trump blasts ‘too late’ Powell for not cutting interest rates

Published

4 hours ago

April 17, 2025

admin

Trump blasts ‘too late’ Powell for not cutting interest rates

US President Donald Trump renewed his criticism of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, accusing him of being too slow to cut interest rates and escalating a long-running conflict that risks undermining the central bank’s political independence.

With the European Central Bank (ECB) cutting interest rates again on April 17, “Too Late” Powell has failed to act appropriately in the United States, even with inflation falling, Trump said on Truth Social on April 17.

“Powell’s termination cannot come fast enough!” Trump said.

Florida Senator Rick Scott agreed with the president, saying, “it’s time for new leadership at the Federal Reserve.”

Trump’s public criticism of the Fed breaks a decades-long convention in American politics that sought to safeguard the central bank from political scrutiny, which includes any executive decision to replace the chair.

In an April 16 address at the Economic Club of Chicago, Powell said Fed independence is “a matter of law.” Powell previously signaled his intent to serve out the remainder of his tenure, which expires in May 2026.

Crypto, risk assets look to the Fed for guidance

The Federal Reserve wields significant influence over financial markets, with its monetary policy decisions affecting US dollar liquidity and shaping investor sentiment.

Since the COVID-19 pandemic, crypto markets have increasingly come under the Fed’s sphere of influence due to the rising correlation between dollar liquidity and asset prices.

This was further corroborated by a 2024 academic paper written by Kingston University of London professors Jinsha Zhao and J Miao, which concluded that liquidity conditions now account for more than 65% of Bitcoin’s (BTC) price movements.

As inflation moderates and market turmoil intensifies amid the trade war, Fed officials are facing mounting pressure to cut interest rates. However, Powell has reiterated the central bank’s wait-and-see approach as officials evaluate the potential impact of tariffs.

The Fed is expected to maintain its wait-and-see policy approach at its next meeting in May, with Fed Fund futures prices implying a less than 10% chance of a rate cut. However, rate cut bets have increased to more than 65% for the Fed’s June policy meeting.

Politics

Wyoming commission floats whether stablecoin is ‘covered’ by SEC rules

Published

5 hours ago

April 17, 2025

admin

<div>Wyoming commission floats whether stablecoin is 'covered' by SEC rules</div>

The Wyoming Stable Token Commission, a body authorized by the US state to issue a stablecoin, has suggested that it may clarify its language to better comply with potential guidelines from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

In an April 17 meeting in the extension of the Wyoming Capitol building, Commissioner Joel Revill suggested the body could reduce the risk of the state’s proposed WYST stablecoin qualifying as a security under SEC rules. The discussion among the commissioners and Executive Director Anthony Apollo followed the SEC issuing guidelines that certain “covered stablecoins” were considered” non-securities” and largely not subject to reporting requirements.

Government, SEC, Wyoming, Stablecoin — *Wyoming Stable Token Commission Executive Director Anthony Apollo with Senator Cynthia Lummis. Source:* *LinkedIn*

“We’re looking to kind of create our own vernacular around some of this, to clarify, and then use that as a jumping off point of discussion for the commission,” said Apollo, adding there were internal discussions regarding the SEC guidance but the commission was scheduled to address the matter in a May memo.

The commission, established after Wyoming passed a law to issue a state-issued stablecoin pegged to the US dollar and redeemable for fiat currency, has been exploring issues surrounding WYST. Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon said in August that the government initially planned a launch in the first quarter of 2025 for the stablecoin, later amending the timeline to potentially launch in July.

Looking to the US Congress for guidance

The commission said it would be monitoring efforts by the federal government to establish a regulatory framework for stablecoins. Among the proposed legislation was the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins, or GENIUS Act, in the Senate, and the Stablecoin Transparency and Accountability for a Better Ledger Economy, or STABLE Act, in the House of Representatives.

Though Wyoming is the least populated US state, with roughly 600,000 people, it has become home to some crypto firms likely seeking a regulatory-friendly jurisdiction. Custodia Bank, the digital asset bank established by Caitlin Long, is based in Cheyenne. US Senator Cynthia Lummis, who often advocates for crypto-friendly policies, represents Wyoming in the Senate.

Magazine: Riskiest, most ‘addictive’ crypto game of 2025, PIXEL goes multi-game: Web3 Gamer

Politics

How Meta’s antitrust case could dampen AI development

Published

9 hours ago

April 17, 2025

admin

How Meta’s antitrust case could dampen AI development

Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Messenger, is facing antitrust proceedings that could limit its ability to develop AI amid a field of competitors.

First filed in 2021, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) alleges that Meta’s strategy of absorbing firms — rather than competing with them — violates antitrust laws. If the court rules against Meta, it could be forced to spin out its various messenger services and social media sites into independent companies.

The loss of its stable of social media companies could harm Facebook’s competitiveness not only in the social media industry but also in its ability to train and develop its proprietary Llama AI models with data from those sites.

The trial could take anywhere from a couple of months to a year, but the outcome will have lasting consequences on Meta’s standing in the AI race.

Meta’s antitrust case and its effect on AI

The FTC first opened its complaint against Meta in 2020 when the firm was still operating as Facebook. The agency’s amended complaint a year later alleges that Meta (then Facebook) used an illegal “buy-or-bury” scheme on more creative competitors after its “failed attempts to develop innovative mobile features for its network.” This resulted in a monopoly of the “friends and family” social media market.

Meta founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg had the chance to address these allegations on April 14, the first day of the official FTC v. Meta trial. He testified that only 20% of user content on Facebook and some 10% on Instagram was generated by users’ friends. The nature of social media has changed, Zuckerberg claimed.

“People just kept on engaging with more and more stuff that wasn’t what their friends were doing,” he said — meaning that the nature of Meta’s social media holdings was sufficiently diverse.

At the time of the FTC’s initial complaint, Meta called the allegations “revisionist history,” a claim it repeated on April 13 when it stated the agency was “ignoring reality.” The company has argued that the purchases of Instagram and WhatsApp have benefited users and that competition has appeared in the form of YouTube and TikTok.

If the District of Columbia Circuit Court rules against Meta, the global social media giant will be forced to unwind these services into independent firms. Jasmine Enberg, vice president and principal analyst at eMarketer, told the Los Angeles Times that such a ruling could cost Meta its competitive edge in the social media market.

“Instagram really is its biggest growth driver, in the sense that it has been picking up the slack for Facebook for a long time, especially on the user front when it comes to young people,” said Enberg. “Facebook hasn’t been where the cool college kids hang out for a long time.”

Such a ruling would also affect the pool of data from which Meta can draw to train its AI models. In July 2024, Meta halted the rollout of AI models in the European Union, citing “regulatory uncertainty.”

The pause came after privacy advocacy group None of Your Business filed complaints in 11 European countries against Meta’s use of public data from its platforms to train its AI models. The Irish Data Protection Commission subsequently ordered a pause on the practice until it could conduct a review.

On April 14, Meta got the go-ahead to use public data — i.e., posts and comments from adult users across all of its platforms — to train the model. If these firms dissolved into separate companies, with their own organizational structures and data protection policies and practices, Meta would be cut off from an ocean of data and human communication with which its AI could be improved.

Andrew Rossow, a cyberspace attorney with Minc Law and CEO of AR Media Consulting, told Cointelegraph that in such an event, “companies would most likely control their own user data, and Meta would be restricted from using it unless new data-sharing agreements were negotiated, which would be subject to regulatory scrutiny and user/consumer privacy laws.”

However, Rossow noted that it wouldn’t be a total loss for Meta. Zuckerberg’s firm would retain the wealth of data from Facebook and Messenger. It could continue to use “opt-in” data from consumers who allow their posts to be used for AI training, and it could also employ synthetic data sets as well as third-party and open data.

Meta, the AI race and data protections

The race to unseat OpenAI and its ChatGPT model from AI dominance has grown more competitive in the last year as DeepSeek joined the fray and Meta launched the fourth iteration of its open-source Llama model.

In addition to training new models, major AI development firms are investing billions in new data centers to accommodate new iterations. In January 2025, Meta announced the construction of a 2-gigawatt data center with more than 1.3 million Nvidia AI graphics processing units.

Zuckerberg wrote in a post on Threads, “This will be a defining year for AI. In 2025, I expect Meta AI will be the leading assistant serving more than 1 billion people […] To power this, Meta is building a 2GW+ datacenter that is so large it would cover a significant part of Manhattan.”

His announcement followed the $500-billion Stargate project, which would see massive investment in AI development led by OpenAI and SoftBank, with Microsoft and Oracle as equity partners.

Amid this competition, AI firms are looking for broader and more varied sources of data to train their AI models — and have turned to dubious practices in order to get the data they need. In order to stay competitive with OpenAI when developing its Llama 3 model, Meta harvested thousands of pirated books from the site LibGen. According to court documents in a case pending against Meta, Llama developers harvested data from pirated books because licensing them from sources like Scribd seemed “unreasonably expensive.”

Time was another perceived motivator for using pirated works. “They take like 4+ weeks to deliver data,” one engineer wrote about services through which they could purchase book licenses.

The practice is not limited to Meta. OpenAI has also been accused of mining data from pirated work hosted on LibGen.

Rossow suggested that, “to ensure lasting impact — beyond short-term profit,” Meta would do well to “prioritize investment in advanced data collection, rigorous auditing and the implementation of privacy-preserving and encryption-based technologies.”

By focusing on transparency and responsible practices, “Meta can continue to genuinely advance AI capabilities, rebuild and nurture long-term user trust, and adapt to evolving legal and ethical standards, regardless of changes to its platform portfolio.”

What a ruling for the FTC would mean

Litigation is now hitting tech firms from all sides as they face allegations of privacy violations, copyright law infringement and stifling competition. Major cases like those facing Google, Amazon and Meta that have yet to play out will decide how and whether these firms can proceed as they have, defining the guardrails for AI development as well.

Rossow said that the current antitrust case against Meta could decide how courts interpret antitrust law for tech firms, spanning tech mergers, data usage and market competition. It would also signal that courts are “willing to break up tech conglomerates” when issues of smothering competition are involved, while at the same time, “taking current precedent a step further in harmonizing it with the laws of cyberspace.”

Magazine: Memecoin degeneracy is funding groundbreaking anti-aging research