UK House of Lords backs mandatory digital asset strategy over Labour position

cointelegraphОпубліковано о 2026-09-10Востаннє оновлено о 2026-09-10

Анотація

The UK House of Lords has passed an amendment mandating the government to formulate a comprehensive digital asset strategy, despite opposition from the ruling Labour party. The amendment, added to the Financial Services and Markets Bill, requires the Treasury to develop, publish, and consult on a strategy covering cryptoassets, stablecoins, and tokenized securities within 12 months of the bill becoming law. The strategy must address innovation, consumer protection, and firms' access to financial services. While the Labour government argued it already has a strategy in place, proponents of the amendment believe a statutory framework is necessary to build a cohesive digital asset economy. The bill now returns to the House of Commons for further consideration of the Lords' changes.

The UK House of Lords backed an amendment requiring the government to develop a digital asset strategy, in a 194–138 vote on Wednesday, despite the Labour government’s opposition to the measure.

The amendment was added to the Financial Services and Markets Bill during its Report Stage on Wednesday. The bill is progressing through Parliament and would make broader changes to the UK’s financial services regulatory framework.

Amendment 88, introduced by Conservative peer Baroness Neville-Rolfe, would require the Treasury to prepare, publish and consult on a digital asset strategy within 12 months of the Financial Services and Markets Bill becoming law.

The strategy would cover cryptoassets, stablecoins and tokenized securities, while addressing issues including innovation, consumer protection and firms’ access to banking, payment and settlement services.

The vote follows months of debate over the UK’s approach to digital assets. During a July debate, Treasury’s Minister for Investment, Lord Stockwood, pushed back on calls for a statutory framework, saying the government believed it already had a digital asset strategy and was executing it.

The ruling Labour party opposed the amendment because they believed it did not adequately address the rapid development of digital assets and the need for a cohesive regulatory framework.

The UK Cryptoasset Business Council, which said it worked with lawmakers on the amendment, welcomed the vote on Thursday, highlighting Lord Chris Holmes’ question of whether the UK is “simply regulating digital assets” or “building a digital assets economy.”

The bill must still return to the House of Commons, where lawmakers can accept, amend or reject the Lords’ changes.

Magazine: 10 of the greatest unsolved crypto mysteries

Пов'язані питання

QWhat did the UK House of Lords vote to require the government to do?

AThe UK House of Lords voted to require the government to develop, publish, and consult on a digital asset strategy within 12 months of the Financial Services and Markets Bill becoming law.

QWho introduced Amendment 88 to the Financial Services and Markets Bill?

AAmendment 88 was introduced by Conservative peer Baroness Neville-Rolfe.

QWhy did the ruling Labour party oppose the amendment?

AThe ruling Labour party opposed the amendment because they believed it did not adequately address the rapid development of digital assets and the need for a cohesive regulatory framework.

QWhat areas must the proposed digital asset strategy cover according to the amendment?

AThe strategy would cover cryptoassets, stablecoins, and tokenized securities, addressing issues including innovation, consumer protection, and firms' access to banking, payment, and settlement services.

QWhat is the next step for the Financial Services and Markets Bill after the House of Lords vote?

AThe bill must return to the House of Commons, where lawmakers can accept, amend, or reject the changes made by the House of Lords.

Пов'язані матеріали

Fed Governor Bowman: No Urgent Need to Raise Interest Rates, Can Watch Economic Trends

Federal Reserve Governor and Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman stated that the Federal Reserve is in no immediate hurry to raise interest rates further. Speaking at the International Institute of Finance annual membership summit in Bangkok on October 14, Bowman emphasized the need to take time to assess the impact of the September rate hike and observe how economic and financial conditions evolve before making further policy decisions. While acknowledging inflation remains above target, she stressed a comprehensive, data-dependent approach. Her comments align with recent cautious tones from several Fed officials but highlight an ongoing internal debate. Other officials, including New York Fed President John Williams and Boston Fed President Susan Collins, have indicated openness to one more rate hike this year to combat persistent inflation. Market expectations now lean toward the Fed holding steady at its upcoming meeting, with future policy moves heavily dependent on incoming inflation data, particularly the upcoming September CPI report. Beyond monetary policy, Bowman addressed financial regulation. She critiqued some post-2008 crisis rules for pushing activity outside the formal banking system and called for a "comprehensive reorganization" of the Fed's internal supervisory structure following the Silicon Valley Bank collapse. On technology, she expressed concern about cybersecurity risks from advanced AI models and the capital demands of data center expansion, while also acknowledging the importance of allowing banks to innovate and exploring AI's potential applications in areas like fraud detection.

marsbit18 хв тому

Fed Governor Bowman: No Urgent Need to Raise Interest Rates, Can Watch Economic Trends

marsbit18 хв тому

The Scene From 1999 Is Repeating Itself

The article draws a stark parallel between the current U.S. stock market and the period leading up to the 2000 dot-com crash. While the S&P 500 hovers near record highs, this strength is deceptive. Beneath the surface, 60% of its components are already in a technical bear market. The index is being propped up almost entirely by the "Magnificent Seven" tech giants, reminiscent of the narrow leadership seen in 1999. Prominent figures like Paul Tudor Jones of Tudor Investment are issuing strong warnings, comparing the present market structure to 1999 and predicting 2027 could be the worst year for stocks since 2002, citing massive upcoming equity supply from IPOs (e.g., Anthropic, OpenAI) and lock-up expirations. Analysts from Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and BTIG echo concerns about extreme concentration and deteriorating market breadth. Key risks identified include an over-reliance on a few AI-related stocks for index returns and earnings growth, signs of peaking profit cycles, and a potential shift in market leadership from semiconductors to software. The upcoming earnings season for cloud giants, particularly their capital expenditure guidance, is seen as a critical near-term catalyst. Furthermore, rising bond yields (10-year Treasury above 5%) and soaring corporate debt issuance costs add to the pressure. The summary concludes by noting a profound disconnect: despite a 16-fold total return in the S&P 500 since 2009, consumer sentiment is at near-record lows, highlighting the unequal distribution of gains and rising cost-of-living pressures—a social tension that mirrors the speculative excesses of the late 1990s.

marsbit25 хв тому

The Scene From 1999 Is Repeating Itself

marsbit25 хв тому

Торгівля

Спот
活动图片