Main Edition
US
FR
March 1, 2023 - 6:00pm
A central bank digital currency (CBDC) in the UK is “likely to be needed,” the Bank of England’s Deputy Governor for financial stability has claimed. During a Treasury select committee hearing this week, Sir Jon Cunliffe was asked to rank the likelihood of a digital pound coming to the UK on a scale of one to 10. The Deputy Governor answered that it was “more than five” before later saying that his “private” view was 7 “and maybe higher”.
“The difficulty is if we just wait until it’s 9 out of 10, then we are five years away at least,” he said. “This would be a very serious thing that would be resilient, fraud-proof and secure. If we just wait until we say ‘okay, now we think it’s needed’, we will be five years behind.” Cunliffe added that the Bank of England currently does not have the technical skills to create a CBDC, but he “hoped” to develop them in the next phase.
When probed about why the UK needed a digital pound, the Deputy Governor asserted that it was the wrong question to ask: “If you do a static thing like ‘what is it that I can’t do now that I know I want to do – what hole in the current landscape would it fill?’ I don’t think you get to an answer for having a CBDC now,” he replied. Instead, the CBDC offered a “new frontier” in payments that would be comparable to when the iPhone first launched:
Cunliffe admitted that he did not know how a CBDC would reduce fraud, promising to “look into it” during the next phase. He then told MPs that a CBDC would be different from cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin because it was a digital bank note with “all the security that it provides rather than a speculative asset”.
Further concerns were raised over what limits a CBDC would impose on individual freedom. “The bank will have the power to peer into people’s transactions and the currency will be programmable,” said Danny Kruger MP, “meaning that people could be influenced or coerced into making certain payments and not other sorts.” Kruger cited the case of the Canadian truckers, who blockaded Ottawa in protest at the Government’s Covid-19 restrictions. In response, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau invoked emergency powers and froze the bank accounts of those participating in the convoy. Cunliffe was asked if something similar could happen in the UK, to which he responded that it was for Parliament to “set the constraints in which that happens”:
This week the Bank of England began its second phase in CBDC research. This is expected to take around two to three years, after which it will decide on whether to proceed to the next stage. The Bank has suggested that ‘Britcoin’ could feasibly be ready by 2030.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeAnd so it happens ….. be very afraid of a cashless society.
”A central bank digital currency (CBDC) in the UK is “likely to be needed”, ‘‘*
*”(If we are to create a 1984 system and enslave the people)”
”the Bank of England’s Deputy Governor for financial stability has claimed”
”A central bank digital currency (CBDC) in the UK is “likely to be needed”, ‘‘*
*”(If we are to create a 1984 system and enslave the people)”
”the Bank of England’s Deputy Governor for financial stability has claimed”
And so it happens ….. be very afraid of a cashless society.
So the BoE can’t explain why it’s needed, doesn’t know how it could be used, and would be totally reliant on third parties with their own agenda to develop it. But if a digital currency perfectly suited to starving political dissidents into submission is in fact used to starve political dissidents into submission “that’s nothing to do with me guv”. He just built the nuclear bomb, he had no idea the government would use it. The only comfort is, if the BoE had been responsible for the development of the iPhone, it would be massively over budget, and still on the drawing board.
So the BoE can’t explain why it’s needed, doesn’t know how it could be used, and would be totally reliant on third parties with their own agenda to develop it. But if a digital currency perfectly suited to starving political dissidents into submission is in fact used to starve political dissidents into submission “that’s nothing to do with me guv”. He just built the nuclear bomb, he had no idea the government would use it. The only comfort is, if the BoE had been responsible for the development of the iPhone, it would be massively over budget, and still on the drawing board.
I’m uncertain about this technology. No doubts there are plenty of benefits, but the temptation for government to tweak and nudge spending behaviour by way of programming will always be there. Perhaps a well documented health policy of a weekly cigarette allowance that will save so many lives? Once that box is opened it cannot be closed again.
There are no benefits! They make you Feudal serfs by it – they own you.
Revelations 13:16
‘‘15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.
16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.”
There are no benefits! They make you Feudal serfs by it – they own you.
Revelations 13:16
‘‘15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.
16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.”
I’m uncertain about this technology. No doubts there are plenty of benefits, but the temptation for government to tweak and nudge spending behaviour by way of programming will always be there. Perhaps a well documented health policy of a weekly cigarette allowance that will save so many lives? Once that box is opened it cannot be closed again.
Not speculative so it’s value will be sterling and guaranteed by the Government. Next question will it be a bearer entitlement, know the number and you can spend it, forget the number and lose it forever. If not then it has nothing to do with crypto currencies. At best it is a variant on digital accounts, at worse it will have flaws that can be exploited.
I do find not knowing what it is for scary. What chance is there of avoiding unintended consequences?
Not speculative so it’s value will be sterling and guaranteed by the Government. Next question will it be a bearer entitlement, know the number and you can spend it, forget the number and lose it forever. If not then it has nothing to do with crypto currencies. At best it is a variant on digital accounts, at worse it will have flaws that can be exploited.
I do find not knowing what it is for scary. What chance is there of avoiding unintended consequences?
Cunliffe doesn’t actually seem to understand much about this at all ! He doesn’t know why/if it is needed – but thinks it should be done anyway. He denies that the Bank of England would have any responsibility for it – in other words that the BofE should have no regulatory role.
The most alarming thing here is his offer “to look into it” (whether it would reduce fraud). Given his evident lack of understanding of the subject and, indeed, the correct role of the BofE, I would suggest he’s the last man we need “looking into it”.
Written all through this is the arrogance of an organisation that spends other peoples’ money. They want the prestige of doing this sort of thing. But absolutely none of the responsibility.
To be quite clear, I am not arguing here against central bank digital currencies in general. They *might* have some net benefits to offer if well implemented. My concern here is that this is currently not the man – or the organisation – to undertake such a project. I doubt we have politicians up to the job of doing this well either.
The fact that they estimate it would take a further 7 years to implement only underscores the lack of competence of the current crew for me.
There are no benefits, except to those who want to monitor and control us.
Money should not be “programmable”. It shouldn’t come with strings attached.
Current reliance on digital payments is dangerous enough (what happens in the event of power failure, hacking or EMP attack?).
The end of cash is the end of freedom.
But there is no fundamental reason why digital currency should mean the end of cash. That is a question of how the system is designed and regulated.
Your argument is rather like saying – as a friend of mine does – that biometric checking at airports must be bad. The reality is that there are both benefits and risks. Some people will value the benefits over the risks – individual judgements will vary.
But there is no fundamental reason why digital currency should mean the end of cash. That is a question of how the system is designed and regulated.
Your argument is rather like saying – as a friend of mine does – that biometric checking at airports must be bad. The reality is that there are both benefits and risks. Some people will value the benefits over the risks – individual judgements will vary.
There are no benefits, except to those who want to monitor and control us.
Money should not be “programmable”. It shouldn’t come with strings attached.
Current reliance on digital payments is dangerous enough (what happens in the event of power failure, hacking or EMP attack?).
The end of cash is the end of freedom.
Cunliffe doesn’t actually seem to understand much about this at all ! He doesn’t know why/if it is needed – but thinks it should be done anyway. He denies that the Bank of England would have any responsibility for it – in other words that the BofE should have no regulatory role.
The most alarming thing here is his offer “to look into it” (whether it would reduce fraud). Given his evident lack of understanding of the subject and, indeed, the correct role of the BofE, I would suggest he’s the last man we need “looking into it”.
Written all through this is the arrogance of an organisation that spends other peoples’ money. They want the prestige of doing this sort of thing. But absolutely none of the responsibility.
To be quite clear, I am not arguing here against central bank digital currencies in general. They *might* have some net benefits to offer if well implemented. My concern here is that this is currently not the man – or the organisation – to undertake such a project. I doubt we have politicians up to the job of doing this well either.
The fact that they estimate it would take a further 7 years to implement only underscores the lack of competence of the current crew for me.
The F_ing Lizards! They will win as we let them do it..;….
The F_ing Lizards! They will win as we let them do it..;….
Financial stability? He can’t even do that job. The private B of E had one job to do since 1694 – keep inflation at 2%. They failed because boom and bust proved so beneficial to the private bankers who refer to it as ‘fleecing the flock’. IBM and Barclays are already trailing CBDCs. Bring back the Bradbury Pound (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iV8LFW2HuSI&t=8s) or at the very least local currencies which we’re trialing in our town.
Absolutely. This cannot be said enough. Thye persistently failed to do their main job. No one ever apologised or resigned for the failure.
It is an organisation with very little credibility.
Also check Andrew Bailey’s pitiable record running the FCA. Talk about rewards for failure.
Absolutely. This cannot be said enough. Thye persistently failed to do their main job. No one ever apologised or resigned for the failure.
It is an organisation with very little credibility.
Also check Andrew Bailey’s pitiable record running the FCA. Talk about rewards for failure.
Financial stability? He can’t even do that job. The private B of E had one job to do since 1694 – keep inflation at 2%. They failed because boom and bust proved so beneficial to the private bankers who refer to it as ‘fleecing the flock’. IBM and Barclays are already trailing CBDCs. Bring back the Bradbury Pound (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iV8LFW2HuSI&t=8s) or at the very least local currencies which we’re trialing in our town.
We need it, but I don’t know why. Great argument.
It keeps the state machine employed. Any subject requiring government intervention is based on that one premise.
It keeps the state machine employed. Any subject requiring government intervention is based on that one premise.
We need it, but I don’t know why. Great argument.
Get out whilst you can. I’m thinking Central America.
Sounds like a peaceful life, no conflicts or anything going on there.
Sounds like a peaceful life, no conflicts or anything going on there.
Get out whilst you can. I’m thinking Central America.
will it be called a Groat?
Not until about 1 year after it’s introduction.
Not until about 1 year after it’s introduction.
will it be called a Groat?
Who’s going to be culpable when it all goes pear shaped which inevitably it will
Who’s going to be culpable when it all goes pear shaped which inevitably it will
Very good post
Thanks