Government passes crypto-currency bill after ‘pappy-show’ debate

Diego Martin East MP Colm Imbert challenges government's measures in the Virtual Assets and Virtual Assets Service Providers Bill, 2025 in Parliament on November 21. - Photos by Faith Ayoung

Debate on the government’s proposed bill to regulate the crypto-currency industry descended into a farce as procedural manoeuvres prevented the discussion of more than 200 proposed amendments which were given to the opposition minutes before the debate began in Parliament on November 21.

The Virtual Assets and Virtual Assets Service Providers Bill, 2025 was first brought before the Parliament in September by Finance Minister Davendranath Tancoo.

After the bill’s first reading, Tancoo along with Attorney General John Jeremie, Central Bank governor Larry Howai and crypto industry stakeholders met and discussed the legislation.

They came up with the proposed amendments, but the opposition was only presented with it moments before the debate began.

As Tancoo began referring to the amendments in the debate, former finance minister Colm Imbert called on Speaker Jagdeo Singh to intervene as he noted the amendments had not yet been brought before the house.

“All of those clauses do not exist in the bill. The amendments have not been dealt with in the committee stage. The minister cannot refer to clauses that do not exist.”

This, however, led to absurd scenes as neither the government nor opposition could properly debate the bill since they could not refer to the proposed amendments.

Imbert, whose objection led to the situation, maintained it was the government’s fault for not giving the opposition the amendments in advance.

He described the move as a “contempt” of the Parliament and “offensive assault on the principles and practices of this Parliament.”

“The list of amendments we were given four minutes before the resumption take up a total of 48 pages, and contain within them more than 200 substantive modifications to the original bill.

“What that does to this bill is that it destroys it and consigns it to the bin. It makes this debate a pappy-show.”

He said the proposed amendments fundamentally changed the structure, intent, and effect of the legislation.

“The government had two months and they did nothing with respect to informing the opposition about these copious avalanche of amendments. It is complete disrespect and contempt for parliamentary process.

Diego Martin East MP Colm Imbert challenges government's measures in the Virtual Assets and Virtual Assets Service Providers Bill, 2025 in Parliament on November 21. - Photos by Faith Ayoung

The bill is necessary as TT prepares for a fifth round of mutual evaluation by Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (C-FATF) with on-site assessment in March 2026.

Imbert said the opposition agrees that there is a need for crypto-currency to be regulated given its prevalence in white-collar crime.

“But it is impossible for us on this side to meaningfully look at 200 brand new amendments which change the structure of the bill, the debate and the conversation. These are highly complex modifications.”

Jeremie meanwhile defended the government’s actions and claimed they were being vilified for consulting stakeholders.

“We are moving expeditiously, carefully and thoughtfully to ensure compliant with FATF recommendations while at the same time doing as little damage to the humans operating in this jurisdiction to the greatest extent possible.”

He said Imbert was bashing the UNC for addressing an issue the PNM failed to fix while in government.

“They put their hands up and surrendered. That was their position… So we had no choice but to move forward and to do so with expedition.”

He said the UNC chose to meet with stakeholders to minimise the disruption to the industry.

“We put our cards on the table and said, ‘Compliance is a necessity. At the same time we want to accommodate you as much as possible, if it can be done.”

Jeremie added the government “will not apologise for “listening to people.”

“We chose to engage in discussion with real humans who are affected. Insofar as they bring problems to us, it is our duty as legislators to listen and to listen without the arrogance that came to define (the PNM).”

He said the legislation, which needs to be passed before 2026, was vital to ensure the banking and trade sectors are not negatively affected.

“We introduced it in an effort to meet a deadline (the PNM) ran away from. The legislation is here this afternoon and we will amend it to take into account the views of persons who said they will be hurt.

“Our government will never say to persons in society, ‘Yuh ent riot yet.’”

However, Diego Martin West MP Hans DesVignes said the bill remains flawed.

“The bill in its original form has errors that continue, with or without the amendments.”

He described the bill as draconian, anti-innovation and constitutionally questionable.

“I know there are concessions but there are some things that are not corrections.”

He said the opposition supports regulation for the crypto currency industry but added it must be sensible and proportionate.

“The minister has papered over the cracks, but the foundation does not change. It still risks criminalising enterprise and stifling young entrepreneurs, trampling property rights and driving away the innovators that this country needs.”

The amendments were discussed in the committee stage before the bill was eventually passed by a vote of 25-11.