The idea that shops in the UK could be required to accept cash has sparked a diverse response across the political and media spectrum (see table below)—but one thing is clear: this isn’t just about protecting vulnerable people, though that in itself is reason enough.

It’s about ensuring that everyone retains the right to choose how they pay—whether with coins, cards, or a mobile tap. That choice is not a luxury. It’s a cornerstone of economic fairness.

But beyond fairness lies something far more strategic and which has been discussed in this blog before: resilience.

Photo by Alexander Grey on Unsplash

Over the past decade, the fragility of digital infrastructure has been laid bare again and again. As The Banker recently noted, digital payments, while convenient and dominant, are not invulnerable. From cyberattacks to grid failures, natural disasters to telco outages, the systems we increasingly rely on are not immune to shocks.

We’ve seen this globally:

• In Canada, the Rogers telecom blackout paralysed card payments for millions—fuel stations and supermarkets turned people away unless they had cash.
• In Sweden, IT outages forced supermarkets to go temporarily cash-only—a wake-up call in one of the world’s most digitised economies. The central bank has also been public on the need to keep some form of cash infrastructure.
• In Mexico, after Hurricane Otis, the central bank activated “Plan Billetes” and airlifted currency to re-enable commerce in Acapulco.
• Even here in the UK, the TSB IT meltdown left thousands unable to access their funds for days.

Cash, in every one of these cases, was the analogue safety net. When the digital failed, cash didn’t.

In Parliament, the Treasury Select Committee has called on ministers to consider a legal obligation for shops to accept cash. This isn’t radical—it’s rational. As The Times and The Guardian have pointed out, nearly three-quarters of the British public support such a move. Yet government ministers, including then Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, remain opposed, arguing that businesses should be free to refuse physical money if they choose.

That’s the wrong way to frame it.

This isn’t about resisting innovation. It’s about designing a payments system that can withstand shocks, not just when things go right, but especially when they go wrong. Rationalising the cash system makes sense. Forcing it into extinction? That’s not a cashless utopia. That’s a digital dystopia.

If we want a future-proof economy—fair, inclusive, and resilient—then preserving the ability to pay with cash isn’t optional. It’s essential.

Source / Stakeholder	Position on Mandating Cash	Rationale	Notes / Key Quotes
The Times	Supportive/Concerned	Warns against sleepwalking into a cashless society; highlights resilience and inclusion	“Risky to rely only on digital infrastructure”
The Guardian	Supportive	Emphasises impact on budgeting, especially during cost-of-living crisis	“71% of UK adults support making cash acceptance mandatory”
The Scottish Sun	Neutral/Opposed	Reports on government’s support for business discretion	Focuses on practicality for businesses
The Herald	Mixed	Experts in favour; others defend business freedom	“Cash is still vital for rural and older communities”
Treasury Select Committee	In favour	Cites social exclusion and system resilience	Calls for government to explore legal requirement
UK Government (Treasury, PM)	Opposed	Prefers to focus on access to cash, not mandating its use	“We’re not going to tell shops how to run their business”
Campaigners (e.g., PCA)	Strongly in favour	Sees cash refusal as discriminatory and economically exclusionary	“It’s a matter of rights, not just preferences”
Retailers & Business Groups	Mixed/Opposed	Want operational flexibility; cite cost and security of handling cash	“Digital payments are more efficient”
Public Opinion (YouGov)	In favour	71% support mandatory acceptance of cash	Rising concern about digital exclusion