I don't know why the now temporarily(?) unresigned chairman needs to worry about looking for Diamond's successor; Hector Sants cleared his desk at FSA last week, so surely he's free, isn't he? Or maybe they've dropped that one because they can't afford him...
-
-
I have no thoughts on that one ahinton. I am though instinctively against O'Donnell, a recently retired senior administrator who when required to be neutral fought the Government hard on aspects of the Freedom of Information legislation.Originally posted by ahinton View Post
Peston this morning says of Diamond : "He maintains that he didn't know what was going on......he feels he was hounded out."
My view is that the establishment is extremely resistant to losing one of its ultimate get-out clauses: "hear no evil, see no evil". There is an inherent contradiction in wanting to manage without accepting full responsibility and needing to show that there is the information, ability and motivation to clean up all key operations.Last edited by Guest; 03-07-12, 09:09.Comment
-
Peston this morning says of Diamond : "He maintains that he didn't know what was going on......he feels he was hounded out."
....only because he didn't think he could get away with a strap line of ....Diamond Dog Hounded out....bong chingComment
-
Well, if he didn't know what was going on, he damn well should have, so he is almost equally culpable. Responsibility, Responsibility, Responsibility.Originally posted by Lateralthinking1 View PostComment
-
Would I be going too far to say....we should freeze his assets and then deport him....
bong chingComment
-
The culture of a company is effectively dictated by the man/woman at the top. In olden days, the man at the top in banking was a banker...someone with probity and who had risen through the ranks. Since 1986 and Big Bang and more so in recent years ...especially the early 2000's...those at the top were nothing more than jumped-up Barrow Boys ....Goodwin, Hornby...Diamond seems to buck the trend but still comes across as a barrow-boy.
Still unclear how the security services are involved as suggested by some. Methinks a conspiracy theory too far.Comment
-
Maybe but if I were responsible for inland security some months after riots, just before the Olympics, and during a double dip recession, I would expect all key players involved in highly publicised systemic failure to cooperate in managing the destabilising social impacts. That would apply whether it were issues of journalism and privacy, contracts and favouritism or interest rates and corruption. I would also expect them to recognise when they needed to receive a lead, to then seek it, and to accept advice aimed at restoring equilibrium, knowing that would be more in their self-interests than waiting until such things had to be imposed.Originally posted by Resurrection Man View PostComment
-
I do! (and I'd probably best keep them to myself)...Originally posted by Lateralthinking1 View PostComment
-
Possibly, because I imagine that most of his assets are not held in UK and I'm not even certain that he's a British citizen anyway...Originally posted by eighthobstruction View PostWould I be going too far to say....we should freeze his assets and then deport him....Comment
-
As I understand it, he's entitled to about 13million shares worth £22million because he has served for more than 15 years. Barclays share price is up about 3.5% at the moment; so a nice day's work - by clearing his desk he's earned himself about £750,000!Comment
-
-
But I believe that these are only those shares that he's not yet vested; on this morning's edition of R4's Today programme, mention was made of a further £200m stake that he has in the firm, which suggests that any possible shareholder backlash against whatever golden handshake he may receive will be pretty weak, given the extent of his own shareholding.Originally posted by Osborn View PostComment
-
The obscenely paid dealing with the obscenely paid? Pah!Originally posted by Northender View PostIt may have been a coincidence, but.....
At 0715 my wife brought me a cup of tea and humorously suggested that Jeremy Paxman be asked to sort out the banking sector. 25 minutes later, Radio 4's 'Today' programme reports the resignation of Bob Diamond.
Comment
-
Well, it seems Barclays have told him he will forego the bonus and now Jerry del Missier has resigned and it seems (left hand and right hand, shades of Murdoch) The FSA said: “As the substance of the telephone conversation was relayed down the chain of command at Barclays, a misunderstanding or miscommunication occurred. This meant that Barclays’ submitters believed mistakenly that they were operating under an instruction from the Bank of England (as conveyed by senior management) to reduce Barclays’ Libor submissions.”
Who next is to go?Comment
-
Hardly surprising - it is surely easier for an Opposition to make knee-jerk demands and get away with them should they be shown later to be ridiculous. Those in Government need to be a little more careful, look at the evidence and take good advice.Originally posted by Lateralthinking1 View Post
When Labour was in power, they were accused similarly of dragging feet, and if they didn't, of acting impulsively.Comment
Comment