Body & Soul0 min ago
so why are Politicians getting involved in sacking Bob Diamond
7 Answers
I just dont get this. Since whe has it been the resposibility of Politicians to appoint the CEO? I watched some labour MP on sky yesterday, clearly he did not know what he was talking about, had no conception of investment banking and retail banknig, and indeed had contradicted himself by the end of it. but he is not alone and it's not just labour.
The appointment of the board is by the shareholders vote. It becomes a very dangerous place when the State think they can change things. If he personally has broken a law, been taken to court and found guilty then fine, but those measures are already in place. So should they not be keeping ther noses out?
And 290m is not a great deal of money.
The appointment of the board is by the shareholders vote. It becomes a very dangerous place when the State think they can change things. If he personally has broken a law, been taken to court and found guilty then fine, but those measures are already in place. So should they not be keeping ther noses out?
And 290m is not a great deal of money.
Answers
1 to 7 of 7
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I think we've all seen that proper running of the banking system is too important just to be left to the private sector.
They have after all almost brought the country to bancruptcy in paying for their mistakes.
Of course Cameron wants less red tape in the city - I wonder if he still thinks that?
I think we can all see what you city boys do when there's less red tape
290M is not the point - that's the fine - not the damage
The arrogance displayed in your question is truely shocking
They have after all almost brought the country to bancruptcy in paying for their mistakes.
Of course Cameron wants less red tape in the city - I wonder if he still thinks that?
I think we can all see what you city boys do when there's less red tape
290M is not the point - that's the fine - not the damage
The arrogance displayed in your question is truely shocking
The State is always responsible for the framework in which business operates. If that framework looks to be inadequate then it isn't a surprise politicians wish to look at the issue. In this case the activities of the guy in question is claimed to have had far reaching affects, not simply confined to their own bank. As I understand it markets were affected, as possibly was the aid given by the taxpayer. I must find time to read the juicy details sometime soon :-)
No, they should definitely not be keeping their noses out.
It is lax and "light touch" regulation that has allowed banks to succumb to overwhelming greed and sharp practices that all but brought the global economy to its knees,and from which we are still recovering. Politicians have every right to express their own and our rancour at the big banks, and most especially when it comes down to cases of outright fraud.
Barclays is, from the sound of things, only the first of several big banks who are implicated in manipulating the LIBOR - something that trillions of dollars of global transactions are based upon, and which has a direct effect on yours and my mortgage rate or savings rates.I want to know, now, whether effectively I have been paying an artificially high interest rate repayment on my mortgage, feeding the greed of the bankers, but putting myself out of pocket?
Once again, greed and a cavalier attitude to risk and the law - this culture needs to be addressed, and Bob Diamond is CEO - the buck stops at his desk, it is under his guidance that such a culture has been allowed to flourish - something he obviously recognises himself, with his attempt to forestall public anger by stating that he will he forgoing his bonus.
If his resignation starts the process of cleaning up the banks, and forcing them to live up to their obligations, rather than casino gambling using the taxpayers as stakeholders of last resort, then that would be great, and I would join with any politician or petition organised to apply pressure on the Barclays board to force his resignation.
It is lax and "light touch" regulation that has allowed banks to succumb to overwhelming greed and sharp practices that all but brought the global economy to its knees,and from which we are still recovering. Politicians have every right to express their own and our rancour at the big banks, and most especially when it comes down to cases of outright fraud.
Barclays is, from the sound of things, only the first of several big banks who are implicated in manipulating the LIBOR - something that trillions of dollars of global transactions are based upon, and which has a direct effect on yours and my mortgage rate or savings rates.I want to know, now, whether effectively I have been paying an artificially high interest rate repayment on my mortgage, feeding the greed of the bankers, but putting myself out of pocket?
Once again, greed and a cavalier attitude to risk and the law - this culture needs to be addressed, and Bob Diamond is CEO - the buck stops at his desk, it is under his guidance that such a culture has been allowed to flourish - something he obviously recognises himself, with his attempt to forestall public anger by stating that he will he forgoing his bonus.
If his resignation starts the process of cleaning up the banks, and forcing them to live up to their obligations, rather than casino gambling using the taxpayers as stakeholders of last resort, then that would be great, and I would join with any politician or petition organised to apply pressure on the Barclays board to force his resignation.
1 to 7 of 7
Latest Posts
ChatterBank7 mins ago
Is Labour Starting To Abolish Democracy...
News11 mins ago
Crosswords12 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.