CliveH Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 Interesting stuff from the TSC this afternoon. Diamond was bordering on nauseous when repeatedly referring to Barclays good name and how "wonderful" he thought they were. Excellent TV when one of the panel brought him down to earth with a list of all the fines due to wrong-doing. But interesting when he revealed that the "control" of the LIBOR was discussed and known about by both the FSA and the BoE. He was actually asked if he felt agrieved that the fine had been imposed "retrospectively" (not sure if this word actually used) when it was a matter that had been discussed by the regulators. The panel then asked him his opinion of the Regulators given that they were "asleep at the wheel" (the Chairmans words) - Diamond was suitably vague at this point - but the inference was clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syd Posted July 4, 2012 Author Share Posted July 4, 2012 Damn and double Damn, I am beginning to think that the BOE are going to get off the hook. Well done diamond bob you talked plenty but gave absolutely NOTHING away. Where is it all going from here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 pelmetman - 2012-07-03 7:38 AM Anyone taking bets whether any of these fraud merchants will get their collars felt *-).................I'm starting feel some sympathy for the rioters >:-) One rule for the rich and one for the poor?............business as usual then *-) I agree with you there Dave. It's a pity that it's all becoming more political ' name calling ' - which politician said what to whom etc. What I would like to know is who these rogue traders are, and, if they have broken the law, why aren't they in court ( or prison ). Bob Diamond said something like " they have been dealt with " . What does that mean - did they have their bonuses reduced ? All the political mud slinging will be exactly what the rogue traders are hoping for, an effective cover up. :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syd Posted July 5, 2012 Author Share Posted July 5, 2012 Did anyone hear the full list of Barclays previous convictions, boy what a fine upstanding organisation Barclays are :D :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 malc d - 2012-07-05 9:11 AM Bob Diamond said something like " they have been dealt with " . What does that mean - did they have their bonuses reduced ? ( They've probably been paid extra to keep quiet *-) I once did a job for Reg Varney... no names no pack drill ;-)..........the one before Dodgy D :D.............He had a very nice gaff not far from Hyde Park Corner.........the place was crawling with builders some even spoke English (lol) and the only clean place to dump my pelmets was Reg's bedroom, where there was a carpenter finishing of his dressing room, I asked what all the little draws were for?........he said socks.......... I have a sock draw......he has a draw for each pair of socks :D..............after that I closed my Barclays bank account ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CliveH Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Syd - 2012-07-05 9:18 AM Did anyone hear the full list of Barclays previous convictions, boy what a fine upstanding organisation Barclays are :D :D YES I DID SYD!!!!!!!!!!! I was shouting and applauding at the same time! Not often I applaud an MP but I did yesterday!! What a marked contrast to the bullshirt from Diamond re how wonderful Barclays are! Having come across little old ladies and gents tucked up bank salesman with unsuitable plans sold to them for the benefit of the salesman - certainly NOT the customer - where the commission taken was 7.7% on a plan that was way way WAY outside their risk profile - I can only say again - how the hell can anyone think that Barclays or any of the big banks for that matter should get away with behaving as they do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pepe63xnotuse Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Unfortunatley,whilst "joe public" is still having his wages pumped into 'em..or still has his "savings" account with 'em..then I can't see *any* of the major banks being all that bothered.... :-S Maybe it's time to give some of these smaller,more ethical "Co-op/Greener" type banks a try..? Got any recomendations Clive....? ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symbol Owner Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Dear old much-maligned Michael Foot was right Syd -- they all need to be nationalised -- the 'high street' banks that is -- and bring back the 'friendly Society' ethos that Mrs' thatcher and her espousal of 'Reagonomics' smashed to pieces as an opener for this 'casino-banking' scandal that we see today! Colin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 pepe63 - 2012-07-05 2:25 PM Maybe it's time to give some of these smaller,more ethical "Co-op/Greener" type banks a try..? Got any recomendations Clive....? ;-) I was thinking the same thing, as I was Allience & Liecester private account and Abbey with the business.......now I seem to be Santander 8-)..............Although I've had no specific problems they seem to come bottom of every customer survey *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symbol Owner Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Yes, Dave, because all of the 'Friendly' mutual Building Societies were allowed to become PLC's., when Mrs. T. allowed them to be deregulated, so that, instead of serving their customers they made profits for shareholders -- her cronies benefiting again! Rampant greed as usual! The destructiveness of that old witches policies is still being felt years later! N.B. :- Mrs.T's chief advisor ( & architect of 'Thatcherism') was (Sir) Keith Joseph,from a noted Jewish banking family. Cheers, Colin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pepe63xnotuse Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Symbol Owner - 2012-07-05 2:38 PM Dear old much-maligned Michael Foot was right Syd -- they all need to be nationalised -- the 'high street' banks that is -- and bring back the 'friendly Society' ethos that Mrs' thatcher and her espousal of 'Reagonomics' smashed to pieces as an opener for this 'casino-banking' scandal that we see today! Colin. I fully agree Colin.. ...but unfortunately,as I've already said, nobody("Joe public" included )was all that bothered about "ethics",while all this "casino-banking" was making him unrealistic returns on his "investments" or was allowing him to get absurd levels of credit.... :-S edit:Oops!..Sorry Colin..I "crossed" your last post... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 The older I get the more I believe Mrs T has done more damage to this country than Hitler *-).............. She has destroyed whole communities, widened the North South divide and completely sold our industrial heritage down the swanny >:-(.............The history books will not be kind to the old bag ;-) She'll turn out to be the next Dr Beeching, another one who couldn't see past next Tuesday *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Somehow, I don't think this is going to come out at all well. The select committee members didn't have their ducks in a row at all. Even worse, most seem to think they did! On which basis, I can see no hope of a satisfactory outcome for any parliamentary committee investigation of Barclays' conduct. If it goes to a judicial enquiry it will take around 3 years to report, during which time no-one will change anything, or prosecute anyone, on the basis that to make change would be to pre-judge the report, and to prosecute would disrupt the proceedings, as witnesses could hardly incriminate themselves at the enquiry, and then plead innocent in a court hearing. I can also foresee lots of arguments that prejudicial evidence was presented to the enquiry so that none of the accused could get a fair trial. I'm pretty sure there are too many large shareholders and stockbrokers (or their sons :-)) in and around the Conservatives, and the government, who just want it out of the way as quickly as possible with as little changed as possible. Labour, on the other hand, I'm equally sure, want it kicked into the long grass for as long as possible, so that by the time it reports (almost bound to be after the next election) everyone will have forgotten what it was all about, and who was responsible. Besides all of which we know pretty much what happened. Blind Diamond Bob saw nothing and knew nothing, while his beloved bank rigged rates and mis-sold various products for the years of his watch. They were investigated fined, castigated, and criticised on a number of occasions as a consequence, yet the first he knew of any of this was "last month". The only way a person in his position could end up so profoundly ignorant of what his company was doing, would be with his eyes tight shut and his hands over his ears. An odd pose, one might think, in which to spend his working day! Of course it isn't just Barclays, at least half the city would have had some inkling as to what was going on, and where one player appears to have gained advantage by dubious means, and is getting away with it, the others will pretty soon adopt the same tactics to protect commercial advantage. That is the essence of any race to the bottom. Time and again we have seen this, and it is far from limited to financial services. Major public companies, and governments, have all begun to adopt the same basically dishonest tactics. Make claims you doubt you will be able to fulfil, or that you have no intention of fulfilling. When challenged, deny, don't apologise, dismiss the evidence, and if really cornered, pay out of court, at the eleventh hour and the fifty-ninth minute, with a suitable gagging clause added if possible. Then, if really stuffed, adopt a sober face, speak earnestly of "making mistakes", assure everyone "the lessons have been learnt" (that is to say, how they got caught!) that the "rogue elements" have been dismissed, that "the stables have been swept out", take a discreet pause for a few weeks until the furore dies down, and then......................................off they go again. And politicians wonder why the public is cynical!! Ye Gods! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symbol Owner Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Right on Brian! You (and Fintan O'Toole in the article which you pointed us all to) have just about summed it up. Cheers & thanks, Colin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Its a shame our resident spokesman for the moneyed classes has gone AWOL ;-)...................It would be nice to hear what his views are :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pepe63xnotuse Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 ....Be careful what you wish for,Dave!...... (lol) Brian.. Very well summarized(...depressingly accurate! :-( ) ...Nothing will ever REALLY change... :-S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symbol Owner Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Come the revolution Pepe............................... (?) C. (Iwish (!) ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syd Posted July 5, 2012 Author Share Posted July 5, 2012 Brian Well said Allister :-D (lol) I have two things that bother me, I can see the need to have this delt with as quickly as posible but have serious doubts that the enquiry that is now going ahead will have enough teeth/authority to do a thorough job The proposal to have the enquiry headed by a judge would be good but then there are the issues of people "Getting a fair trial" and of course the time taken. BUT will there be any trials, IS there any law available that anyone of any standing can be charged under Clive Where can we find the list of Barclays previous convictions, cannot find it on Google :D :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syd Posted July 5, 2012 Author Share Posted July 5, 2012 Here are some live updates from the hearing for those interested http://news.sky.com/story/955955/live-updates-diamond-quizzed-by-mps And Here http://news.sky.com/politics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave225 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 I am always amused by the comments that ‘it is all Maggie’s fault’ Boy, she must have done some real bad things in her lifetime, and I am a Scot where she is burned at the stake every year. However, for those who have nostalgic memories possibly they can recall the Winter of Discontent when rubbish was piled in the streets and the dead were unburied, all due to the Unions flexing their muscles, with nobody willing to stop them. The good days when George Brown (the other one) devalued the 'pound in your pocket' .The Power workers held the country to ransom under Heath and the lights were off daily. I doubt there was anyone who actually wanted to buy a British Leyland car in the 70’s unless they had to. Now we make some of the best cars in the world even if the owners are non UK. Do the current workers really care as a long as they have a good job? They may also wish to wander round many a ex Council estate where houses are now neat and tidy, usually with a car park in the front garden and people no longer regard the neighbourhood as a tip. Before anyone jumps up and down I accept they are not all like that but many certainly are, and those that say that allowing the tenants to buy was incorrect also forget that if you threw them out, you would then have to rehouse them, or do you prefer the houses to be always occupied by people who do not give a damn? Yes, she introduced share ownership through ‘Sid’ but her idea was for lots of small shareholders to be able to actively control Companies. She did not expect the big boys such as your Pension Funds, Investment types to buy such big stakes that they controlled the outcome, usually without bothering to check it. Curiously, even the Unions are not shy of putting their loot into such Companies. Much of the so called ‘relaxed control’ environment has been in the last 15 years, long after she ceased to be PM and under the control of the so called ‘people’s Party’. The ‘boom and bust’ years were the 90’s long after she was gone. Now I am not a Thatcherite even if the above suggests otherwise, but I do believe those that are making these complaints have very restricted vision of what the world has changed into over the last 2 decades. Of course there are some who believe we should have remained a coal burning nation and had our own shipping etc. I regret the dockers and types such as Prescott killed shipping, and coal is disappearing worldwide, except possibly China where the fumes are destroying whole communities. Do these people really feel we should go back to coal fires in the living room instead of them just flicking a switch for the gas central heating?? I enjoy steam engines but I am realistic enough to recognise that it was a very inefficient method of power. Yes, we have problems but harking back to the ‘good old days’ is not going to solve them with developing nations breathing down our necks. As the dinosaurs found out, if you do not adapt you go extinct. As for the Banks, they were allowed by successive Governments, again after Thatcher to grow to such a size that they became feared by authorities and as they also produced huge Corporation Tax revenues, nobody was going to rein then in, until it was too late. As other countries have suffered the same fate again I cannot see how Thatcher can be held responsible for the global mess. As for the Building Societies, they all were owned by the members, the general public who all voted cheerfully for a quick gain from the conversion. The Societies could not have done this without the support of the public and ‘carpetbagging’ became a bit of an issue. Joe Public is as greedy as anyone else in this world. OK, I have said my piece so you can throw the spears now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 No spears from me Dave, because that is all true enough. To me, the culpability of Thatcher lies in your last sentences: "As other countries have suffered the same fate again I cannot see how Thatcher can be held responsible for the global mess. As for the Building Societies, they all were owned by the members, the general public who all voted cheerfully for a quick gain from the conversion. The Societies could not have done this without the support of the public and ‘carpetbagging’ became a bit of an issue. Joe Public is as greedy as anyone else in this world." Again, all true, but all also a consequence of short-sightedness in pursuit of short-term political popularity, or narrow self-interest. I take no comfort from the undeniable fact that others have been as foolish. That still leaves us as fools. How much better it would be if others had been foolish, and we had not. Naive idiot that I am, I expect governments to be wiser and more far-sighted than the masses. I even expect governments to act against the foolish short-term instincts of the feckless, and at act prevent their fecklessness. It should be remembered that a number of building societies were de-mutualised by a smallish group of individuals who forced the issue at general meetings and then forced votes, purely for their own personal gain. This was no act of altruism, it was pure Thatcherism. The inducement to the average member was (albeit quite long lasting) fools gold, as can now be seen. The fools went for the gold. Now it seems we want our dear old fuddy-duddy, uncool, unexciting, safe, mutuals back. Well, hallelujah! :-) Was Thatcher directly responsible for all that? No - but just as I suspect Balls isn't directly responsible for the banking debacle, his fingerprints, just like hers, will be found all over it. It is the long, long, shadow of of Thatcher that we are seeing in many areas and, in most cases, what she set in motion has rolled on with insufficient attention being paid to its direction or progress by successive governments. Most, IMO, have not turned out particularly well for most people. It is the lingering, indirect, knock on, consequences of her policies (for example PFI), coupled with the narrow, partisan, self-interested, mind-set that she introduced, that have borne the most bitter harvest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syd Posted July 6, 2012 Author Share Posted July 6, 2012 Well I agree Brian except maybe for PFI PFI, I think was not a BAD idea really in that it did give us the schools and hospitals etc that we could not afford at the time but the fault lies with the negotiators who were far far too nieve/generous/gullabul when negotiating with the sharks of industry who were much much sharper than both the government and the civil servants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 When I mentioned the "T" (Thatcher) word, I should of added the "U" (Union) word as well :D........They are both as guilty as each other ;-)..........Confrontation politics seems to be the only option in the UK *-)..... If our wonderful leaders spent a little less time scoring points and a bit more on allowing us to decide on what and how we want our money spent, then we'd resemble more a democracy than a hypocracy, and with modern technology we could easily vote on a monthly basis on the most pressing issues ;-).........But our big businesses and politicians would never allow the people to run the country would they? :D I'm a firm believer in the collective wisdom of millions when compared to the vested interests of a few hundred ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 Whoops - duplicated posting :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 pelmetman - 2012-07-06 10:40 AM . with modern technology we could easily vote on a monthly basis on the most pressing issues ;-)......... I'm a firm believer in the collective wisdom of millions when compared to the vested interests of a few hundred ;-) So everything would be decided by people who are computer literate then ? Sounds a bit elitist to me. :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.