Earlier in its statement Barclays highlighted that this was, “Part if an industry-wide investigation into the setting of interbank offered rates…”
See Ma everyone was doing it. Perhaps that will prove to be true but it is an excuse that doesn't hold water for an eight-year-old let along a global bank.
The kicker? Barclays Chief Executive, Bob Diamond, said: “Nothing is more important to me than having a strong culture at Barclays; I am sorry that some people acted in a manner not consistent with our culture and values. To reflect our collective responsibility as leaders, Chris Lucas, Jerry del Missier, Rich Ricci and I have voluntarily agreed with the Board to forgo any consideration for an annual bonus this year.”
Not resigning in shame, not offering to return bonuses from the years of false reporting that may have had a direct impact the Bank’s bottom line. But they will forgo bonuses for this year. When you lead a company that just gets fined $452 million by making a deal to avoid a criminal complaint—are bonuses still an option? How is a resignation not automatic here? How do you square that statement with this from the CFTC: “throughout the global financial crisis in late August 2007 through early 2009, as a result of instructions from Barclays’ senior management, the Bank routinely made artificially low LIBOR submissions to protect Barclays’ reputation from negative market and media perceptions concerning Barclays’ financial condition.”
This is the type of blindness and self-absorption that occurs from years of not holding people accountable.