The recent departure of Robert Diamond from Barclays marks a watershed. To be sure, CEOs of major banks have been forced out before. Chuck Prince lost his job at Citigroup over excessive risk-taking in the run-up to the financial crisis of 2008 and, more recently, Oswald Grubel of UBS was pushed out for failing to prevent unauthorized trading to the tune of US$2.3 billion.
However, Diamond was a banker supposedly at the top of his game. Barclays, it was claimed, had come through the 2008 to 2009 crisis without benefiting from UK government support. Also, while his bank had been found in violation of various rules recently, including on products sold to consumers and on how it reported interest rates, Diamond had managed to distance himself from the damage.
Press reports indicate that regulators were willing to give Diamond a free pass — right up to the moment when a serious political backlash took hold. Diamond started to fight back, pointing an accusatory finger at the Bank of England. At that point, he had to go.
LESSONS
There are three broader lessons of Diamond’s demise at Barclays.
First, the political backlash was not from backbenchers in parliament or uninformed spectators on the margins of the mainstream. Top politicians from all parties in the UK were united in condemning Barclays’ actions, particularly with regard to its systemic cheating on the reporting of interest rates, exposed in the LIBOR scandal. (The London Interbank Offered Rate is a key benchmark for borrowing and lending around the world, including for the pricing of derivatives).
Indeed, British Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne went so far as to say: “Fraud is a crime in ordinary business; why shouldn’t it be so in banking?”
His clear implication is that fraud was committed at Barclays — a serious allegation from the UK’s finance minister.
After five years of global financial sector scandals on a grand scale, patience is wearing thin. As Eduardo Porter of the New York Times put it: “Bigger markets allow bigger frauds. Bigger companies, with more complex balance sheets, have more places to hide them. And banks, when they get big enough that no government will let them fail, have the biggest incentive of all.”
Second, Diamond apparently thought that he could take on the UK establishment. His staff leaked the contents of a conversation he claimed to have had with Paul Tucker, a senior Bank of England official, suggesting that the central bank had told Barclays to report inaccurate interest rate numbers.
Diamond apparently forgot that the continued existence of any bank with a balance sheet that is large relative to its home economy — and its ability to earn a return for shareholders — depends entirely on maintaining a good relationship with regulators. Barclays has total assets of around US$2.5 trillion — roughly the size of the UK’s annual GDP — and is either the fifth or eighth-largest bank in the world, depending on how one measures balance sheets. Banks at this scale benefit from huge implicit government guarantees; this is what it means to be “too big to fail.”
Diamond apparently believed his own rhetoric — that he and his bank are critical to economic prosperity in the UK. The regulators called his bluff and forced him to resign. Barclays’ stock price rose slightly on the news.
The final lesson is that the big showdowns between democracy and big bankers are still to come — both in the US and in continental Europe. On the surface, the banks remain powerful, yet their legitimacy continues to crumble.
JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon presided this year over reckless risk-taking to the tune of nearly US$6 billion, yet his job apparently remains secure. Dimon even remains on the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, despite the fact that the New York Fed is deeply involved in the investigation not only of JP Morgan Chase’s trading losses, but also of its potential involvement in the broadening LIBOR scandal.
EFFECTIVE RESISTANCE
As president of advocacy group Better Markets Dennis Kelleher documented in recent US Congressional testimony, two years after the passage of the Dodd-Frank legislation, the US banking system continues to fight hard — and effectively — to undermine meaningful reform. (Kelleher’s testimony is a must-read assessment, as is his opening statement to the hearing).
Yet progress is nonetheless being made. Dimon is the public face of megabanks’ resistance to reform; repeated and public egg on this particular face strengthens those who want to rein in these banks’ excessive and irresponsible risk-taking.
Meanwhile, the European situation looks explosive. The EU’s approach to bank regulation encouraged financial institutions to load up on government debt — supposedly a “risk-free” asset. Now, given the profound sovereign debt crisis in the eurozone periphery, government defaults threaten to take down the big banks. The European Central Bank has provided a great deal of emergency “liquidity” funding to banks, which they use to buy even more government debt. This holds down interest rates on that debt in the short term, but creates even bigger potential losses in the case of potential default.
Banks and politics are deeply intertwined in all advanced economies. Diamond discovered that, ultimately, politicians trump bankers — at least in the UK.
However, what really matters is legitimacy and informed public opinion. Do you really believe the increasingly dubious notion that megabanks, as currently constituted, are good for the rest of the private sector, and thus for economic growth and job creation? Or do you begin to consider more seriously the increasingly mainstream proposition that global megabanks and their leaders have simply become too powerful and dangerous?
Simon Johnson, a former chief economist of the IMF, is co-founder of a leading economics blog, a professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
A series of strong earthquakes in Hualien County not only caused severe damage in Taiwan, but also revealed that China’s power has permeated everywhere. A Taiwanese woman posted on the Internet that she found clips of the earthquake — which were recorded by the security camera in her home — on the Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu. It is spine-chilling that the problem might be because the security camera was manufactured in China. China has widely collected information, infringed upon public privacy and raised information security threats through various social media platforms, as well as telecommunication and security equipment. Several former TikTok employees revealed
At the same time as more than 30 military aircraft were detected near Taiwan — one of the highest daily incursions this year — with some flying as close as 37 nautical miles (69kms) from the northern city of Keelung, China announced a limited and selected relaxation of restrictions on Taiwanese agricultural exports and tourism, upon receiving a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) delegation led by KMT legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅崑萁). This demonstrates the two-faced gimmick of China’s “united front” strategy. Despite the strongest earthquake to hit the nation in 25 years striking Hualien on April 3, which caused
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth