Robert E. Diamond Jr., the former chief of
Barclays who resigned because of a scandal involving interest rate
manipulation, defended his testimony to a British parliamentary committee as
lawmakers called more senior officials to appear.
Late Tuesday, Mr. Diamond responded to
criticism from British politicians that he had not been completely forthcoming
last week at a hearing on the Barclays case.
“Any such suggestion would be totally unfair and unfounded,” Mr.
Diamond wrote in a letter to Andrew Tyrie, the committee’s chairman. “The
comments made at today’s hearing have had a terribly unfair impact upon my
reputation.”
Mr. Diamond said that he would be willing
to discuss the issue with lawmakers. A number of committee members have called
for him to give more testimony.
However, there may not be time. The
committee has one week before it recesses for the summer, and other officials
have already been slated to give testimony on Monday.
That list includes top executives from the
Financial Services Authority, including the regulator’s chairman, Adair Turner;
Andrew Bailey, the head of the prudential business unit; and Tracey McDermott,
the acting head of the enforcement and financial crime division. Jerry del
Missier, a senior Barclays official who resigned last week, is also set to
appear.
The committee is investigating the
manipulation of the London interbank offered rate, or Libor. The rate underpins
trillions of dollars of financial products, including mortgages, student loans
and complex derivatives.
In late June, Barclays agreed to pay $450
million to British and American authorities to settle claims that it submitted
bogus rates to deflect concerns about its health and improve profits.
Politicians in Washington and London are
questioning whether officials did enough to avoid the scandal.
The New York Fed said on Tuesday that it
had received “occasional anecdotal reports from Barclays of problems with
Libor” as far back as late 2007. Barclays has said that it had informed
American and British regulators about concerns with the rate, but officials did
not address the problems.
On Tuesday, members of the parliamentary
committee focused their anger on Marcus Agius, Barclays’ chairman, asking him
about the actions of Mr. Diamond and the culture inside the bank.
Questions centered on two letters to
Barclays from British regulators who raised questions about Mr. Diamond’s
management style. Some concerns dated to his appointment to the bank’s top spot
in late 2010.
During his testimony last week, Mr. Diamond
said the bank had maintained a good relationship with the Financial Services
Authority, adding that he did not recall that the regulator had questioned the
bank’s activities or its internal culture.
On Tuesday, members of the committee asked
Mr. Agius about Mr. Diamond’s testimony.
“Would you say that Mr. Diamond lied to this committee?” David
Ruffley, a member of Parliament, asked Mr. Agius.
“I can’t comment on Mr. Diamond’s testimony,” Mr. Agius said.
No comments:
Post a Comment