Barclays: “Shouldn’t we hear some answers before the condemned man is whacked?”

Timely analysis from Iain Martin on a trigger happy populism that could easily get out of hand… with a language straight out of Sean O’Casey…

what is slightly depressing is the sanctimonious lynch-mob mentality which currently prevails. It was there over Hester’s bonus and Sir Fred, sorry Mr Fred, Goodwin’s knighthood.

So intense has been the clamour from some MPs that Diamond is in the bizarre position of having been forced out before he has had a chance to try and explain himself in front of a parliamentary committee. The hearing will go ahead despite his resignation.

Is it generally not better to wait a few days to hear what someone has to say before sending them to the scaffold? The thirst for blood seems so over-powering that instead we want people dispensed with first; then afterwards we listen to their pleas and evidence.

Diamond, it might be said, is a special case. His bank has been fined £290m for its part in rate-fixing. But how high did it go? Which procedures and individuals failed? Shouldn’t we hear some answers before the condemned man is whacked?

Mick is founding editor of Slugger. He has written papers on the impacts of the Internet on politics and the wider media and is a regular guest and speaking events across Ireland, the UK and Europe. Twitter: @MickFealty