Bob Diamond's resignation is a victory for Ed Miliband

Once again, the Labour leader set the political pace.

Bob Diamond's resignation, announced this morning by Barclays, is a significant victory for Ed Miliband. Alone among senior politicians, the Labour leader called for the Barclays chief executive to resign the day after the Libor scandal broke (a call he repeated yesterday), with David Cameron merely stating that he had "serious questions to answer".

"It is not for prime ministers to hire and fire bank chiefs," said Cameron. "He has to make himself accountable to his shareholders and this House. He has some serious questions to answer." As in the case of the phone hacking-scandal (when he called for Rebekah Brooks's resignation and the abandonment of the BSkyB bid) and Stephen Hester's bonus, Miliband set the political pace. Even Vince Cable, who might have been expected to call for Diamond's resignation, suggested that it was up to Barclays shareholders to remove him. But in his resignation statement, it was "external pressure" (Miliband, in other words) that Diamond blamed.

One indicator of how seriously the Barclays boss took the Labour leader's opinion is that he called him last Thursday in an attempt to give his "side of the story" (as Miliband put it). Miliband was initially unsure whether to call for Diamond to go, preferring to focus on the sins of the banking system, rather than one individual, but he eventually resolved that Barclays needed new leadership. At this point, Diamond probably knew that his time was up.

Update: Miliband has responded to Diamond's resignation, stating that it was "necessary and right", while repeating his call for a juidical inquiry into the banks. Here's the statement in full:

This was necessary and right.

It was clear Bob Diamond was not the man to lead the change that Barclays needed.

But this is about more than one man.

This is about the culture and practices of the entire banking system which is why we need an independent, open, judge-led, public inquiry.

Bob Diamond resigned as chief executive of Barclays this morning. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Getty
Show Hide image

Nobody's bargaining chips: How EU citizens are fighting back against Theresa May

Immigration could spike after Brexit, the Home Affairs select committee warned. 

In early July, EU citizens living in Scotland received some post from the First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon. The letters stated: “The immediate status of EU nationals living in Scotland has not changed and you retain all the same rights to live and to work here. I believe those rights for the longer term should be guaranteed immediately.”

The letters were appreciated. One Polish woman living on a remote Scottish island posted on social media: “Scottish Government got me all emotional yesterday.”

In reality, though, Sturgeon does not have the power to let EU citizens stay. That rests with the UK Government. The new prime minister, Theresa May, stood out during the Tory leadership contest for her refusal to guarantee the rights of EU citizens. Instead, she told Robert Peston: “As part of the [Brexit] negotiation we will need to look at this question of people who are here in the UK from the EU.”

As Home secretary in an EU member state, May took a hard line on immigration.  As PM in Brexit Britain, she has more powers than ever. 

In theory, this kind of posturing could work. A steely May can use the spectre of mass deportations to force a hostile Spain and France to guarantee the rights of British expat retirees. Perhaps she can also batter in the now-locked door to the single market. 

But the attempt to use EU citizens as bargaining chips may backfire. The Home Affairs select committee warned that continued policy vagueness could lead to a surge in immigration – the last thing May wants. EU citizens, after all, are aware of how British immigration policy works and understand that it's easier to turn someone back at the border than deport them when they've set up roots.

The report noted: “Past experience has shown that previous attempts to tighten immigration rules have led to a spike in immigration prior to the rules coming into force.”

It recommended that if the Government wants to avoid a surge in applications, it must choose an effective cut-off date for the old rules, whether that is 23 June, the date Article 50 is triggered, or the date the UK finally leaves the EU.

Meanwhile, EU citizens, many of whom have spent decades in the UK, are pursuing tactics of their own. UK immigration forms are busy with chatter of UK-based EU citizens urging one another to "get your DCPR" - document certifying permanent residence - and other paperwork to protect their status. More than 1,000 have joined a Facebook group to discuss the impact of the referendum, with hot topics including dual nationality and petitions for a faster naturalisation process. British citizens with foreign spouses are trying to make the most of the "Surinder Singh" loophole, which allows foreign spouses to bypass usual immigration procedures if their British partner is based in another EU country. 

Jakub, a classical musician originally from Poland, is already thinking of how he can stay in the UK, where there are job opportunities for musicians. 

But he worries that although he has spent half a decade in the UK, a brief spell two years ago back in Poland may jeopardise his situation.“I feel a new fear,” he said. “I am not sure what will happen next.”