Barclays has issued the following statement about its decision:

“It is recognized that some money service businesses don’t have the proper checks in place to spot criminal activity and could therefore unwittingly be facilitating money laundering and terrorist financing. We want to be confident that our customers can filter out those transactions, because abuse of their services can have significant negative consequences for society and for us as their bank. We remain very happy to serve the many companies who do have strong anti-financial crime controls. For the others which we can no longer bank, we regret the inconvenience that moving to another bank will cause.”

A few hours after Barclays issued the above statement, it sent me another one, which it said it had 'strengthened', referring to Somalia. Here is the later 'strengthened quote':

“It is recognised that some money service businesses don’t have the proper checks in place to spot criminal activity and could therefore unwittingly be facilitating money laundering and terrorist financing. We want to be confident that our customers can filter out those transactions, because abuse of their services can have significant negative consequences for society and for us as their bank. We remain very happy to serve the many companies who do have strong anti-financial crime controls, including those who send money to Somalia. For the others which we can no longer bank, we regret the inconvenience that moving to another bank will cause.”

When a similar move was made last year against Somali money transfer companies in Minnesota in the USA, banks also said they were worried about cash ending up in the wrong hands: BBC story on Somali remittance firms in USA

Following widespread protests by Somalis and pressure from others, a solution was found to keep Somali remittances flowing from the US.