Much has been made of Sophie Raworth's interview with Peter Mandelson last Sunday. The bit that caught my eyes was this...
PETER MANDELSON: Well thank you very much. You've said I've done nothing wrong. Therefore what do I have to answer for?
SOPHIE RAWORTH: A lack of judgement. Appearing, socialising with somebody who could benefit from you and your position as European Trade Commissioner.
PETER MANDELSON: Sophie, Sophie, you cannot do business as a European Trade Commissioner in Russia, India, China, South Africa, Brazil, all the big emerging economies of the world without having contact with the big business and economic figures in those countries as well as the political figures.
I make a very clear distinction indeed. I do not allow any conflict of interest to arise between the contacts I have with these individuals and how I do my day job. I've now come back to British politics, I'm now a British minister, I'm governed by the ministerial code. I've signed up to the ministerial code and I will abide by the ministerial code...
As Nick Robinson made clear earlier in the week...
So far, no evidence has been produced that he broke any rules but there's little doubt that had he behaved this way as a cabinet minister he would have been in breach of the ministerial code which advises against perceived conflicts of interest.
But leaving that aside (and we shouldn't) just look again at the bit I have highlighted in bold above. This is the question Sophie Raworth should have followed up with...
SOPHIE RAWORTH: Yes, Mr Mandelson, but do you really need to stay on his yacht to "have contact" with a Russian businessman?
Robert Winnett now reveals on the Telegraph website that Mandelson had five separate meetings with Mr Deripaska. He has so far failed to give any details as to why, and what was discussed. Guido says there are rumours of tapes. Robert Winnett writes...
The Russian oligarch stands to benefit from three decisions made at the time Lord Mandelson was a European trade commissioner. Mr Deripaska also owns a British manufacturing company which could benefit from decisions taken by Lord Mandelson's new Whitehall department.
George Osborne, the shadow Chancellor, was forced to issue a detailed statement revealing his contacts with Mr Deripaska and Nat Rothschild, a financier who works with the billionaire, during a holiday in Corfu. Mr Osborne was accused of soliciting funds for the Conservative Party during the meetings.
However, attention is now turning to the closeness of the relationship between Lord Mandelson and Mr Deripaska. When it first emerged that the two men had been in Corfu, sources close to the new Business Secretary, insisted that he had simply seen Mr Deripaska at a cocktail party.
However, when it later emerged that Lord Mandelson had been staying on Mr Deripaska's £80 million yacht, it was then claimed that this was because he was unable to stay at the Rothschild's villa on the Greek Island.
However, according to an account given by Mr Osborne, Lord Mandelson was regularly present alongside Mr Deripaska. During the course of one weekend, the shadow Chancellor claims that he saw Mr Deripaska and Lord Mandelson together at a party, a dinner and a lunch.
Mr Osborne also says that when he first met the Russian businessman at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, last January, Lord Mandelson was also present. It has also been alleged that Lord Mandelson and Mr Deripaska have enjoyed at least three dinners together in Moscow since October 2004.
The Russian appears to have benefited from decisions made during Lord Mandelson's tenure as European trade commissioner. Mr Deripaska runs Russia's biggest aluminium company, Rusal. In December 2005, Lord Mandelson signed off a decision to remove a tariff of 14.9 per cent which had been imposed on some aluminium products being imported into Europe by Rusal.
Mr Deripaska and Mr Rothschild are also investing large sums of money in Montenegro. Lord Mandelson has led EU support for the Adriatic nation to join global trade agreements.
The former European trade Commissioner has also been criticised for his role in a controversial dispute involving a Russian insurance company in which Mr Deripaska is a major shareholder. European shareholders claim they have lost out as a result of a restructuring of the firm ordered by Mr Deripaska. They appealed to Lord Mandelson for assistance. He raised the issue with the Russian Trade Minister but the European shareholders were disappointed he did not do more.
On Tuesday George Osborne made full disclosure of his meetings with Mr Deripaska. Many journalists now privately admit that they went totally OTT over the story. Perhaps now they may be turning their attention back to where it should have been in the first place - examining the links between the EU Trade Commissioner and the man who benefited from so many of his decisions. I am sure it is all complete coincidence, but should we not be holding Mr Mandelson to account for his actions in the same way that the media has held George Osborne to account?
73 comments:
Peter Mandelson speaks with a forked tongue
Proof here
There is an interesting article in The Nation by Mark Ames and Ari Berman that sheds more light on the Rothschild/Deripaska affair
-
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081020/
ames_berman
The authors suggest that Putin and Russia wanted independence for Montenegro so it could come under Russia's influence.
The move for influence started with Deripaska's purchase of the KAP aluminium plan, "the biggest Montenegrin industrial asset" according to the article.
Then came the independence referendum that Serbia opposed. To discourage pro-independence votes in a very close referendum, Serbia threatened to withdraw various privileges from Montenegrin students, which discouraged support for independence.
So to counter panic in the pro-independence camp, Nathaniel Rothschild was brought in to promise $1 million to Montenegrin students who might suffer from Serbia's withdrawal of funding.
Therefore Mandelson has got caught up in an affair that is not just about billionaires finding new ways to enrich themselves but also has geopolitical implications. Even if Mandelson didn't understand all the implications of what was happening around him, once again his judgement is called into question.
The article also looks at the links between John McCain and Deripaska, which is quite eye-opening.
Mandelson may have comprimised his position!
What is he doing in a Labour government?
Iain
Glencore, Rothschild, Rusal
Off you go. See if you can get it before Guido does.
Don't criticise Sophie Rayworth...If it had been Marr he wouldn't have been asked the question at all...Probably Marr would have asked him if he was enjoying his new job, blah, blah cosy fireside chat etc
At last the REAL political story begins to emerge... Clearly, you can't fool all of the journalists all of the time ! Bringing Mandelson back was another typical Brown serious misjudgement - and one that's about to cause him as much grief as last time. Anyone giving odds on a third Mandelson resignation before Christmas ?? You couldn't make it up !
Maybe it's me but I just cannot get excited about this story. Does not matter whether it is Mandelson or Osborne, its been blown up and is really about a few boys having a tiff with a toff.
The big story has been spiked; Blair/Ecclestone. So I guess the spin doctors have earned their pennies this week.
Time to move on don't you think and take a look at how Labour have destroyed this country.
Why is everyone so terrified of challenging Mandelson?
It is important that this is not allowed to drop.
Could those two fearless investigating BBC 'political' reporters Peston and Robinson be persuaded that this might merit their attention?
No?
Oh, such a pity.
Mandelson will not make any disclosures. The BBC and the newspapers will not bring them out. Even if he or they did , it will be full of holes.
Cameron having taken a hit should commssion a couple hardnosed journalists to dig deep into what Mandelson was up to from 2004 when he first met the Russian. The trail will stink as it always does in the case of Mandelson.
It is clear that Osborne walked into a trap at corfu and this questions his judgement in meeting this Russian who the Americans have barred into entering their country. Just how Osborne did not know about this says something about his naivity.
More than Osborne, it is Mandelson who is at risk of his activities
revealed to the whole world. If he goes, Brown is finished. That should give some thoughts at the Tory HQ.
You might just as well have the party logo in the corner of your now tedious little site. No one is listening to you (any more) and any resource that Ashcroft's (other) minnions are spending briefing you is pretty much a waste. If you genuinely don't want a safe seat, why not try your hand at something else and give us all - including your weary friends - a break.Sigh.
It's when I see comments like the one above that I know I am bang on the money.
Strange though it may seem, that was all my own work. No briefings, no conversations with anyone.
Now piss off somewhere else you pathetic anonymous idiot.
Wasn't Oleg Deripaska in England in 2001 when Mandelson was still a member of the government?
Deripaska's son, oddly enough named Peter was born in Westminster during that year.
Register number: D86C
District : 2581 D
Entry Number: 107
Mother's maiden surname: Yumasheva
You're right about journalists ignoring the real villain in the Corfu saga.
The Telegraph is one of the worst offenders (after The Times).
Today, chip on the shoulder Randall wastes a whole column bleating about Tory toffs.
What about Mandelson, Deripaska, platinum tariffs, Montenegro?
What are they afraid of?
Anon 11pm
You are an arsehole. You know nothing. Now be a good chap and cut off your nadgers with a rusty saw, and ask your mum to clean up the tissues from under your bed while you are doing it.
Many may not get a berth on Olge's yacht for much longer...
"Russia's richest man is having money troubles, and the country's largest nickel producer could change hands as a result. Forecasting firm Global Insight reports that Oleg Deripaska is
running out of time and money to pay back the USD 4.5 billion he borrowed from a group of foreign financial institutions in April 2008 to purchase a 25% share in Norilsk Nickel.
Deripaska used the shares in the nickel producer as collateral, but their value has since plummeted to the point that they no longer cover the money he owes; Deripaska now needs USD 1.8 billion to refinance the loan, according to the report.
Deripaska's creditors have granted him an extension until the end of the month, but it is unlikely they will be so generous again.
The oligarch has already sold his assets in Canadian automotive parts maker Magna and German construction company Hochtief, but these deals still have not produced enough funds to pay off the debt, the report states.
Having exhausted every other possibility, Deripaska is now seeking help from the state."
PR Newswire 23 October
Anon @11:00 PM
Apart from 'Hello Dolly'...
"You might just as well have the party logo in the corner of your now tedious little site. No one is listening to you (any more)"
I think Iain is clear in his Conservative leanings. However, as for not been listened to, my understanding is that his readership is increasing month on month...
Perhaps you should concentrate your anger on the venal, mendacious, shocking excuse for a human being, Mandleson. He has done more to degrade politics that any other modern politician that I can think of.
The return of Mandy is NuLab's Palin moment. Don't tell me you don't get it...
Iain, why do you allow anon comments?
That's more like it Iain.
Anonymous.
Anon @11:00 PM
What an unbelievable Draper /Cambell plant. Mandy wound up Nattiepoohs and it is blowing up in his face!
I may not be welcome here, Ian, for accusasions of rampant homophobia. So feel free to dismiss my presence. However if you were to pause for a moment you will regard my attitude to be more intellectual than aggressive.
I am a staunch Conservative but to claim this is still regarded as madness due to 15 years of Labour thought police activity. Successful work to date but I hope and pray that guys like you will move the agenda beyond that. Mandleson is an evil, nasty, clever, cunning, piece of work. Everyone with a shred of decency need to oppose him and bring him to book. I rather think you might be the man to do it. Good luck and if you invite me I would happily return.
Iain,
All this antipathy towards Mandelson! Why? Tinged by homophobia for the Guido tendency, I'm sure. But why you? Fear that he's going to rip the novices to shreds? Osborne now knows not to mess with the big boys.
Anon at 11pm is bang on the money. You have become tedious, Iain. Ever wondered why Guido, despite being obnoxious, gets so many more comments than you? Every word you write reeks of bitter failure.
Oh hilarious. Guido is welcome to his comments. Most of them are from complete nutters. As for bitter failure - you sound like someone who knows what that feels like!
11.57. I have always got on fine with Mandelson. I published a book of his and he was a pleasure to deal with. But if he wants to throw mud around he has to be prepared to take it himself. He has questions to answer and all I am doing is pointing out what they are.
Iain,
This is desperate stuff. Think for a moment. Why did the Osborne story have legs this week and not this one? If you honestly believe this is BBC bias, then you have lost the plot, you sad little man.
Has Mandelson thrown any mud around? People have speculated he's behind the Osborne stuff but I didn't think there was any actual evidence. Perhaps I am naive!
Iain
I think I once read you describe Guido as a 'friend'. Is that really true? Tell us what you really think about him.
It's going to be an education to see how this is buried.
"Mandelson Must Make Full Disclosure.
Ooh, you are awful, but I like you.
As for bitter failure - you sound like someone who knows what that feels like!
Leave 'im Iain, 'es not worf it.
Sock it to 'em, Iain.
I recognise the "sigh" literary style of Anon 11.00 pm.
You are Tim Ireland and I claim my £5.
Anonymous, you are a pathetic wally. If you are going to make an attack on someone you should at least put your name to it so the person on the receiving end has the option of punching you in the gob next time they see you. Iain, you should stop showing anonymous posts which attack people. I've been attacked anonymously before and I just think that if these pathetic people don't have enough confidence in their arguments to put their name to them, they do not deserve to be published.
Iain, thank you for this story on Mandelson, and the report that the journalists now admit their coverage was wrong. And good for Sophie.
You said you were going to do more moderation - as Labour try and counter the attack from 'the truth' on the right-wing blogs. As a regular reader of this site could I please ask that you do moderate the 'trolls' out - in the main.
Whilst, I'm for freedom of speech, and it is interesting to see comments like anon at 11pm - and I would still want to. The following tirade of abusive, nasty, pointless comments by a whole host of self-hating annons, is unnecessary -it adds nothing to the debate.
We know Labour are Orcs - please keep the majority of the animals in the bearpit. If they've got a genuine point to make, and few seem to, then keep them. The site shouldn't become like Labour Home, who only talk amongst themselves. Genuine differences of opinion and the occassional Orc make for an entertaining and usful site.
PS Guido comments are always entertaining to read, I go there knowing there will be gossip and 'colourful'language. I come here to learn more about a subjuct from you AND the people making the comments - you don't get this in the press, and certainly not on the biased Brown Broadcasting (how to cope in a depression!) Corporation.
I’ve availed myself on some of the 7/1 at Paddy Power on Mandelson to leave the Cabinet in 2008. I’m convinced that this week has been simply a last ditch diversionary tactic by Mandelson to save his position and that there is more (serious) dirt in Mandelson to come out at the weekend …. I suspect Brown would not mind asking Mandelson to leave, given their previous rocky relationship. Brown can then continue with his 'I've saved the world' narrative.
Chris Trinder
http://kickingbets.blogspot.com
Osborne's justification for meeting Deripaska was that Deripaska was friends/a colleague of Osborne's (erstwhile) extremely good friend Nat Rothschild. Osborne was staying with Nat Rothschild (they've been friends for almost 30 years since Prep School) and so it isn't in the least surprising that the Rothschild house party see a lot of Deripaska. Now this may be unseemingly for Osborne and show lack of judgement but it provides a perfectly innocent and understandable excuse for Osborne to have seen Deripaska so often.
What I fail to understand is why Mandelson was staying on Deripaska's yacht. There has been no claims made that Mandelson and Deripaska are friends, they are people who have met only at business meetings. I can understand them having dinners, I could understand Deripaska corporately entertaining Mandelson for the day in a box at Arsenal or Wimbledon Centre Court, but to invite someone to stay for their summer holidays on your yacht ? How many normal people choose to go on holiday with people they have met occasionally through work ?
Mandy says nothing thats not got extra meaning.
Unprompted last week he mentioned India, China, Brazil, South Africa.
If I was a journo or a publisher of a top political magazine, I would certainly be looking at Mandy's broader dealings with thse countries.
As has been mentioned elsewhere, he must have got the £1.65m he put down on his London house fom somewhere.
Good news.
The Times today says that Mandleson "will be more careful about misleading the public in future."
Oh good. So that's alright then.
But after being twice before sacked as a minister, one might have thought that, by now, he would have learned the need for candour
PS Iain
Ignore all the bitchy anonymous comments here. You are spot on. These NuLab posts are hilarious and interestingly I have spotted what seem to be some more on Guido this week.
This all seems to have started a few weeks ago so I suspect that the Nu Lab machine is starting to gear up to plant disinformation / undermine those bloggers who publish anything critical (or accurate)
So Osborne is in the clear and Mandy isn't?
Were you on the yacht Iain? Were you party to the discussions?
Osborne could be just as guilty of being, 'economical with the truth' as Mandy.
But then, 'Being Tory is enough' for you Iain isn't it, even down to excusing racism and homphobia, providing its done by a Tory MP.
Care to comment on the shadow security minister being funded by a Ukranian Oligarch via a spoof company?
Oligarch's adviser funds Tory
It's a funny thing that the anonymous trolls who claim that this blog is becoming tedious still bother to read it and post comments in it.
Not so funny is the BBC's almost complete silence on Mandelson's admission of having issued a misleading statement about his meetings with Derpaska. No bias there then?
wrinkled weasel - we await Speaker Martin's enquiry into whether MP's have been misled by Blair!! then part two of that Blair/Ecclestone scandal should really take off.
Norman said. I agree, perhaps Cameron should agree with a full enquiry! and ensure that Mandleson and Co. are included!! Call Brown's stupid bluff!
But I still believe,firmly, that boy george has proved to be a liability. Not fit for high office and a most disloyal individual.
He should be removed.
THIS is the story. But you won't hear it on the BBC because the Brown Broadcasting Corporation's effective ditor-in-chief is Gordon Brown.
The pathetic non-story about George Osborne has been all over the BBC all week and yet not a single word about Mandelson's involvement. And the papers are even worse - it's sad that even the Telegraph is now little more than a Brown-controlled Pravda for the Labour Party.
Fortunately, more people probably now get their news from sites like this and Guido than probably the whole MSM combined. Most people know the real story is Mandelson's corruption - even if that's not what the BBC is reporting.
As for Sophie Raworth, she's one of the most sycophantic Labour lickspittles of the lot.
On the Amanda Platell thing - what is the point of being fabulously f**kable if one is an evil witchy old harridan !? Great tits though..
Careful guys - you are in danger of falling for the lure! By attacking Iain the comments spin off into a debate about Anon at 11pm.Classic NuLie spinning & confusion. Morning Alistair - any nasty dreams about Dr Kelly last night?
This reinforces my suspicion that actually the Mandelson saga is a real worry to NuLiebour and once again they are trying to put people off the trail.
The issues are clear - stay focused: Ecclestone, Abrahams, Deripaska & Mandelson - all with a Brown tinge. As some journalists were once advised before 'Follow the money'. Stay focused - the truth is out there!
PS Iain - abuse from Anons is flattery - enjoy!
Davidm - cheers buddy - that was a brilliant article. Surely Rothschild has been vulgar and egregious. What's the name of the 3rd party willing to corroborate his claim that Gideon asked for cash? Therein lies the story.
Amusing that they're slating Obama as willing to talk with 'terrorists' whoever the hell they are when McCain at best is cynical or, worse, a bloody chump.
At the event horizon of global economic meltdown it's always nice to watch these billionaires panic.
Completely O/T but they've been showing the old Brideshead Revisited on one of the ITV channels for the last few weeks and it's an absolute treat. I never understood why High Society was made when The Philadelphia Story was genuis but, as Iain mentioned, I hang around on Guido so am a nutter!! Cheeky.
Iain, Why are you at a "You've Been Framed" conference - haven't you get better things to do with your time ?
Or maybe you just want to meet Lord Harry of Hill ?
Or you want the 'cute voiceover' gig to add to your portfolio of meeja talents...
The "Press" - aka the BBC - (honourable exception of Sophie Raworth) certainly went totally OTT about the story about George Osborne - but oddly enough, seemed to have failed to notice the real story was Peter Mandelson's dealings with Mr. Deripaska - indeed, didn't Nick Robinson thoughtfully tell us he had "resisted" reporting on that aspect of it? Why was that, one might wonder.............
"Contact with" all kinds of people does not mean staying on their yachts - and amending the story to say he had to stay with a billionaire Russian because he couldn't stay with billionaire Rothschild is really bottom-of-the-barrel stuff. Why should he stay with Nat Rothschild either - another person involved in Deripaska's business dealings who also had much to gain from the EU Trade Commissioner's decisions.
George Osborne was - certainly past tense required here, I should think - a friend of Nat Rothschild dating back 20 years, and George Osborne is not in Government. How long had NR known Peter Mandelson?
Believe they have those useful things called hotels in Corfu, do they not? Mandy could have stayed in one of those - not quite as nice or as free as a billionaire's yacht, perhaps, but possibly - cheaper in the end.
is there any financial linkage between the deripaska and rothschild
businesses ?
just thought i would ask
Anon @ 9.42am
It looks like the Electoral Commission have been all over this and are OK with it, even if it is being kept "under review".
How much has Mittal given to Labour? Guido claims it is over £4m at the last count. A little more significant that the £5k/qtr paid to PNJ, don't you think? After all, he got Blair to call up some foreigh PM to push a deal through for him!
Anonymous said...
Care to comment on the shadow security minister being funded by a Ukranian Oligarch via a spoof company?
Why bother to comment if the funding is (as the Guardian article makes clear) legitimate?
I not know why Peter Mandelson has to answer to anyone regarding the episode. He was not a Minister at the time of the meetingand he was not involved in any discussion about party funding. It seems to me that George Osborne made a serious misjudgement when he made known to the press a private conversation that he had with Mr Mandelson. It was inevitable that it would backfire - Peter Mandelson is much more experienced politically than George Osborne. Mr Osborne will have gained a valuable lesson from his indiscretions - end of matter.
I do not know what all the fuss is about. Shall we ask the parties to detail the content of their conversations? It is inevitable that politicians will have contact with powerful figures from all walks of life. I would expect this and there are sufficient rules to guide them in such matters.
Why are there continual calls from some for Peter Mandelson to detail his contacts over recent years? Are you suggesting that whilst an EU Commssioner these contacts broke EU rules? Is it an attempt to deflect the actions and take pressure of George Osborne. This has been clear to me from the time that Mr Osborne started providing detail to the media. He may not have broken any code but showed a lack of judgement and manners. Judgement relating to funding and manners in relaying private conversations.
The more calls that are made the more suspicious I become about those making the calls. Sometimes it is better to admit misjudgement rather than seek to blame others for somehow being worse than one self. Jane
Lets go back beginning.....
Rothschild’s motive for sending his letter to the Times was that he didn’t like the way that Osborne had behaved but what if he was trying to hide his and Mandy’s links to the Russian.
This looks like a conspiracy between a rich business man the Russian mafia and a dodgy politician.
to the
mr osbourne and his friends should have kept in mind two things
1 there is no such thing as a free lunch
2 no politician should accept any gifts other than a bag of boiled sweets (julian critchley of happy memory)
Mandy said: "you cannot do business as a European Trade Commissioner in Russia, India, China, South Africa, Brazil, all the big emerging economies of the world without having contact with the big business and economic figures in those countries as well as the political figures."
Quite right. You cannot do business without having contact with such figures. Such contact is normally made through "meetings" in "offices" or "conference rooms" often with "minutes" taken.
Brown's appointment of Mandelson was stupidity of the highest order. Mandy can't help himself - it is in his DNA to chase power, suck up to the super-rich, lie every time he draws breath, and go suicidally over-board on vendettas.
What has Mandy achieved? The bank bailout had given Brown a half-decent script, and an opportunity to bash the Scottish Nationalists, maybe even to win a by-election. Instead, the papers are dominated by Corfu and sleaze allegations, which are now bouncing back at Mandy. Ha-ha, as young Master Muntz would say.
Why is Peter Mandelson attending meetings with UK bank chiefs when his dodgy friend Deripaska is desperately trying to refinace a $4.5bn loan which includes recently nationalised RBS ? Would the Rothschild's also be involved in these negotiatons?
Close to the wind: Russia’s oligarchs
I find the "anon" sock-puppet comments depressing... Not so much because they're there as they're so hopelessly obvious and inept.
Come on guys! Let's have a bit of subtlety in your trolling.
ROFL - Word Verification = "press" :-)
the money has to be on this man making a third resignation.
Gordon is rattled. For the first time in weeks he flashed that strange pretend smile that we had grown used to seeing before he was able to genuinely smile about the banking crash. He was answering questions about Mandelson and Deripaska....Oh Dear.
By the way Gordon reckons Mandy was saying ALL of his meetings with Deripaska were investigated by the European Commission....We shall see but I'll wager Gordon is wrong about ALL.
is there any financial linkage between the deripaska and rothschild
businesses ?
just thought i would ask
October 25, 2008 11:00 AM
Not sure if this is a rhetorical question since the MSM have pretty well indicated they are joined at the hip (sic)!
Has George Osborne really made a full disclosure of his meetings with Derispaska? Is that what he actually said? Or is that you joining the dots? When he first said he would provide a timetable of meetings in Corfu, "not very many" OWTTE; but he added Davos. Is that it? Really? Or has he too answered a question of his own choosing through intermediaries with an incomplete but otherwise literally true answer?
The interesting thing about that AM interview for me was that Mandy DID NOT take the opportunity to take a swipe of any sort at Tories he knew were in cahoots with Oleg AND bound by the parliamentary codes.
I watched it at Guido's behest but after the GOO stuff began to break.
Interesting stuff today don't you think about Pauline Neville-Jones being funded from the Oligarch stable via a possibly dormant, possibly non-trading, possibly ineligible UK company.
Have any of them been using unincorporated associations too?
PS Mandelson is NOT throwing mud around at all now is he? Far from it. And Old Holborn makes an interesting point which is related to my post from Wednesday. And the Guardian say contributions to PNJ via an apparently dormant company, coming from an Oligarchist, total £70,000.
We are going over old ground here. Labour is corrupt always has been always will be. Try working in the NE if you don't believe me. The Tories and the Liberals are almost as bad. We need a dictator so there is only one person to give backhanders to instead of several thousand. How's the enquiry going into the NE donations/planning scandal?
Freedom to Prosper
I just hope Sir Cliff won't be dragged into this. Where does he recycle his cans. Not Russia I hope.
Freedom to Prosper
PS Bring back Poulson, money in envelopes, new cars on the drive, wonderful days
Windsor Tripehound said...
Anonymous said...
Care to comment on the shadow security minister being funded by a Ukranian Oligarch via a spoof company?
Why bother to comment if the funding is (as the Guardian article makes clear) legitimate?
It's one thing receiving donations from a genuine company and quite another receiving donations from a company merely set up (a company in nane only) to channel donations from a foreign person. It may just be possible to prove this is legal under the current law but it's bloody obvious that it is a devious tool and against the spirit of the law. Just because Blair did devious doesn't make it OK for the Tories to do the same, as some are trying to argue.
Also this shadow minister may be responible for national security at a future date, is a Ukranian Oligarch an appropriate financial donor for such a person?
"Has George Osborne really made a full disclosure of his meetings with Derispaska? Is that what he actually said? Or is that you joining the dots? When he first said he would provide a timetable of meetings in Corfu, "not very many" OWTTE; but he added Davos. Is that it? Really? Or has he too answered a question of his own choosing through intermediaries with an incomplete but otherwise literally true answer?"
The Labour trolls are out in force today, Iain! Looks like Dolly Draper has got his minions working Saturdays now!
Forget it Labour troll. The Osborne non-story is dead. It's all about Mandelson now.
I'd like to see Cameron on BBC and Sky News NOW calling for Mandelson's resignation.
Why are "Anonymous said... (October 24, 2008 11:00 PM)" and "Anonymous said...(October 25, 2008 12:01 AM) pretending to be different people when they have the same IP Address?
Iain - whilst I'm all for free speech etc., consider banning sockpuppets
Jon, how can you tell what their IP addresses are?
I have no way of detecting IP addresses on other people's blogs, but I came to exactly the same conclusion as Jon at 3.19pm, just by reading the language used.
So that's two visits from Tim Ireland, posting anonymously, in one night Iain.
I thought he was against anonymous posting?
We should know from experience that Mandelson is always economical with the truth, so why should we be surprised when `another` disclosure` comes up.
For this reason he fits well into Browns gang.
Iain,
The sums don't add up. In 1998, Mandelson had to sell his house because he didn't have £350k to repay Robinson. Eight years later he bought a house for £2.4 million. We know how much he was paid as an MP/ minister/ commissioner in those 8 years and that still leaves, plus his share of a £1.45 million legacy (less 40% duty). My guess is that he is still at least £1.5 million short (he must have paid some tax and spent some of the income), which would be about 8 times salary if he got a mortgage - not likely aged 50 and towards the end of his career.
So where did the rest come from?
Follow the money - it's all the crooked Mandelson craves.
That guy Deripaska makes Don Corleone look like a fruit! SEE:
THE MANDELSON INTERVIEW
I don't know if this will get past comment moderation but I hve just read Tim ireland's blog linking to this and he says, regarding the accusation that he posts anonymously:
"No, it's not. I don't care how many IP addresses these anonymongrels 'see' (that are invisible to everyone but themselves and the magical interweb pixies that speak to them), and I don't give a tuppeny stuff even if I am the only person in the world who pauses to type 'sigh' (and I'm pretty sure that I'm not); nobody can prove that this happened because it didn't happen."
Tim, don't you think, on the balance of things, it's absolutely hilarious that you should fall back on the same argument others have used against your spurious charges of similar?
You constantly make accusations about how any comment you don't like must be a sockpuppet and when the person tries to point out that it's not the case you demand that they prove the negative. Now the boot is on the other foot and you go off on one.
Excuse me whilst I laugh at your hypcritical thicko reasoning. Hahahahahahah.
Kind regards
Phil
Post a Comment