AN EVENING Standard investigation today raises new questions about how the Business Secretary, Peter Mandelson, was able to finance his purchase of a £2.5 million villa near Regent's Park.

Using publicly-available records, the Standard examined Lord Mandelson's finances and his proceeds from a decade in the property market. Even on the most generous possible analysis, we have established that there appears to be a substantial gap between the amount of money he was able to raise and the price he paid for his latest house.

Almost 10 years after Lord Mandelson was brought down by buying a house he could not afford, the disclosure will inevitably fuel speculation as to whether he has again financed a property purchase through the generosity of a rich benefactor, along the same lines as the millionaire businessman Geoffrey Robinson, who in 1998 secretly lent him £373,000 to buy a house in Notting Hill.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23618111-details/So%20how%20did%20Mandy%20buy%20his%20£2.5%20million%20Regency%20villa/article.do?expand=true#StartComments

This should be fun!

> again financed a property purchase through the
> generosity of a rich benefactor

Where do you find these rich benefactors? I want one!

I can see a whole heap of stuff hitting the fan with this one. Can't wait

I'm consoled by the thought that with any luck the value of his property has taken a big tumble, largely as a result of his own government's policies! Still, if he's short of a few quid he can always join Blair on the lecture circuit. They have so much in common, both being seemingly unaquainted with the truth.

The figures dont add up: Apparently he was short £1.2 million....after taking everything into account.

From publicly-available records, he found that Lord Mandelson - who was then an EU commissioner earning £160,000 - paid almost 16 times his income for the house.

Land Registry records show it was bought for £2.4million, rising to £2.5million once stamp duty and legal fees were factored in.

At the time, it was reported Lord Mandelson had financed the deal via a shares sell-off in the advertising agency Clemmow Hornby Inge.

But Companies House records show the shares were not sold until June 2007 - almost a year after the house was bought, according to Gilligan.
It was also said at the time that Lord Mandelson had been able to use a large legacy from his mother Mary to fund the purchase after she died earlier that year.
But a copy of her will shows the amount her son was bequeathed, although substantial, was nowhere near enough, Gilligan reports.

After inheritance tax, her estate was worth just under £980,000. She left £76,000 to various beneficiaries and the remainder was split between her sons.
This left Lord Mandelson with just under £425,000. Probate was granted on July 12 2006 and he bought the house immediately, implying he used the whole sum on it.
However, even with this large inheritance, he was still almost £2.1million short of the price.

Mandelson is beyond reproach, and doesn't need to explain himself to us, his subjects. He pretty much told us as much himself during the Deripaska affair when he declined to inform us of the times and dates of his meetings with nobody's favourite oligarch, and what he discussed.

Besides, Gilligan is messing with forces he doesn't understand.

> Besides, Gilligan is messing with forces he doesn't
> understand.

All joking aside, if any journalist understands dark forces it is Gilligan after the Kelly affair.

>asaint

>All joking aside, if any journalist understands dark forces it is Gilligan after the Kelly affair


Hmm, where were the dark forces there then?


When it was pointed out to the journalist that his version of events differed greatly from Dr Kelly's, Mr Gilligan said he understood why an employee of the Ministry of Defence would have found it difficult to admit what he'd done to a committee of MPs.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3145833.stm

> Hmm, where were the dark forces there then?

Well, I'm certainly not here to defend Gilligan. But how can you put a journalist who possibly over-egged the pudding in the same category as a political machine that crassly threw a man to the wolves to save its own skin in a way that led to his death - however that came about.

And even if Kelly's testimony didn't fully support Gilligan's assertions, I don't think anyone doubts (or the government even bothers any more to deny) that the "dodgy dossier" was "sexed up" by the government.

Friends in High Places..... Grateful Friends..... Mr Oligarch Fenders .... Who knows where New Labour Ministers get their dosh to buy expensive homes when some of these properties appear to be beyond their salaries.... who knows...

Third time (un)lucky... more banana skins for Pa Brown's Minister to slip and slide on....

This should be fun!

Is this the same Gilligan who had to leave the BBC (not known for being too fussy about the facts) when he was unable adequately to substantiate his "dodgy dossier" report on the wireless. I hope the ES is keeping an eye on him!