Thursday, January 15, 2009

Andrew Gilligan: Mandelson Smear Just Don't Add Up

Earlier we reported on Gilligan's latest smear. But unless we're missing something it really doesn't seem to add up to a molehill, never mind a mountain. The New Mathematics:

Gilligan minimum estimated accumulated equity from London property ladder to date = "only" £700,000, to maximum £840,000; Disposal of constituency house = £205,000; Disposal of shares in successful business Clemmow Hornby Inge = £1,000,000; Inheritance from Lady Mary Mandelson = £452,000 assuming equal share with brother which is not certain; Mortgage based on 4.5 times salary = £750,000; Total £3,107,000 to £3,247,000.

There is one cash flow pinch point in this story of the well-to-dos. This is the time between buying the Regency Villa and later cashing in the shares. This would have been covered easily and completely legitimately by Mandy's brother giving him temporary use of his own share of their joint inheritance. Once the sale of shares was concluded and his family repaid Mr Mandelson as was would have had between £607,000 and £747,000 cash in hand.

LOL believe the cumulated London equity may well have been higher than Gilligan's higher estimate, that there may easily have been other incoming payments and gifts, and that on the face of it there isn't a case to answer.

Just a load of crappy, creepy smearage from a past master. Lord Mandelson isn't everyone's cup of tea but Gilligan has turned into a purveyor of nonsense and a Tory puppet. Where are the stories about Tory donations, nannys and gravy trains?


Anonymous said...

He is also assuming that there is no other transfer of assets from his mother/trusts other than the declared estate - which would be pretty unusual in an estate of that size.

I suspect that a similar analysis could be performed in respect of David Cameron and his wife - who I daresay have both received substantial sums from thier inlaws - but of course inherited wealth is ok for the Tories.

Could you imagine the uproar if any journalist was to spend their time trying to disentagle all the financial transactions of any Tory politicians in such detail (now where did Alan Duncan's wealth actually come from?)- or even of a journalist such as Gilligan, never mind a detailed examination of his application of the usual journalistic ethics.

Kerron said...


Chris Paul said...

I'll take a look Kerron. Has old Srtignr (actually thick, not dyslexic - joke) been getting up your nose then?

Anon: Obviously Gilligan should be all over Boris and the Tories in general. Mandelson has a few moves there in this story but nothing compared to the possible and impossible of the Tories.

But is Duncan's original "stake" a particularly big issue???