Evidence

Apparently Lord Mandelson told us that he first met the Russian oligarch in 2006, he was not corrected by anybody. We now know that he has stated that was a mistake and that actually he had first met him in 2004. Now what should be asked is if the EU investigated Peter Mandleson were they aware that the first meetings took place in 2004, not 2006.

If they heard that he first met him in 2006 why did they not issue an immediate correction stating that the noble Lord was wrong and that they had been told that meetings took place in 2004, as per any evidence supplied to them by Peter.

Maybe we ought to see the transcript of any evidence supplied to both the EU and Gordon Brown which proves, beyond all reasonable doubt that Lord Mandelson is guilty of nothing.

Do we just accept the truth of what has been said, remember why Mandelson resigned in the first place, was it not because he forgot he had an outstanding mortgage. It seems to me that the good Lord is perfectly suited to the unelected House of Lords, he seems very forgetful.