BRITAIN: Doubts continued about culture secretary Tessa Jowell's survival in cabinet yesterday, despite prime minister Tony Blair's decision to clear her of any breach of the ministerial code of conduct.
With Italian prosecutors expected to decide soon whether to prosecute her lawyer husband, David Mills, on charges of perjury and possibly money-laundering, some MPs pressed Ms Jowell to make a personal statement to the Commons about her knowledge of her husband's complex financial affairs.
And while chancellor Gordon Brown led ministerial attempts to close down the controversy yesterday, there was speculation that ministers could ultimately face the embarrassment of an Italian extradition request should Mr Mills decline to present himself for any trial.
At the same time Conservative MP Nigel Evans rejected ministerial claims that Thursday's report by cabinet secretary Gus O'Donnell had cleared Ms Jowell, and said the ministerial code would be left "in tatters" if she did not resign.
Mr Mills denies that the £344,000 he received from an Italian source was "a bribe" from Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi in return for helpful testimony in a 1997 corruption probe.
In a brief report on Thursday Sir Gus said Ms Jowell became aware in August 2004 that her husband had received in September 2000 a sum of money "he thought he had reasonable grounds to believe was a gift".
According to her own account, by the time Ms Jowell became aware of the money, her husband had agreed with the Inland Revenue that it should be treated as earnings on which tax should be paid.
Sir Gus consequently reported: "She did not, therefore, consider it necessary to make any reference about any of this to her permanent secretary.
"However, she fully accepts that Mr Mills should have informed her and she would of course have reported it."
It was on the basis of this assurance from Ms Jowell that Mr Blair made the decision that was for him, and not Sir Gus, to make - namely that she had not been in breach of the ministerial code.
However, while the Conservative front bench chose not to join the attack, Mr Evans dismissed the report as "a whitewash".
As MPs studied the detail, it was also widely noted that the code had been breached in the first instance, and that Sir Gus implicitly criticised the minister's apparent failure to take a greater interest in her husband's affairs with his reminder that notification of financial interests of ministers and their partners is the responsibility of ministers themselves.
Downing Street confirmed yesterday that Ms Jowell had consulted the parliamentary commissioner for standards about her affairs and her declaration of interests as an MP - which likewise has so far contained no reference to the original "gift" made to her husband in 2000.
However, for some Labour MPs it seemed this was coming too late, as former minister Peter Kilfoyle's call for her resignation was followed by others demanding a more independent and transparent process for investigating alleged breaches of the ministerial code.
Labour MP Ian Gibson reflected widespread concern that "this will run and run" to the further embarrassment of the government.
Confirming what he considered a particular "Labour dimension" to the story, Dr Gibson told BBC Radio 4's World at One programme that the world of hedge funds, multiple mortgages and complex investments was "not a world we have much respect for as Labour MPs".
With Labour MP Tony Wright reflecting disbelief among colleagues that "she didn't know what was going on" in her husband's case, Conservative MP Richard Ottaway said: "This is a very serious case here. There are a lot of unanswered questions and, in my judgment, I think Tessa Jowell should be prepared to come before parliament and answer many of the questions which still remain unanswered."