'We are not saying very much' - Macleans.ca

‘We are not saying very much’


I asked Mr. Gillani’s spokesman, Brian Kilgore, if Mr. Gillani had any comment on last night’s report from CTV. Here is the response.

You probably know Nazim Gillani has been “invited” by a Hourse of Commons committee to appear before it on April 28.

This idea of House of Commons committees is new to us — Nazim is a business man, not a politician — and so we are treating this, at least for the next few days, as being similar to the idea of  a matter being “before the courts” and thus we are not saying very much.

Remember, the CTV report said others had said Nazim spoke about various things, and CTV was clear in saying there was no confirmation that pictures actually existed, or other items in the allegations were true.

Even local radio in Toronto this morning was careful to include phrasing saying there was no confirmation of the story about any (alleged) photos.

And our position is that with the court proceding on the 21st and the House of Commons committee on the 28th that we should not say anything because of the before the courts / Parliament restrictions.


‘We are not saying very much’

    • Was that his work on the Sun's cover the other day?

  1. I wish the press would follow Kilgore's example.

    • CTV has also reported that the Liberals refused to meet with the PI when he contacted them to give them the allegation info. I'd say they took the high road there, Gaunilon, and let the prime minister take the low road by slurring his own minister, lying about asking for investigations, and really making it look like the unnamed allegations are so bad, he cannot even speak them.

      I'd say John Baird and Prentice are also having a hard time with the whole truth about their and their underlings' "business meetings" with Rahim.

      • That's terrific. Meanwhile they've been wasting time and money in Parliament by demanding that Harper provide details of the allegations. I'm delighted that they piously managed to turn down the PI and have their high-roadness trumpeted by CTV.

        • Well, CTV never really trumpets anything good about Liberals — in fact, Bob Fife characterized it as they missed out on hearing the details first.

          Do you think if Harper had disclosed all the facts when he told us he was calling the cops, etc, that these opposition questions would have been redundant? He still could shut the questions down by disclosing — but by not doing that, he has most certainly invited all the media scrutiny to the case, no? I mean, when you read that the ethics commissioner wasn't actually asked to investigate — didn't you feel just a little bit had (semantically speaking)?

          • But now that you know the allegations, what do you think?

            I believe the Liberals can thank their lucky stars they weren't the ones disclosing all this information, it is to their benefit and quite a lucky break, because coming from them it would of sound again like desperate to demonize Harper, so this is a point on their side but they have to be carefully not to overplay this.

            But it is also good for Harper the way he handled it, imagine if this allegations are true and he hadn't done anything, he will be almost crucified for it, and it was a LEGAL reason why he couldn't made any more comments, this is not a fact yet, they are allegations and if it is untrue then he could be sued, he acted accordingly.

      • ' the prime minister take the low road by slurring his own minister'

        get real,
        that was the Liberal meadia and Iffy and the nobodies, jack and gilles and crew…….NOTHING disparaging came from the CPC, not one word.

    • I wish the press and the Loyal Opposition (redundancy?) would follow Kilgore's example.

      They should start photographing dogs?

    • There are some legitimate questions to be asked. If this government worked in a more clear and open way people wouldn't have so much room to speculate the answers their lacking from government. I'm sure Harper was responding this way to punish Geurgis, but it's created a situation of the opposition having to rely on the media for their information. I think they would have preferred getting the facts from the government vs the salacious headlines from the media who let's face it are only trying to sell papers here.

      • Adults are expected to make decisions on their own behaviour,
        Liberals saying 'Harper made me turn into an idiot' is no defence…..

  2. Well it's not what I had in mind, but it would probably be an improvement over their current conduct.

  3. Brian Mulroney had Karl Heinz Schreiber. Now, Stephen Harper has Nazim Gillani.

    To each unto his own, I guess.

    • That's an extremely weak analogy.

      • I agree!