It is not surprising that Paul Martin has asked the Liberals' Ethics Counsellor to  come up with a scheme that will allow him, if he becomes Prime Minister, to continue to own his large, multinational, wide-ranging corporate interests that include a shipping company.

Not surprising because there has been wide gaps since the early 1990s between Liberal rhetoric about government ethics and the reality of their actions.  But Martin's attitude and past and present actions, like the actions of the entire Liberal Cabinet, are still disappointing, dishonest, hyprocritical and cynicism-breeding.

In 1992 as a Liberal opposition MP, Paul Martin stated that a fully independent, fully empowered ethics watchdog was needed "to provide the public with the assurance that individual transactions which might be in conflict have been handled in a fair and legitimate manner." In 1993, the Liberals promised in the "governing with integrity" chapter of their election platform to set up such a watchdog, and promised "no more politics as usual."

Instead, in June 1994 the Liberals set up a lapdog "Ethics Counsellor" who has no independence nor investigative powers, is completely controlled by Prime Minister Chrétien, and reports in private to Chrétien about conflicts involving ministers. For almost nine years, Ethics Counsellor Howard Wilson has acted as a frontman for the Liberals, repeatedly clearing the Prime Minister and Cabinet ministers of alleged violations of ethics rules, often by ignoring rules and clear conflicts of interest or by simply refusing to investigate allegations.

The American word for defence lawyer is "counsellor" and Wilson has lived up to this definition by consistently defending the actions of many ministers. So it is also not surprising that Wilson has recently come to Martin's defence, telling the media "I don't believe it is necessary for him [Martin] to sell the business."

However, any reasonable interpretation of the ethics rules for ministers leads to the conclusion that Martin should have sold the company when he became Finance Minister, and that the only ethical option is to sell if he becomes Prime Minister.

The rules, which the Liberals themselves revamped in 1994, require ministers to "arrange their private affairs in a manner that will prevent real, potential or apparent conflicts of interest from arising" and "that will bear the closest public scrutiny, an obligation that is not fully discharged by simply acting within the law."

The rules also require ministers to avoid even "the appearance of being placed under an obligation to any person or organization . . . that might profit from special consideration" and "to uphold the highest ethical standards so that public confidence and trust in the integrity, objectivity and impartiality of government are conserved and enhanced."

Martin and Wilson claim that the management agreement for the shipping company under which Martin was updated about significant company activities several times while he was Finance Minister did not violate any of these rules, and that continuing to own the company if he becomes Prime Minister will not violate any of these rules.

In order to agree with Martin and Wilson, you have to believe that Martin, as owner of the company, does not appear to be under an obligation to the shipping company.  You also have to believe that any real, potential or apparent conflicts of interests were prevented when Martin was Finance Minister, and will be prevented if he becomes Prime Minister.

Given that the Ethics Counsellor and the Liberal Cabinet have been in cahoots behind closed doors on ethics matters since 1994, only a forensic audit of Martin's and the shipping company's activities when he was Finance Minister could prove for sure that all conflicts were avoided in the past.

As Prime Minister, avoiding such conflicts becomes impossible. Martin's company is regulated by so many government departments in general ways (such as by tax, trade and corporate governance laws and other measures) and specific ways (such as by shipping, environmental, and transport laws and measures) that he would simply not be able to function as Prime Minister.

Even if Martin stepped out of the Cabinet room, or delegated his powers to other ministers when he saw a conflict arising, the appearance of a conflict would remain because Martin would have power over all ministers. They would all know that Martin could kick them out of Cabinet if they did not do what he wanted.

It seems that Martin intends to try to ignore this reality and instead hide behind whatever scheme the Ethics Counsellor develops. But will the scheme bear the closest public scrutiny? Will it go beyond what the law requires? Will it uphold the highest ethical standards and enhance the public's confidence and trust in the integrity of government?

 I and many other commentators don't believe any scheme could meet these standards, and as a result Martin's situation will violate federal ethics rules.

By even trying to get around ethics rules with the help of a lapdog Ethics Counsellor, Martin is failing to uphold the highest ethical standards, and doing little to give the public confidence in his integrity.  That sounds a lot like politics as usual.  Canadians deserve better.