Wanted: Turnaround specialist with proven track record of success as the chief executive of a multibillion-dollar multinational. Must be able to lock up skeletons and misplace the closet key, sweep dirt under the rug and bedazzle the masses with a spin campaign that makes the greatest of boondoggles appear to be ancient history perpetrated by someone else.

Now, is this smart-ass job posting for the top job at Nortel Networks or for the esteemed office of the Prime Minister of Canada?

The more I hear and read about Adscam and Justice Gomery's report, the more I keep drawing parallels with the restructuring of Nortel, not only of its business and bottom line, but of its reputation, following the accounting scandal.

Is John Roth a match for Jean Chrétien, Frank Dunn a match for Paul Martin (as finance minister) and Bill Owens a match for ... well, that's the big question, isn't it?

If we take Justice Gomery's report at face value, it was Mr. Chrétien and a tight circle around him that bears ultimate responsibility for the gross mismanagement of the sponsorship program that allowed millions to be swindled from taxpayers. Mr. Martin in his previous incarnation as finance minister, it appears, was on the outside looking in and seeing very little.

At this point, it appears that Mr. Martin will fare better than his alter ego, Mr. Dunn. He may lose the next election and preside over the end of more than 12 years of Liberal rule, but at least he won't be backed into a corner like Mr. Chrétien, vowing to consume more taxpayers' dollars with a judicial review in an attempt to wipe away the tarnish to his reputation.

The key parallel to draw between the Liberal and Nortel scandals is not found by using hindsight to affix blame, but in looking forward at who is in the best position to clean up the whole mess and restore the confidence of taxpayers (shareholders). It is found by identifying who has the role of turnaround specialist.

In the Nortel fiasco, it is quite obvious – former U.S. Navy man William Owens. Right now we exist in a sweet spot where we can say Mr. Owens did his job. He came in, appraised the situation, set to work to clean up the books, overhauled Nortel's business and made strategic acquisitions to provide access to new markets. While the company only last week reported a small loss where analysts expected a small profit, overall the news appeared positive. The next year or two will illustrate whether he indeed succeeded in getting Nortel back on track and if new CEO Mike Zafirovski can hold the course.

With the sponsorship scandal, identifying the turnaround specialist is far more difficult. Is it Paul Martin? Even if he wasn't complicit in any wrongdoing and he, along with Ralph Goodale et al. did take steps to clean up the mess, can they escape being painted with the same brush, dipped in Liberal red? Is the stink of it all too much for any Liberal successor to Jean Chrétien to overcome? It all comes back to public perception. No matter how "clean" the government of the day may be, more than a decade in power and a major scandal involving top officials simply demands a shakeup to restore some measure of public trust that simply cannot come without a switch in the ruling party.

Is Mr. Martin the turnaround specialist? Let's for a moment give him the benefit of the doubt and hold him up as a noble and conscientious fellow who did his best to clean up the mess that was waiting for him in the PMO. It is still, nonetheless, time for a change. Like Mr. Owens, he has steered the ship through rough waters as best he could. Now it is time to surrender the helm to someone else. Unlike Mr. Owens, however, he may need a little nudge.

Enter Jack Layton and one last analogy.

It is a "deal with the lesser devil" mentality that has led the NDP to bolster the minority Liberals even as Mr. Layton spins his own anti-Liberal message. The whole mess makes me think of a group of dissident shareholders fighting to get their way with an entrenched board of directors, using the threat of voting in a new slate as their leverage.

Jack Layton is the pivotal figure, not only because of his party's support for the current government, but if the Liberals manage to eke out another minority mandate, he will again be in a position to make or break the government.

How about it, Jack? What best serves the interests of shareholders? An embattled board forced into constant compromise, or a fresh slate with a strong mandate? Is it worth the risk to take a turn on the dance floor with the devil in blue?