I don't have a lot to add on apparent conflicts of interest. The way Justice Oliphant defined it was that apparent conflicts of interest are understood to exist if there is a reasonable perception, which a reasonably well-informed person could properly have, that a public office holder's ability to exercise an official power or perform an official duty or function will be or must have been affected by his personal interest. I have it in my notes as well, which hopefully you will get.
Ian Greene's description of how that works in the municipal affairs case that he described is correct.
You asked about what would happen if you switched the model.