News reports from multiple outlets including SBS News, news.com.au, and 9News confirmed that the Abbott government relaxed rules regarding federal ministers' business interests, allowing them to hold company shares under certain conditions [1][2][3].
The Abbott code did not eliminate all requirements to divest shares that created conflicts - rather, it changed the threshold and mechanisms for determining when shares must be divested.
The Howard Government Precedent (1996-2007)**
The claim omits crucial historical context: under former Prime Minister John Howard's ministerial code of conduct, ministers were "simply required to sell shares in companies that came under their area of portfolio responsibility" [4].
The Rudd Labor Government's Stricter 2007 Code**
Kevin Rudd's Labor government introduced significantly stricter "Standards of Ministerial Ethics" in December 2007, which the Abbott code replaced.
Under Rudd's code, ministers were "banned from owning shares unless they are held in superannuation funds, publicly-listed funds or in a trust where the minister has no influence over investment decisions" [4].
This was described at the time as requiring ministers "to conduct themselves to a higher standard of conduct than had been the case in the past" [5].
**3.
Section 8.2 required that "Ministers should ensure that dealings with lobbyists are conducted consistently with the Lobbying Code of Conduct, so that they do not give rise to a conflict between public duty and private interest" [6].
While the factual reporting is reliable, the framing emphasizes the "winding back" of standards without fully contextualizing that this represented a return toward Howard-era standards rather than an unprecedented relaxation.
**Did Labor do something similar?**
Search conducted: "Labor government ministerial code of conduct share ownership changes comparison"
**Finding:** Labor's Rudd government actually implemented the *stricter* code that Abbott later modified.
* * * *
In 2007, Rudd introduced the "Standards of Ministerial Ethics" which explicitly banned ministers from owning most individual shares [4][5].
This was a significant tightening compared to both the preceding Howard government and the subsequent Abbott government.
**Key comparison points:**
- **Howard (1996-2007):** Ministers only had to divest shares in companies directly related to their portfolio [4]
- **Rudd/Gillard Labor (2007-2013):** Ministers banned from owning most individual shares; only superannuation, publicly-listed funds, or blind trusts allowed [4][5]
- **Abbott Coalition (2013-2015):** Relaxed to allow shareholdings in publicly listed companies [1][2]
**Assessment:** Labor's approach was demonstrably stricter on this specific issue.
**The Policy Rationale:**
While critics viewed the Abbott changes as reducing accountability, the government likely justified the changes on practical grounds.
The Howard-era approach of case-by-case portfolio-based divestment may have been seen as more workable while still addressing direct conflicts.
**International Context:**
Australian ministerial standards are comparable to other Westminster systems.
The Rudd approach was actually more restrictive than many international counterparts.
**The Unaddressed Issue:**
The real test of any ministerial code is not the text but the enforcement.
As Julia Gillard noted in 2007 regarding the Howard government: "What happened with the Howard government code of conduct... it stopped living and breathing and became empty words on a sheet of paper, and even the most clear breaches of the code were no longer the subject of any punishment" [4].
The effectiveness of Abbott's code depended on whether it was actually enforced when breaches occurred.
**Subsequent History:**
The Abbott code was later modified by Malcolm Turnbull in 2018 following the Barnaby Joyce affair, with changes focusing on relationships with staffers rather than shareholdings [7].
This suggests the share ownership issue, while contentious, was not the only or most prominent ethical concern that emerged during the Coalition years.
The core fact is correct: the Abbott government did change the ministerial code of conduct in December 2013 to allow ministers to hold shares in publicly listed companies, relaxing the stricter Rudd-era ban on most individual shareholdings.
In reality, it represented a partial return to the approach used under John Howard's government (1996-2007), where ministers only had to divest shares directly related to their portfolio.
The Rudd Labor government had implemented unusually strict standards in 2007, and Abbott's changes moved back toward the longer-standing Howard approach.
The core fact is correct: the Abbott government did change the ministerial code of conduct in December 2013 to allow ministers to hold shares in publicly listed companies, relaxing the stricter Rudd-era ban on most individual shareholdings.
In reality, it represented a partial return to the approach used under John Howard's government (1996-2007), where ministers only had to divest shares directly related to their portfolio.
The Rudd Labor government had implemented unusually strict standards in 2007, and Abbott's changes moved back toward the longer-standing Howard approach.