Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Ministerial Travel: Cost

Thursday 23 January 2025 · 1 question

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 1 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Ministerial travel under the current Government is decided based on efficiency and time management.
  • The previous Government was criticized for wasteful use of taxpayer funds for short helicopter journeys.
  • The current Government considers the best use of time and resources when approving ministerial travel.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Joe Robertson Con Isle of Wight East
Standards & Ethics
Context

The question addresses the issue of government ministers using VIP helicopter travel, a topic previously criticized for being wasteful and out of touch with taxpayers.

Question

What steps he is taking to reduce the cost of ministerial travel. The Minister refers to helicopter travel, and she has given her description of the previous Government. Does she not accept that the Government are using VIP helicopter travel, not through the Ministry of Defence budget but through the Cabinet Office budget? Does that not make this Government grossly hypocritical, and is that not a symbol of how out of touch they are with the British public?

Answer from Ellie Reeves (Minister without Portfolio)

Under the last Government, the former Prime Minister would take helicopters for short journeys at huge waste to the taxpayer. The Prime Minister’s ministerial travel under this Government is always decided with consideration for the most efficient and best use of time and, crucially, in the interests of the taxpayer.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The questioner asked specifically about using VIP helicopter travel via Cabinet Office budget, which was not directly addressed by the Minister.

How: Changes Subject To Efficiency, References Previous Government

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)