.svg)
Labour Leader Faces Backlash Over Domestic Flight Expenditure, Tripling Sunak's Spendings-Sir Keir Starmer is facing accusations of "rank hypocrisy" after revelations that his domestic flight expenses have reached £102,000 since assuming office following last July's General Election. This figure, released amidst growing scrutiny, comes after Labour's vocal criticism of former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's use of private jets while in opposition, and Starmer's own pledges to implement stringent regulations on ministerial private aircraft use to "save millions for taxpayers."
The controversy stems from the stark contrast between Starmer's expenditure and Sunak's comparable spending. During the ten months following his appointment as Prime Minister in October 2022, Sunak's bill for private UK flights totaled £36,900. Starmer's £102,000, therefore, represents nearly three times the amount spent by his predecessor.
The issue is further inflamed by comparisons to specific flights. In February, Sunak faced criticism for a 41-minute flight to Cornwall, an incident reminiscent of Labour's condemnation of his 2023 flight to Blackpool. At that time, then Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves pledged to crack down on ministers' "private jet habit" and implement strict regulations.
Shadow Cabinet Office Minister Mike Wood has seized on the revelations, accusing Starmer of "rank hypocrisy." "Labour were all too happy to point the finger in opposition," Wood stated, "But now in government, it is clear that this was just petty political point scoring and it's one rule for them and another for everyone else."
Adding to the growing list of accusations, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has also attacked Starmer's stance on immigration, sharing clips of his past remarks promoting the benefits of immigration, further challenging his current political position.
The escalating scrutiny over Starmer's flight expenses and shifting political stances has ignited a fierce debate about accountability and consistency within the Labour Party, raising questions about his leadership and adherence to his own stated principles.
