Former Liberal senator Linda Reynolds has paid back nearly $8,800 in parliamentary expenses after her partner claimed family reunion allowances to visit his son in Melbourne while en route to meet her in Canberra.
Reynolds accepted the ruling of the Independent Parliamentary Expenses Authority (IPEA) but initially disputed their ruling, saying her partner’s visits to his son – her stepson – were necessary after “high profile (and false) 2021 workplace allegations made against me”, seemingly a reference to her
long-running court dispute with former staffer Brittany Higgins.
The IPEA, which administers the use of political spending and travel, last week
published a number of recent reviews into parliamentarians’ expenses. Labor MP Louise Miller-Frost repaid more than $4,100 after travelling to Perth with her husband several days before a committee hearing, while Liberal senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price repaid $387 after blaming an “oversight” for claiming an extra day of travel allowance.
Reynolds, a former defence minister who left parliament at the May 2025 federal election, was required to repay $8,778.01 after three trips her partner took between Perth, Melbourne and Canberra in May and June 2025.
In a statement to Guardian Australia, Reynolds said she repaid the amount, which included a 25% penalty loading.
“At the time of undertaking the travel I believed it was within the rules. IPEA took a different view which I accept,” she said.
In a September 2025 email to Reynolds, the IPEA raised concern that on each occasion, her partner “appears to have stayed for two nights in Melbourne without you, before joining you in Canberra”, adding: “there are no provisions in the legislation for personal stopovers when travelling for family reunion purposes”.
Sign up for the Breaking News Australia email
The IPEA found, in its review published online, that three trips between Perth and Melbourne were “not to accompany or join Ms Reynolds” but instead “for the predominant purpose, as stated by Ms Reynolds in her correspondence, of spending time with their son.”
The IPEA said family travel entitlements were for “spending time and facilitating family life with the member, not broader family,” ruling all three trips to Melbourne did not meet the guidelines. It found the subsequent travel from Melbourne to Canberra, however, was consistent with the legislation.
Parliamentarians are entitled to
“family reunion” travel benefits, allowing close family members to join them on occasion when travelling away from home – for example, to Canberra for parliament sitting, or other locations for committee hearings. IPEA advice states a spouse or nominee is entitled to the equivalent of nine business class return airfares from their home city to Canberra, and an additional three business return airfares outside of Canberra.
“Family reunion” travel is permitted only if the family member is travelling to accompany or join the parliamentarian.
In correspondence to the IPEA, also published in the review, Reynolds stated her partner travelled to join her in Canberra “via stopovers in Melbourne to see and stay with his son… my (defacto) stepson”.
“As [redacted] is my partner’s son and an integral member of our family, I believe that [her partner] stopping over in Melbourne on his way to Canberra was clearly to facilitate our family life and therefore meets requirement (c) of the Regulations. Given work my commitments I was not always able to take the time to do so on my way to Canberra. However, we believed it was important for [her partner] to do so,” Reynolds wrote.
“This was particularly important given the high profile (and false) 2021 workplace allegations made against me (and subsequently [redacted]). They were highly traumatic for all our family members and [her partner] and I were concerned to ensure that [her stepson] and his sister were ok and that our family unit remained strong.”
Guardian Australia asked Reynolds if this was a reference to her
various court proceedings related to former employee Higgins, who was ruled to have defamed her ex-boss when she accused Reynolds of mishandling her rape allegation. Reynolds did not immediately respond.
The IPEA, in a letter to Reynolds, wrote that her partner was allowed to travel between Perth and Canberra, but that travel rules don’t “make provision for breaks in the journey or ‘stopovers’.”
The senator responded that “it did not cost the taxpayer any extra to make the stopover”, asking for a review and later calling the IPEA’s position “patently ridiculous”.
“[Her partner] travelled to Canberra to be reunited with me and there was no additional cost to the taxpayer. Even if there had been, surely what would be repayable should be any cost difference with the direct flight from Perth to Canberra (which can be more expensive),” Reynolds wrote.
Miller-Frost repaid $4,183 after travelling to Perth with her husband in January 2023, three days before a committee hearing. In correspondence to IPEA, the Labor MP said she travelled earlier to “acclimatise” to “the significant time difference between Adelaide and Perth”, saying she was “exhausted” after a busy 2022.
The Labor MP did not claim travel allowance for the extra days before the hearing, but IPEA ruled she should only have travelled on the day of, or before, her parliamentary business began. She repaid the cost of the airfares, with a 25% penalty loading.
<small>Source: The Guardian</small>
