Australia has 7 living former prime ministers who are no longer in parliament – its equal highest number ever. In addition to their superannuation entitlements (not covered in this article), these former prime ministers can access certain Commonwealth-funded services to support their ongoing public role. The Independent Parliamentary Expenses Authority (IPEA) reports this expenditure quarterly, which often attracts media attention given its high-profile subjects. This article examines how the entitlements are set, the scope of entitlements and how Australia compares to other similar nations.

How are entitlements provided?

Former prime ministers have received certain travel entitlements since at least 1941, while Sir Robert Menzies was the first retired former prime minister to receive a furnished office and staff. A 2010 Review of Parliamentary Entitlements (the Belcher Review) recommended formally legislating this practice (p. 95), which was realised in 2017 through the Parliamentary Business Resources Act 2017 (PBR Act).

The PBR Act (section 16) allows the Prime Minister to ‘determine that the Commonwealth must provide specified goods, services, premises, equipment or facilities, or pay specified allowances or expenses’ to a former prime minister, their spouse, dependant or employee. This determination is a non-disallowable legislative instrument, which specifies the provided resources (and any conditions), including personal staff, an equipped office, and car/air transport. It was most recently updated in March 2024 to set out entitlements for Scott Morrison.

Despite the longstanding nature of these entitlements, they have occasionally been criticised from within the parliament. For example, in 2017 Senator Pauline Hanson moved an amendment to the Parliamentary Entitlements Legislation Amendment Bill 2017 to prevent former prime ministers receiving Commonwealth-funded benefits except for superannuation. In response, the Special Minister of State, Scott Ryan, contended:

… it is almost impossible for a former Prime Minister to be immediately free of the commitments and demands that naturally arise from holding such a high office when they leave parliament. Successive governments have taken this into account in providing former prime ministers with a range of facilities, including domestic travel, to assist them in meeting the commitments that arise from their continued standing and involvement in the community. 

The amendment was defeated 35 votes to 5, having received endorsement from One Nation, Liberal Democratic and Australian Conservatives senators.

More recently, in May 2024 an Australian Greens motion called for the Senate to note that the Remuneration Tribunal was ‘better placed’ to determine former prime ministers’ entitlements. Like Senator Hanson’s earlier motion, this also failed to gain support from either major party and was subsequently defeated.

How much has been provided?

IPEA (and historically Department of Finance) data shows that over the past 12 months, former prime ministers have claimed over $1.8 million in travel and office expenses. Total claims since July 2008 amount to $21.9 million, of which almost $18 million (82%) was for office facilities, including rent and renovations. Notably, 5 of the 7 former prime ministers’ offices are Sydney-based, where average office facilities expenses for the most recently reported 12 months are comparatively higher (approximately $270,000) than those based elsewhere (approximately $128,000).

Car costs (incorporating private leases and fuel in addition to COMCAR use) are the next largest expense, with the most recent data indicating each former prime minister claims approximately $18,000 per year on average. While these costs have increased since 2008, office administration and communications expenses have reduced. This is likely due to email and digital subscriptions largely replacing requirements for postage and newspapers.

Alongside these expenses, former prime ministers have consistently been provided 3 staff to support their public role. These staff are employed under the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 and allocated within the PBR Determination. Given their administrative support roles, allocated staff are broadly mid-level personnel.

What do other similar countries do?

Other Westminster parliaments have varying approaches in providing services to former prime ministers, in addition to pensions and other specified allowances. In Canada, former prime ministers do not receive any publicly-funded services. However, in the United Kingdom a ‘Public Duty Costs Allowance’ currently provides an annual limit of £115,000 (around A$226,300) to reimburse former prime ministers for ‘necessary administrative costs arising from their special position in public life’. In 2024–25, the total cost was £782,787 (approximately A$1.62 million). Established in 1991, the allowance has remained at its current level since 2011 but the Prime Minister reviews this annually and at the start of each parliament. The Cabinet Office publishes an account of these expenses in its annual report.

In New Zealand, the Remuneration Authority determines the level of travel entitlement provided to former prime ministers and their spouses or partners. The current Determination (as at November 2025) states that domestic commercial travel, a private car and use of the VIP Transport Service car fleet can be provided to former prime ministers. These expenses are published in the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) annual report. The DIA reporting for 2025 showed an annual cost of NZ$384,949 (approximately A$333,300). Notably, the Determination does not provide for any office or staffing expenses.