Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has defended using a Defence Force plane to fly home from a National Party fundraiser, saying he had no other way to get back to Auckland in time.

On the evening of 23 July, Luxon flew from Whanganui to Auckland on a six-seater military plane — an NZDF King Air — after attending a dinner that raised money for the National Party. He told reporters he needed to be in Auckland for a meeting the next morning, and that no commercial flights were available at that hour. He said he moved the meeting to 7am so he could also attend the funeral of former National MP Bill Birch.

Luxon argued the flight did not cost taxpayers extra money, because the military planes need to fly anyway and pilots need practice hours. He said he uses military planes "if and when it's appropriate." "I've got a busy job, I've got a full schedule," he said. RNZ

Labour leader Chris Hipkins accused Luxon of using the Defence Force as a "personal taxi service." He said using military planes to get home from a party fundraiser was "absolutely unjustifiable" and that there should be a clear line: Air Force planes should not be used to support party fundraising. He also stressed that the Defence Force is supposed to stay out of politics.

The argument is about where to draw the line between a prime minister's official travel needs and using public resources for party-political purposes. Luxon says the flight was a practical necessity — he needed to get home and no commercial flights were available. Hipkins says the real issue is what the event was for: a fundraiser, not government business.

The rules back this up. The Cabinet Manual — the rulebook ministers are expected to follow — says publicly funded travel should be for official purposes, with party-political activity treated separately. The problem is that a prime minister's schedule often mixes official and party events, and it can be hard to work out which part of a trip made the military plane necessary.

Hipkins's point about Defence Force neutrality is the sharper part of the attack. The military has a longstanding rule of staying out of politics. If it looks like Air Force planes are being used to help a governing party raise money, that works against that rule — whether or not it cost the taxpayer anything extra.

The broader context is that New Zealand prime ministers have faced this kind of criticism before. The government's usual response is to say it was practical and cost nothing extra; the opposition's usual response is to call it a misuse of public resources. What makes this case trickier is that the event was a fundraiser — not a government announcement or a diplomatic meeting — which makes it harder to argue the trip was official business, even if the need to get home afterwards was genuine.

Luxon has not said he will change how he uses military transport. No complaint has been sent to the Auditor-General, who reviews government spending. For now, the argument remains a political one, fought out through press gallery questions and opposition attacks.