Changes to travel expense rules ahead of the last election have been dismissed by a senior minister as a simplification rather than an attempt to expand what can be billed to taxpayers.
Addressing the latest chapter in the unfolding travel perks controversy, Labor frontbencher Chris Bowen defended tweaks to the definition of "party political duties" made by his government ahead of the May 3 poll.
"That change was simply a clarification of the rules to make them simpler," the energy minister told reporters on Saturday.
"There was no change to what is allowed or not allowed."
A report in the Daily Telegraph pointed to a determination issued by Special Minister of State Don Farrell on February 12 to expand the definition of "party political duties" under existing provisions.
Senator Farrell has been contacted for comment.
But Mr Bowen said the changes amounted to a clarification and simplification of the rules, particularly for staff travel, and they were not an expansion of entitlements.
"Those changes, made in a normal way, were made so that people are surer when they're booking their travel as to whether it was covered or not," he said.
The use of parliamentary entitlements has come under the microscope following revelations Minister for Sport Anika Wells claimed expenses for travel to major events for herself and her husband.
A growing list of MPs and senators have been facing similar scrutiny of their spending on travel for themselves and their families.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said he would seek advice from the parliamentary expenses watchdog on the rules for taxpayer-funded perks, while Ms Wells and Attorney-General Michelle Rowland have both referred their travel to the body for review.
Opposition Leader Sussan Ley, who previously resigned as health minister after using taxpayer funds to travel to buy a property, has offered bipartisan support to reform expense rules for politicians.
Ms Ley has also been calling for Ms Wells to resign from the front bench, a move the minister has rejected.
Coalition immigration spokesman Paul Scarr said all politicians should be "reasonable and considered" with respect to expenses.
"Just because you can do something under the rules, doesn't mean you should do it," he told Nine's Today program.
Politicians are allowed to claim travel expenses if their official duties are the "dominant purpose" of the trip.
They are also entitled to fly family to Canberra and other locations around Australia for reunions.