SANDRA HOWARD’S hairdo for the election campaign was said to have cost the Conservatives less than 1per cent of the price of those for Cherie Blair.

As Labour defended the £7,700 incurred by Mrs Blair for having a hairstylist travel the country with her, Tory insiders said that the wife of Michael Howard, then Tory leader, had charged the party just £65.

Labour has reacted with a “so what?” response to the cost of Mrs Blair’s haircuts. A spokesman said: “Mrs Blair worked fantastically hard — and visited more than 50 constituencies during the campaign. She is enormously popular with the party and, don’t forget, we won the election.”

But the amount spent on Mrs Blair when Labour was seeking multimillion-pound loans for its campaign caused misgivings among Labour MPs who feared that voters would be insulted by the spending.

One MP called on Mrs Blair to pay back the money. Ian Gibson, MP for Norwich North, said that he was “astonished” much-needed election funds were used to settle the £275-a-day bill. He said that many people had invested huge effort in securing a third term — but that none would expect to have personal expenses met by political funds.

“I was astonished by this. I would never think of having my hair paid for by the Labour Party,” he said.

“Those funds are quite clearly for electioneering — leaflets and going doorstepping. That’s quite valuable to winning things, not the hairdo of the leader’s wife.

“We all have to look smart but you’re not going to the Dorchester each night when you’re campaigning.”

Details of the spending by Mrs Blair were contained in party accounts submitted to the Electoral Commission.

An invoice from André Suard, a stylist at a salon in Mayfair, Central London, is believed to have been declared as an election expense.

Labour took millions of pounds in secret loans from wealthy backers to fund its re-election.

The Prime Minister’s official spokesman refused to comment on the bill for Mrs Blair’s hairdresser.

But he said that Mrs Blair paid the bill when M Suard accompanied her when she travelled on official trips as the wife of the Prime Minister, not of the Labour Party leader.

The same had been true for a recent visit to Australia, New Zealand and Indonesia, he said.

“We have dealt with this issue repeatedly and the answer has always been the same, which is that Mrs Blair meets the cost, full stop,” he said.

The Labour Party was unable to say whether Mrs Blair had billed it for hairdressing at the previous general elections.

Mrs Blair was involved in campaigning — mainly separately from her husband — until the eve of the poll when she met a group of Asian women at a Leeds community centre.

Her use of a “pricey” hairdresser was commented on by Sandra Howard in her online diary of the campaign. The bill from Mrs Howard, a former model, was £65.

“That’s less than 1 per cent of Mrs Blair’s bill. It’s an interesting contrast, to say the least,” a Tory spokesman said.

ONLINE VIEWS

Why is it a female partner of a politician appears to believe she is entitled to financial assistance to look good when male partners would not be afforded the same “benefit”? Sexual equality? Don’t think so.
Posted by: Maureen Vieya

OK, £7,000 is a lot of money, but she is expected to perform for the Labour Party and look her best. She is not paid in any other way and listen to the cries if she hadn’t looked the part. Just leave her alone!
Posted by: Henk Kuiper

I think it’s a cheap shot. Why do we ridicule people in these positions — would we want to swap?
Posted by: Pat Donoghue

This isn’t news! As long as it’s not funded by the taxpayer, it’s a matter for Labour.
Posted by: Imran Khan

Leave the poor woman alone. She has fine, flyaway hair — very difficult to manage. Of course she had to look her best on the campaign trail.
Posted by: Gill Lomas-Walker

Hey, I’ll give her hair a wash and blowdry for £300 per day! Any offers?
Posted by: Sarah

I have voted Labour for the last 40 years but am now seriously looking for an alternative. Why do long-running governments eventually descend into sleaze and become self-serving?
Posted by: David Ellis

What is it hacks hate about Cherie? That she earns more than you do, I suspect.
Posted by: Deirdre

Off with her head!
Posted by: Mac

Times Recommends

• Oh no, Mr Darling: you have failed
• BBC survives dogfight over Kennel Club expose
• Where the Rosetta belongs can’t be set in stone