🔗 Share this article

There exists a political theory in UK politics, frequently credited to Tony Blair, that caution is necessary when launching attacks in opposition, because when you reach government, it might return to hit you in the face.

The Opposition Years

As leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer mastered landing blows against the Conservatives. Throughout the Partygate scandal in particular, he demanded Boris Johnson to step down over his violation of regulations. "You should not be a legislator and a lawbreaker and it's time for him to go," he stated.

After Durham police launched an investigation whether he had broken lockdown rules himself by having a beer and curry at a campaign event, he took a huge political gamble and vowed he would quit if found guilty. Luckily for him, he was exonerated.

The "Mr Rules" Image

At the time, perhaps not entirely helpfully for the Labour leader whom the public already perceived was somewhat uptight, Lisa Nandy characterized him as "Mr Rules," emphasizing the difference between Starmer's apparently high ethical standards and Johnson's lack of concern.

Reversal of Fortune

Since taking power, the boomerang appears to have swung back toward the prime minister forcefully. Maintaining such high standards of integrity, not just for himself but for his whole ministerial team, was inevitably would prove an impossible task, particularly in the flawed world of politics.

But few foresaw that it would be Starmer himself who would be the first to undermine his own position, when his inability to see that taking free glasses, clothes and Taylor Swift tickets could break what minimal confidence existed that his government would be different.

Growing Controversies

Since then, the scandals have emerged rapidly, although they have differed in seriousness. Louise Haigh was compelled to step down as transport secretary last November after it was revealed she had been convicted of fraud over a lost official mobile in 2014.

Tulip Siddiq quit as a Treasury minister in January after accepting the government was being damaged by the uproar over her close ties to her aunt, the ousted prime minister of Bangladesh now facing corruption allegations.

The exit of Starmer's deputy, Angela Rayner, in September after she breached the ministerial code over her insufficient payment of stamp duty on her £800,000 seaside flat was the most serious blow yet.

Equal Standards

Yet Starmer has consistently maintained there would be no exceptions. "People will only believe we're transforming politics when I dismiss someone on the spot. If a minister – any minister – makes a significant violation of the rules, they will be gone. It doesn't matter who it is, they will be sacked," he told his biographer Tom Baldwin before the election.

Rachel Reeves Situation

When it emerged on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, second only to the prime minister in seniority, could be in trouble, it sent a shared apprehension through the top of government. If the chancellor were to go, the entire Starmer project could collapse entirely.

Downing Street, having apparently learned from the Rayner row, responded firmly, declaring that the chancellor had acknowledged "inadvertently" breaking housing rules by leasing her south London home without the specific £945 licence mandated by the local council.

Furthermore, the prime minister had already spoken with Reeves, sought advice from his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and determined that additional inquiry into the matter was "not necessary," all within hours of the Daily Mail story breaking.

Political Defense

Early on Thursday morning, government insiders were assured that Reeves, while having committed an error, had an justification: she had not received notification by her rental agency that her home was in a designated area which required a licence. She had quickly rectified the error by applying for one.

But Kemi Badenoch, whose Tory researchers are thought to be behind the story, was intent on securing a resignation. "This entire situation smells. The prime minister needs to cease attempting to conceal this, commission a complete inquiry and, if Reeves has violated legislation, grow a backbone and dismiss her," she wrote online.

Evidence Emerges

Fortunately for Reeves, she had receipts. Her husband located emails from the lettings agency they used to lease their home. Just before they were released, the agent released a declaration saying it had apologised to the couple for an "oversight" that meant they failed to obtain a licence.

The chancellor appears to be in the clear, although there are still questions over why her account evolved overnight: from her being ignorant that a licence was necessary, to the agency having informed them it would apply on their behalf.

Remaining Issues

Also, the law explicitly specifies it is the owner – instead of the lettings agent – that is legally responsible for applying. It is also unclear how the couple failed to notice that almost £1000 had not left their bank account.

Broader Implications

While the misdemeanour is comparatively small when compared with numerous ones committed during previous Tory administrations, Reeves's encounter with the standards regime highlights the difficulties of Starmer's position on ethics.

His goal of rebuilding shattered public trust in the political classes, gradually worn down after years of scandals, may be comprehensible. But the pitfalls of adopting superior ethical standards – as the boomerang comes back round – are clear: people are fallible.