🔗 Share this article

There exists a political theory in British politics, frequently credited to Tony Blair, that caution is necessary when launching attacks in opposition, since when you reach government, it could come back to hit you in the face.

During Opposition

As opposition leader, Keir Starmer became adept at scoring points against the Conservatives. Throughout the Partygate scandal specifically, he called for Boris Johnson to resign over his rule-breaking. "You should not be a legislator and a lawbreaker and it's time to pack his bags," he declared.

After Durham police launched an investigation whether he had broken lockdown rules himself by having a beer and curry at a campaign event, he made a significant political wager and vowed he would quit if found guilty. Fortunately for him, he was cleared.

The "Mr Rules" Image

At the time, possibly not completely advantageous for the Labour leader whom voters already thought was rather rigid, Lisa Nandy described him as "Mr Rules," highlighting the difference between Starmer's apparently high ethical standards and Johnson's lack of concern.

The Boomerang Returns

Since assuming office, the boomerang appears to have swung back toward the prime minister with a vengeance. Maintaining such high standards of integrity, not only for himself but for his whole ministerial team, was inevitably would prove an impossible task, especially in the imperfect realm of politics.

But rarely did anyone anticipate that it would be Starmer himself who would be the first to undermine his own position, when his failure to recognize that accepting free glasses, clothes and Taylor Swift tickets could break what little belief existed that his government would be distinct.

Mounting Scandals

Since then, the controversies have come thick and fast, though they have differed in seriousness. Louise Haigh was forced to resign as transport secretary last November after it emerged she had been found guilty of fraudulent activity 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 strong connections 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 gravest setback yet.

No Special Treatment

Yet Starmer has consistently maintained there would be no exceptions. "People will truly trust we're transforming politics when I dismiss someone on the spot. If a minister – whichever minister – makes a serious breach of the rules, they will be gone. It makes no difference who it is, they will be sacked," he told his biographer Tom Baldwin before the election.

The Reeves Controversy

When it emerged on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, ranking immediately below the prime minister in seniority, could be in trouble, it sent a shared apprehension through the highest levels of administration. If the chancellor were to go, the entire Starmer project could collapse entirely.

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

Furthermore, the prime minister had previously conversed with Reeves, consulted his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and determined that additional inquiry into the matter was "not necessary," within mere hours of the Daily Mail story breaking.

Government Response

Early on Thursday morning, government insiders were confident that Reeves, while having made a mistake, had an excuse: she had not been informed by her lettings agency that her home was in a specified zone which required a licence. She had promptly corrected the error by submitting an application.

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, order a full investigation and, if Reeves has violated legislation, show courage and sack her," she posted.

Evidence Emerges

Fortunately for Reeves, she had documentation. Her husband located emails from the rental company they used to rent out their home. Just before they were published, the agent released a declaration saying it had expressed regret to the couple for an "oversight" that meant they failed to obtain a licence.

The chancellor appears to be in the clear, though there are remaining queries over why her story changed overnight: from her being ignorant that a licence was necessary, to the agency having told them it would apply on their behalf.

Lingering Questions

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

Wider Consequences

While the infraction is comparatively small when measured against numerous ones committed during previous Tory administrations, Reeves's brush with the standards regime highlights the difficulties of Starmer's position on morality.

His ambition of rebuilding shattered public trust in the political establishment, eroded over time after years of scandals, may be comprehensible. But the dangers of adopting superior ethical standards – as the boomerang comes back round – are clear: people are imperfect.