🔗 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, since when you reach government, it could come back to hit you in the face.

During Opposition

As leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer became adept at landing blows against the Conservatives. During the Partygate scandal specifically, he called for Boris Johnson to step down over his violation of regulations. "You should not be a legislator and a lawbreaker and it's time to pack his bags," he stated.

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

The "Mr Rules" Image

At the time, possibly not completely advantageous for the Labour leader whom voters already thought was rather rigid, Lisa Nandy characterized him as "Mr Rules," emphasizing the contrast between Starmer's apparently high ethical standards and Johnson's carelessness.

The Boomerang Returns

Since assuming office, the boomerang appears to have swung back toward the prime minister with a vengeance. Maintaining such levels of probity, not just for himself but for his whole ministerial team, was always going to be an impossible task, particularly in the imperfect realm of politics.

But rarely did anyone anticipate that it would be Starmer himself who would initially compromise his own position, when his failure to recognize that accepting free glasses, clothes and Taylor Swift tickets could break what minimal confidence existed that his government would be distinct.

Mounting Scandals

Since then, the controversies have emerged rapidly, though they have varied in degree of severity. Louise Haigh was compelled to step down as transport secretary last November after it was revealed she had been found guilty of fraudulent activity over a missing work phone in 2014.

Tulip Siddiq quit as a Treasury minister in January after acknowledging the government was being damaged by the furore over her strong connections to her aunt, the removed leader of Bangladesh now facing corruption allegations.

The departure 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 always been clear there would be no exceptions. "People will only believe we're changing 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 makes no difference who it is, they will be sacked," he told his biographer Tom Baldwin before the election.

The Reeves Controversy

When it was revealed on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, second only to the prime minister in seniority, could be in hot water, it sent a collective shudder round the top of government. If the chancellor were to go, the entire Starmer project could come tumbling down.

Downing Street, having seemingly gained insight from the Rayner dispute, responded firmly, announcing that the chancellor had admitted to "inadvertently" violating housing rules by renting out her south London home without the specific £945 licence demanded by the local council.

Not only that, the prime minister had already spoken with Reeves, sought advice from his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and decided that further investigation into the matter was "not necessary," all within hours of the Daily Mail story breaking.

Government Response

Early on Thursday morning, administration sources were confident that Reeves, while having made a mistake, had an justification: she had not received notification by her lettings agency that her home was in a specified zone which necessitated a permit. She had promptly corrected the error by submitting an application.

But Kemi Badenoch, whose Tory researchers are thought to be behind the story, was determined to get a scalp. "This whole thing stinks. The prime minister needs to cease attempting to conceal this, order a full investigation and, if Reeves has broken the law, grow a backbone and sack her," she wrote online.

Evidence Emerges

Luckily for the chancellor, she had receipts. Her husband located emails from the lettings agency they used to rent out their home. Just before they were released, the agent issued a statement 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 account evolved overnight: from her being ignorant that a licence was necessary, to the agency having informed them it would submit the application for them.

Lingering Questions

Also, the law clearly states it is the property holder – rather than the lettings agent – that is legally responsible for applying. It is additionally uncertain how the couple failed to notice that almost £1000 had not left their bank account.

Broader Implications

While the infraction is relatively minor when measured against multiple instances committed during prior Conservative governments, Reeves's brush with the standards regime underlines the challenges of Starmer's position on ethics.

His ambition of rebuilding broken public faith in the political classes, eroded over time after years of scandals, may be understandable. But the dangers of taking the moral high ground – as the political consequences return – are clear: people are fallible.