🔗 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 achieve power, it could come back to strike 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 demanded Boris Johnson to resign over his rule-breaking. "You cannot be a lawmaker and a rule-breaker and it's time to pack his bags," he stated.

After Durham police began probing whether he had broken lockdown rules himself by consuming a beer and curry at a political gathering, he took a huge political gamble and promised he would resign if determined to have committed an offense. Fortunately for him, he was cleared.

The "Mr Rules" Image

At the time, perhaps not entirely helpfully for the Labour leader whom voters already thought was somewhat uptight, Lisa Nandy characterized him as "Mr Rules," highlighting the contrast between Starmer's seemingly elevated ethical standards and Johnson's lack of concern.

The Boomerang Returns

Since assuming office, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister with a vengeance. Maintaining such high standards of integrity, not only for himself but for his entire cabinet, was inevitably would prove an unachievable challenge, particularly in the imperfect realm 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 spectacles, clothes and Taylor Swift tickets could break what minimal confidence existed that his government would be distinct.

Mounting Scandals

Since then, the scandals have come thick and fast, although they have differed in seriousness. Louise Haigh was forced to resign as transport secretary last November after it emerged she had been convicted of fraud over a missing work phone in 2014.

Tulip Siddiq quit as a Treasury minister in January after accepting the government was being harmed by the furore over her close ties to her aunt, the removed leader of Bangladesh now accused of corruption.

The exit of Starmer's deputy, Angela Rayner, in September after she breached the ministerial code over her underpayment of stamp duty on her £800,000 coastal apartment was the gravest setback yet.

No Special Treatment

Yet Starmer has consistently maintained there would be no special treatment. "People will truly trust we're transforming politics when I dismiss someone on the spot. If a minister – whichever minister – makes a significant violation of the rules, they will be out. It makes no difference who it is, they will be sacked," he informed his chronicler Tom Baldwin before the election.

Rachel Reeves Situation

When it emerged on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, ranking immediately below the prime minister in authority, could be in hot water, it sent a shared apprehension through the highest levels of administration. If the chancellor were to depart, the whole Starmer initiative could come tumbling down.

Downing Street, having apparently learned from the Rayner row, acted decisively, declaring that the chancellor had admitted to "inadvertently" breaking housing rules by leasing her south London home without the required £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 determined that further investigation into the matter was "not necessary," all within hours of the Daily Mail story emerging.

Political Defense

Early on Thursday morning, government insiders were assured that Reeves, while having made a mistake, had an excuse: she had not received notification by her rental agency that her home was in a specified zone which necessitated a permit. She had promptly corrected the error by applying for one.

But Kemi Badenoch, whose Tory researchers are thought to be behind the story, was determined to get a scalp. "This entire situation smells. 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 posted.

Evidence Emerges

Fortunately for Reeves, she had documentation. Her husband dug out emails from the rental company they used to rent out 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 neglected to acquire a licence.

The chancellor seems to be exonerated, although there are still questions over why her story changed overnight: from her being unaware that a licence was necessary, to the agency having informed them it would apply on their behalf.

Remaining Issues

Also, the law clearly states it is the property holder – instead of the lettings agent – that is legally accountable for applying. It is also unclear how the couple failed to notice that almost £1000 had not been deducted from their bank account.

Wider Consequences

While the infraction is relatively minor when measured against numerous ones committed during prior Conservative governments, Reeves's encounter with the standards regime underlines the difficulties of Starmer's position on ethics.

His ambition of restoring shattered public trust in the political establishment, eroded over time after years of scandals, may be comprehensible. But the dangers of taking the moral high ground – as the boomerang comes back round – are clear: people are imperfect.