🔗 Share this article

There is a political theory in UK politics, often attributed to Tony Blair, that you need to be careful when launching attacks in opposition, because when you achieve power, it might return to hit you in the face.

The Opposition Years

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

After Durham police began probing whether he had broken lockdown rules himself by having a curry and beer at a political gathering, he made a significant political wager and vowed 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 the public already perceived was somewhat uptight, Lisa Nandy characterized him as "Mr Rules," emphasizing the difference between Starmer's seemingly elevated 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 forcefully. Upholding such levels of probity, not just for himself but for his whole ministerial team, was inevitably would prove an unachievable challenge, especially 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 shatter what minimal confidence existed that his government would be distinct.

Growing Controversies

Since then, the scandals have emerged rapidly, although 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 resigned as a Treasury minister in January after accepting the government was being damaged by the uproar over her close ties to her aunt, the removed leader of Bangladesh now accused of corruption.

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

Equal Standards

Yet Starmer has always been clear there would be no special treatment. "People will truly trust we're changing 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 doesn't matter who it is, they will be sacked," he informed his chronicler Tom Baldwin before the election.

Rachel Reeves Situation

When it was revealed on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, second only to the prime minister in seniority, could be in trouble, it sent a collective shudder round the highest levels of administration. If the chancellor were to depart, the entire Starmer project could collapse entirely.

Downing Street, having apparently learned from the Rayner dispute, acted decisively, announcing 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 decided that additional inquiry into the matter was "not necessary," all within hours of the Daily Mail story emerging.

Government Response

Early on Thursday morning, government insiders were assured that Reeves, while having made a mistake, had an justification: she had not received notification by her rental agency that her home was in a specified zone which required a licence. She had quickly rectified 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 stop trying to cover this up, order a full investigation 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 dug out 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 neglected to acquire a licence.

The chancellor seems to be exonerated, though there are remaining queries over why her story changed overnight: from her being unaware that a licence was necessary, to the agency having told 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 accountable for submitting the application. It is additionally uncertain how the couple failed to notice that almost £1000 had not been deducted from their bank account.

Wider Consequences

While the misdemeanour is comparatively small when compared with multiple instances 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 broken public faith in the political establishment, gradually worn down after years of scandals, may be understandable. But the dangers of taking the moral high ground – as the boomerang comes back round – are evident: people are fallible.