🔗 Share this article

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

During Opposition

As leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer became adept at scoring points against the Conservatives. During the Partygate scandal specifically, he called for Boris Johnson to resign over his rule-breaking. "You cannot be a legislator and a lawbreaker and it's time for him to go," he stated.

After Durham police began probing whether he had violated lockdown rules himself by consuming a curry and beer at a political gathering, he made a significant political wager and promised he would quit if determined to have committed an offense. Luckily for him, he was exonerated.

Establishing an Ethical Persona

At the time, possibly not completely advantageous for the Labour leader whom the public already perceived 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 taking power, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister with a vengeance. Upholding 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 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 taking free spectacles, clothes and Taylor Swift tickets could shatter what little belief existed that his government would be different.

Growing Controversies

Since then, the scandals have emerged rapidly, though they have varied in degree of severity. 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 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 violated the ministerial code over her underpayment of stamp duty on her £800,000 seaside flat was the gravest setback yet.

Equal Standards

Yet Starmer has always been clear there would be no exceptions. "People will only believe 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 out. It makes no difference who it is, they will be terminated," 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 trouble, it sent a shared apprehension through the highest levels of administration. If the chancellor were to depart, the entire Starmer project could collapse entirely.

Downing Street, having seemingly gained insight from the Rayner row, responded firmly, announcing that the chancellor had acknowledged "inadvertently" violating housing rules by renting out her south London home without the required £945 licence mandated by the local council.

Not only that, the prime minister had previously conversed with Reeves, sought advice from his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and decided that additional inquiry into the matter was "not necessary," within mere hours of the Daily Mail story breaking.

Government Response

Early on Thursday morning, administration sources 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 designated area which required a licence. 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 whole thing stinks. The prime minister needs to cease attempting to conceal this, order a full investigation and, if Reeves has broken the law, show courage and dismiss her," she posted.

Proof Surfaces

Luckily for the chancellor, she had receipts. Her husband located emails from the rental company they used to rent out their home. Just before they were published, the agent issued a statement saying it had apologised to the couple for an "oversight" that meant they neglected to acquire a licence.

The chancellor appears to be in the clear, although there are still questions 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.

Remaining Issues

Also, the law explicitly specifies 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.

Broader Implications

While the infraction is comparatively small 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 morality.

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