🔗 Share this article

There exists a political theory in UK politics, frequently credited to Tony Blair, that caution is necessary when throwing a boomerang in opposition, since when you achieve power, it might return to strike you in the face.

The Opposition Years

As opposition leader, Keir Starmer became adept at scoring points against the Conservatives. Throughout the Partygate scandal specifically, he called for Boris Johnson to step down over his violation of regulations. "You should not be a lawmaker and a rule-breaker 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 quit if determined to have committed an offense. Luckily for him, he was exonerated.

Establishing an Ethical Persona

At the time, perhaps not entirely helpfully for the Labour leader whom the public already perceived was rather rigid, Lisa Nandy characterized him as "Mr Rules," emphasizing the difference between Starmer's seemingly elevated ethical standards and Johnson's lack of concern.

Reversal of Fortune

Since assuming office, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister forcefully. Maintaining such high standards of integrity, not just for himself but for his entire cabinet, was always going to be 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, clothing and Taylor Swift tickets could break what little belief existed that his government would be different.

Growing Controversies

Since then, the controversies have emerged rapidly, although 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 lost official mobile in 2014.

Tulip Siddiq resigned as a Treasury minister in January after accepting the government was being damaged by the furore over her strong connections to her aunt, the ousted prime minister of Bangladesh now accused of corruption.

The exit 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 seaside flat was the most serious blow yet.

No Special Treatment

Yet Starmer has always been clear there would be no special treatment. "People will truly trust we're transforming politics when I dismiss someone on the spot. If a minister – any minister – makes a serious breach of the rules, they will be out. It doesn't matter 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, second only to the prime minister in seniority, could be in hot water, it sent a shared apprehension round the highest levels of administration. If the chancellor were to depart, the whole Starmer initiative could collapse entirely.

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

Furthermore, 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 breaking.

Political Defense

Early on Thursday morning, administration sources were confident that Reeves, while having committed an error, had an justification: she had not received notification by her lettings agency that her home was in a designated area 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 intent on securing a resignation. "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 sack her," she wrote online.

Proof Surfaces

Luckily for the chancellor, 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 issued a statement 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, although there are remaining queries over why her account evolved overnight: from her being ignorant 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 – instead of the lettings agent – that is legally responsible for submitting the application. It is also unclear how the couple failed to notice that almost £1000 had not left their bank account.

Broader Implications

While the infraction is comparatively small when compared with numerous ones committed during previous Tory administrations, Reeves's brush with the ethical framework highlights the challenges of Starmer's position on morality.

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