🔗 Share this article

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

During Opposition

As opposition leader, Keir Starmer became adept at scoring points 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 for him to go," he stated.

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

The "Mr Rules" Image

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 contrast between Starmer's seemingly elevated ethical standards and Johnson's carelessness.

Reversal of Fortune

Since assuming office, the boomerang appears to have swung back toward the prime minister forcefully. Maintaining such levels of probity, not only for himself but for his entire cabinet, was inevitably would prove an impossible task, particularly in the flawed world of politics.

But few foresaw that it would be Starmer himself who would initially compromise his own position, when his failure to recognize that taking free spectacles, clothing and Taylor Swift tickets could break what minimal confidence existed that his government would be distinct.

Mounting Scandals

Since then, the scandals have emerged rapidly, though they have differed in seriousness. Louise Haigh was compelled to step down 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 damaged by the uproar over her close ties to her aunt, the ousted prime minister of Bangladesh now facing corruption allegations.

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 seaside flat was the gravest setback yet.

Equal Standards

Yet Starmer has consistently maintained there would be no exceptions. "People will only believe we're transforming politics when I fire someone on the spot. If a minister – any minister – makes a significant violation of the rules, they will be out. It makes no difference who it is, they will be terminated," he informed his chronicler Tom Baldwin before the election.

The Reeves Controversy

When it emerged on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, ranking immediately below the prime minister in authority, could be in trouble, it sent a collective shudder round the highest levels of administration. If the chancellor were to go, the whole Starmer initiative could come tumbling down.

Downing Street, having seemingly gained insight from the Rayner row, acted decisively, declaring that the chancellor had acknowledged "inadvertently" breaking housing rules by leasing her south London home without the required £945 licence mandated by the local council.

Furthermore, the prime minister had previously conversed with Reeves, consulted his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and decided that additional inquiry into the matter was "not necessary," all within hours of the Daily Mail story breaking.

Political Defense

Early on Thursday morning, government insiders were assured that Reeves, while having committed an error, 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 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 posted.

Proof Surfaces

Luckily for the chancellor, 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 issued a statement saying it had apologised to the couple for an "oversight" that meant they failed to obtain a licence.

The chancellor seems to be exonerated, though there are remaining queries over why her story changed overnight: from her being ignorant that a licence was necessary, to the agency having informed them it would submit the application for them.

Remaining Issues

Also, the law explicitly specifies it is the property holder – instead of the lettings agent – that is legally accountable for applying. It is also unclear how the couple overlooked that almost £1000 had not left their bank account.

Broader Implications

While the misdemeanour is relatively minor when compared with multiple instances committed during previous Tory administrations, Reeves's brush with the standards regime underlines the challenges of Starmer's position on ethics.

His ambition of rebuilding shattered public trust in the political classes, gradually worn down after years of scandals, may be understandable. But the dangers of adopting superior ethical standards – as the political consequences return – are clear: people are fallible.