🔗 Share this article

There exists a political concept in UK politics, often attributed to Tony Blair, that you need to be careful when launching attacks in opposition, since when you reach government, it might return to strike you in the face.

The Opposition Years

As leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer became adept at landing blows against the Conservatives. During the Partygate scandal in particular, he demanded Boris Johnson to resign over his rule-breaking. "You cannot be a legislator and a lawbreaker and it's time to pack his bags," he stated.

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

Establishing an Ethical Persona

At the time, possibly not completely advantageous for the Labour leader whom voters already thought was rather rigid, Lisa Nandy described him as "Mr Rules," emphasizing the difference between Starmer's seemingly elevated ethical standards and Johnson's lack of concern.

Reversal of Fortune

Since taking power, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister forcefully. Upholding such levels of probity, not only for himself but for his entire cabinet, was always going to be an impossible task, especially in the flawed world 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 taking free spectacles, clothes and Taylor Swift tickets could shatter what little belief existed that his government would be distinct.

Mounting Scandals

Since then, the controversies have emerged rapidly, although they have varied in degree of severity. Louise Haigh was forced to resign as transport secretary last November after it emerged she had been convicted of fraud over a lost official mobile in 2014.

Tulip Siddiq quit as a Treasury minister in January after accepting the government was being damaged by the furore over her strong connections to her aunt, the removed leader 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 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 serious breach of the rules, they will be gone. It doesn't matter who it is, they will be terminated," 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 collective shudder through the highest levels of administration. If the chancellor were to go, the entire Starmer project could collapse entirely.

Downing Street, having apparently learned from the Rayner dispute, acted decisively, declaring that the chancellor had acknowledged "inadvertently" breaking housing rules by leasing her south London home without the required £945 licence demanded 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.

Government Response

Early on Thursday morning, government insiders were confident that Reeves, while having made a mistake, had an justification: she had not received notification by her lettings agency that her home was in a specified zone which necessitated a permit. 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 entire situation smells. The prime minister needs to stop trying to cover this up, order a full investigation and, if Reeves has broken the law, show courage and dismiss her," she wrote online.

Proof Surfaces

Fortunately for Reeves, she had documentation. Her husband located emails from the lettings agency they used to rent out their home. Just before they were released, 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 still questions over why her account evolved overnight: from her being unaware that a licence was necessary, to the agency having informed them it would submit the application for them.

Lingering Questions

Also, the law explicitly specifies it is the owner – 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 been deducted from their bank account.

Wider Consequences

While the misdemeanour is relatively minor when measured against multiple instances committed during prior Conservative governments, Reeves's brush with the standards regime highlights the challenges of Starmer's position on morality.

His goal of restoring 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 boomerang comes back round – are clear: people are imperfect.