🔗 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, since when you reach government, it might return to strike you in the face.

During Opposition

As opposition leader, Keir Starmer became adept at landing blows against the Conservatives. Throughout the Partygate scandal in particular, he called for Boris Johnson to resign over his rule-breaking. "You should not be a legislator and a lawbreaker and it's time to pack his bags," he declared.

After Durham police began probing whether he had violated lockdown rules himself by consuming a beer and curry at a political gathering, he took a huge political gamble and vowed he would resign if determined to have committed an offense. Luckily for him, he was cleared.

The "Mr Rules" Image

At the time, perhaps not entirely helpfully for the Labour leader whom voters already thought was somewhat uptight, Lisa Nandy described him as "Mr Rules," highlighting the contrast between Starmer's seemingly elevated ethical standards and Johnson's carelessness.

The Boomerang Returns

Since assuming office, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister with a vengeance. Upholding such levels of probity, not just for himself but for his entire cabinet, was inevitably would prove an unachievable challenge, especially in the flawed world 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, clothes and Taylor Swift tickets could shatter what little belief existed that his government would be different.

Mounting Scandals

Since then, the scandals have come thick and fast, though they have differed in seriousness. Louise Haigh was forced to resign 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 acknowledging the government was being harmed by the furore 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 breached the ministerial code over her insufficient payment of stamp duty on her £800,000 coastal apartment 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 changing politics when I fire someone on the spot. If a minister – any minister – makes a serious breach of the rules, they will be gone. It makes no difference 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, ranking immediately below the prime minister in authority, could be in hot water, it sent a shared apprehension round the top of government. If the chancellor were to depart, the whole Starmer initiative could collapse entirely.

Downing Street, having apparently learned from the Rayner row, responded firmly, declaring that the chancellor had admitted to "inadvertently" breaking housing rules by leasing her south London home without the specific £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 determined that further investigation into the matter was "not necessary," all within hours of the Daily Mail story emerging.

Political Defense

Early on Thursday morning, government insiders were assured that Reeves, while having committed an error, had an excuse: she had not been informed by her lettings agency that her home was in a specified zone which necessitated a permit. She had quickly rectified 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 stop trying to cover this up, order a full investigation and, if Reeves has violated legislation, grow a backbone and sack her," she wrote online.

Evidence Emerges

Fortunately for Reeves, she had receipts. Her husband dug out emails from the lettings agency they used to rent out their home. Just before they were released, the agent released a declaration 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 told them it would apply on their behalf.

Lingering Questions

Also, the law clearly states it is the owner – instead of the lettings agent – that is legally accountable for submitting the application. It is also unclear how the couple overlooked that almost £1000 had not left their bank account.

Wider Consequences

While the infraction is comparatively small 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 goal of rebuilding broken public faith in the political classes, gradually worn down after years of scandals, may be understandable. But the pitfalls of adopting superior ethical standards – as the political consequences return – are clear: people are imperfect.