🔗 Share this article

There is a political theory in UK politics, often attributed to Tony Blair, that you need to be careful when launching attacks in opposition, because when you reach government, it could come back to hit you in the face.

The Opposition Years

As leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer mastered landing blows against the Conservatives. During the Partygate scandal specifically, he called for Boris Johnson to step down over his rule-breaking. "You should not 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 beer and curry at a campaign event, he made a significant political wager and vowed he would quit if found guilty. Fortunately for him, he was cleared.

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 described him as "Mr Rules," highlighting the difference between Starmer's apparently high ethical standards and Johnson's lack of concern.

The Boomerang Returns

Since assuming office, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister forcefully. Upholding such high standards of integrity, 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 be the first to undermine his own position, when his inability to see that accepting free spectacles, clothing and Taylor Swift tickets could break what minimal confidence existed that his government would be distinct.

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 missing work phone in 2014.

Tulip Siddiq resigned as a Treasury minister in January after accepting the government was being damaged by the uproar over her close ties to her aunt, the removed leader of Bangladesh now facing corruption allegations.

The exit of Starmer's deputy, Angela Rayner, in September after she breached the ministerial code over her underpayment of stamp duty on her £800,000 coastal apartment was the most serious blow yet.

Equal Standards

Yet Starmer has consistently maintained there would be no special treatment. "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 gone. It makes no difference 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 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" breaking housing rules by leasing her south London home without the specific £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 further investigation into the matter was "not necessary," within mere 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 excuse: she had not been informed by her rental agency that her home was in a specified zone which necessitated a permit. 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 entire situation smells. The prime minister needs to cease attempting to conceal this, order a full investigation and, if Reeves has violated legislation, grow a backbone and dismiss her," she wrote online.

Proof Surfaces

Fortunately for Reeves, she had documentation. Her husband located emails from the rental company they used to lease 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 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.

Remaining Issues

Also, the law clearly states it is the owner – instead of the lettings agent – that is legally responsible for submitting the application. It is additionally uncertain how the couple overlooked that almost £1000 had not been deducted from their bank account.

Wider Consequences

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

His ambition of restoring shattered public trust in the political classes, gradually worn down after years of scandals, may be understandable. But the dangers of taking the moral high ground – as the political consequences return – are evident: people are fallible.