🔗 Share this article

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

The Opposition Years

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

After Durham police began probing whether he had broken lockdown rules himself by having a beer and curry at a campaign event, he took a huge political gamble and promised he would resign if determined to have committed an offense. Fortunately for him, he was exonerated.

Establishing an Ethical Persona

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 apparently high ethical standards and Johnson's lack of concern.

Reversal of Fortune

Since taking power, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister with a vengeance. Maintaining such levels of probity, not just for himself but for his whole ministerial team, was always going to be an unachievable challenge, 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 inability to see that accepting free spectacles, clothes and Taylor Swift tickets could shatter what minimal confidence existed that his government would be different.

Mounting Scandals

Since then, the controversies have come thick and fast, although 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 resigned as a Treasury minister in January after accepting the government was being harmed by the uproar 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 violated the ministerial code over her underpayment 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 exceptions. "People will only believe 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 doesn't matter who it is, they will be sacked," he informed his chronicler Tom Baldwin before the election.

Rachel Reeves Situation

When it was revealed on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, second only to the prime minister in authority, could be in hot water, it sent a collective shudder round the highest levels of administration. If the chancellor were to depart, the entire Starmer project could collapse entirely.

Downing Street, having seemingly gained insight from the Rayner row, responded firmly, declaring that the chancellor had acknowledged "inadvertently" breaking 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, government insiders were assured that Reeves, while having made a mistake, had an excuse: she had not been informed by her lettings agency that her home was in a designated area which necessitated a permit. She had quickly rectified the error by submitting an application.

But Kemi Badenoch, whose Tory researchers are believed to have originated 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 violated legislation, grow a backbone and dismiss her," she wrote online.

Evidence Emerges

Luckily for the chancellor, she had receipts. Her husband dug out emails from the rental company they used to lease their home. Just before they were published, the agent released a declaration saying it had expressed regret to the couple for an "oversight" that meant they failed to obtain a licence.

The chancellor appears to be in the clear, although there are remaining queries 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.

Remaining Issues

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

Wider Consequences

While the infraction is relatively minor when compared with multiple instances committed during previous Tory administrations, Reeves's brush with the ethical framework underlines the difficulties 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 pitfalls of taking the moral high ground – as the boomerang comes back round – are clear: people are fallible.