🔗 Share this article

There exists a political concept in British politics, frequently credited to Tony Blair, that you need to be careful when launching attacks in opposition, since when you achieve power, it might return to strike you in the face.

During Opposition

As opposition leader, Keir Starmer mastered scoring points against the Conservatives. Throughout the Partygate scandal specifically, he called for Boris Johnson to resign over his violation of regulations. "You cannot be a legislator and a lawbreaker and it's time for him to go," he declared.

After Durham police launched an investigation whether he had violated lockdown rules himself by consuming a beer and curry at a political gathering, he took a huge political gamble and promised he would resign if found guilty. Fortunately 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 somewhat uptight, Lisa Nandy described him as "Mr Rules," emphasizing the difference between Starmer's apparently high ethical standards and Johnson's carelessness.

The Boomerang Returns

Since taking power, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister with a vengeance. Upholding such levels of probity, not just for himself but for his whole ministerial team, was inevitably would prove an impossible task, particularly in the flawed world of politics.

But rarely did anyone anticipate that it would be Starmer himself who would be the first to undermine 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.

Growing Controversies

Since then, the scandals have emerged rapidly, although they have differed in seriousness. 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 resigned as a Treasury minister in January after acknowledging the government was being damaged by the furore over her strong connections 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 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 always been clear there would be no special treatment. "People will truly trust 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 gone. 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, second only to the prime minister in seniority, could be in hot water, it sent a collective shudder round the top of government. If the chancellor were to go, the entire Starmer project could collapse entirely.

Downing Street, having seemingly gained insight from the Rayner row, responded firmly, announcing that the chancellor had admitted to "inadvertently" violating housing rules by renting out 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," within mere hours of the Daily Mail story breaking.

Government Response

Early on Thursday morning, government insiders were assured that Reeves, while having committed an error, had an justification: she had not received notification by her rental agency that her home was in a designated area which required a licence. 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 whole thing stinks. The prime minister needs to stop trying to cover this up, order a full investigation and, if Reeves has violated legislation, show courage and sack her," she wrote online.

Proof Surfaces

Fortunately for Reeves, she had documentation. Her husband located 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 expressed regret to the couple for an "oversight" that meant they neglected to acquire a licence.

The chancellor appears to be in the clear, although there are still questions 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.

Lingering Questions

Also, the law clearly states 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 been deducted from their bank account.

Broader Implications

While the infraction is comparatively small when compared with numerous ones committed during prior Conservative governments, Reeves's encounter with the standards regime underlines the challenges of Starmer's position on ethics.

His goal of restoring broken public faith in the political classes, eroded over time after years of scandals, may be understandable. But the pitfalls of adopting superior ethical standards – as the boomerang comes back round – are evident: people are imperfect.