🔗 Share this article

There is a political concept in British politics, often attributed to Tony Blair, that caution is necessary when launching attacks in opposition, because when you achieve power, it might return to hit you in the face.

The Opposition Years

As leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer mastered landing blows against the Conservatives. Throughout the Partygate scandal specifically, he called for Boris Johnson to step down over his violation of regulations. "You should not be a legislator and a rule-breaker and it's time for him to go," he declared.

After Durham police began probing whether he had violated 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 cleared.

The "Mr Rules" Image

At the time, possibly not completely advantageous for the Labour leader whom the public already perceived 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.

The Boomerang Returns

Since assuming office, the boomerang appears to have swung back toward the prime minister with a vengeance. Maintaining such high standards of integrity, not only for himself but for his entire cabinet, was always going to be 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 inability to see that accepting free spectacles, clothing 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 compelled to step down as transport secretary last November after it was revealed 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 acknowledging the government was being harmed by the furore over her strong connections to her aunt, the ousted prime minister 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 coastal apartment was the most serious blow yet.

No Special Treatment

Yet Starmer has consistently maintained there would be no exceptions. "People will only believe we're transforming politics when I fire someone on the spot. If a minister – whichever minister – makes a serious breach of the rules, they will be out. It makes no difference who it is, they will be terminated," he told his biographer Tom Baldwin before the election.

Rachel Reeves Situation

When it emerged on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, ranking immediately below the prime minister in seniority, could be in trouble, it sent a collective shudder round the top of government. If the chancellor were to depart, 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 already spoken with Reeves, consulted 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 confident that Reeves, while having committed an error, had an excuse: she had not received notification by her lettings 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 whole thing stinks. The prime minister needs to cease attempting to conceal this, order a full investigation and, if Reeves has broken the law, show courage and sack her," she wrote online.

Proof Surfaces

Luckily for the chancellor, she had receipts. Her husband located emails from the rental company they used to rent out 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 neglected to acquire a licence.

The chancellor seems to be exonerated, though there are still questions over why her account evolved overnight: from her being unaware that a licence was necessary, to the agency having told them it would submit the application for them.

Lingering Questions

Also, the law clearly states it is the owner – rather than the lettings agent – that is legally accountable for applying. It is additionally uncertain how the couple overlooked that almost £1000 had not left their bank account.

Broader Implications

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

His ambition of rebuilding shattered public trust in the political establishment, eroded over time after years of scandals, may be comprehensible. But the pitfalls of taking the moral high ground – as the boomerang comes back round – are clear: people are fallible.