🔗 Share this article

There exists a political theory in UK politics, frequently credited to Tony Blair, that you need to be careful when throwing a boomerang in opposition, since when you achieve power, it could come back to hit you in the face.

The Opposition Years

As opposition leader, Keir Starmer mastered scoring points against the Conservatives. Throughout the Partygate scandal in particular, he demanded Boris Johnson to step down over his violation of regulations. "You cannot be a lawmaker and a rule-breaker and it's time for him to go," he stated.

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 vowed he would quit 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 difference between Starmer's seemingly elevated ethical standards and Johnson's lack of concern.

Reversal of Fortune

Since assuming office, the boomerang appears to have swung back toward the prime minister forcefully. Maintaining such high standards of integrity, not just for himself but for his whole ministerial team, was always going to be an impossible task, particularly in the imperfect realm of politics.

But few foresaw 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 break what little belief 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 quit as a Treasury minister in January after accepting the government was being damaged by the furore over her strong connections to her aunt, the ousted prime minister of Bangladesh now accused of corruption.

The departure 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 seaside flat 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 changing politics when I fire someone on the spot. If a minister – whichever minister – makes a significant violation of the rules, they will be out. It makes no difference 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, ranking immediately below the prime minister in seniority, could be in trouble, 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 apparently learned from the Rayner dispute, acted decisively, announcing that the chancellor had admitted to "inadvertently" breaking 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, consulted his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and decided that additional inquiry into the matter was "not necessary," within mere hours of the Daily Mail story emerging.

Government Response

Early on Thursday morning, administration sources were assured that Reeves, while having made a mistake, had an justification: she had not received notification 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, commission a complete inquiry and, if Reeves has violated legislation, grow a backbone and sack her," she posted.

Evidence Emerges

Luckily for the chancellor, she had documentation. Her husband dug out emails from the rental company they used to lease their home. Just before they were released, the agent issued a statement saying it had apologised 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 ignorant that a licence was necessary, to the agency having informed them it would submit the application for them.

Remaining Issues

Also, the law clearly states it is the owner – rather than the lettings agent – that is legally responsible for applying. It is additionally uncertain how the couple failed to notice that almost £1000 had not been deducted from their bank account.

Broader Implications

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

His goal of rebuilding shattered public trust in the political establishment, eroded over time 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 imperfect.