🔗 Share this article

There exists a political concept in UK politics, frequently credited to Tony Blair, that caution is necessary when throwing a boomerang in opposition, because when you reach government, it could come back to hit you in the face.

During Opposition

As leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer mastered landing blows against the Conservatives. Throughout 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 declared.

After Durham police began probing whether he had broken lockdown rules himself by consuming a curry and beer at a campaign event, he made a significant political wager and promised he would quit if determined to have committed an offense. Luckily for him, he was cleared.

Establishing an Ethical Persona

At the time, perhaps not entirely helpfully for the Labour leader whom voters already thought was somewhat uptight, Lisa Nandy characterized him as "Mr Rules," highlighting the contrast between Starmer's apparently high ethical standards and Johnson's lack of concern.

Reversal of Fortune

Since assuming office, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister with a vengeance. 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 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 taking free spectacles, clothing and Taylor Swift tickets could break what little belief existed that his government would be different.

Mounting Scandals

Since then, the scandals have emerged rapidly, 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 acknowledging the government was being harmed by the furore over her close ties to her aunt, the removed leader of Bangladesh now accused of corruption.

The departure 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.

Equal Standards

Yet Starmer has consistently maintained there would be no special treatment. "People will only believe we're transforming 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 terminated," he informed his chronicler Tom Baldwin before the election.

The Reeves Controversy

When it was revealed on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, ranking immediately below the prime minister in seniority, could be in trouble, it sent a collective shudder through the top of government. If the chancellor were to depart, the entire Starmer project could come tumbling down.

Downing Street, having apparently learned from the Rayner row, responded firmly, declaring that the chancellor had admitted to "inadvertently" violating housing rules by renting out her south London home without the required £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.

Political Defense

Early on Thursday morning, government insiders were assured that Reeves, while having made a mistake, had an excuse: she had not received notification by her rental agency that her home was in a designated area which necessitated a permit. She had quickly rectified the error by applying for one.

But Kemi Badenoch, whose Tory researchers are believed to have originated the story, was intent on securing a resignation. "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

Fortunately for Reeves, 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 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, although there are still questions 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 property holder – instead of the lettings agent – that is legally responsible for applying. It is additionally uncertain how the couple overlooked 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 encounter with the standards regime underlines the challenges of Starmer's position on ethics.

His goal of restoring shattered public trust in the political classes, 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.