🔗 Share this article

There is a political theory in British politics, frequently credited to Tony Blair, that caution is necessary when launching attacks in opposition, since when you reach government, it could come back to hit you in the face.

During Opposition

As opposition leader, Keir Starmer mastered scoring points against the Conservatives. During the Partygate scandal specifically, he demanded Boris Johnson to step down over his rule-breaking. "You should not be a legislator and a lawbreaker 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 curry and beer at a political gathering, he made a significant political wager and promised he would quit if found guilty. Luckily for him, he was cleared.

Establishing an Ethical Persona

At the time, possibly not completely advantageous for the Labour leader whom voters already thought was somewhat uptight, Lisa Nandy characterized him as "Mr Rules," emphasizing the contrast between Starmer's apparently high ethical standards and Johnson's carelessness.

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 only for himself but for his whole ministerial team, was always going to be an unachievable challenge, especially 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 distinct.

Mounting Scandals

Since then, the controversies have come thick and fast, although they have varied in degree of severity. Louise Haigh was forced to resign as transport secretary last November after it was revealed she had been convicted of fraud over a lost official mobile in 2014.

Tulip Siddiq quit as a Treasury minister in January after accepting the government was being harmed by the uproar over her strong connections to her aunt, the removed leader 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 seaside flat was the gravest setback yet.

No Special Treatment

Yet Starmer has consistently maintained there would be no exceptions. "People will truly trust we're transforming politics when I dismiss someone on the spot. If a minister – whichever minister – makes a significant violation 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 emerged on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, second only to the prime minister in seniority, could be in trouble, it sent a shared apprehension through the highest levels of administration. If the chancellor were to depart, the entire Starmer project could collapse entirely.

Downing Street, having apparently learned from the Rayner dispute, responded firmly, declaring that the chancellor had acknowledged "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 previously conversed with Reeves, sought advice from his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and determined that additional inquiry into the matter was "not necessary," within mere hours of the Daily Mail story breaking.

Political Defense

Early on Thursday morning, administration sources were confident that Reeves, while having committed an error, had an justification: she had not been informed by her rental 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 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, show courage and dismiss her," she posted.

Proof Surfaces

Luckily for the chancellor, she had receipts. Her husband dug out emails from the lettings agency 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 failed to obtain a licence.

The chancellor appears to be in the clear, though there are still questions over why her account evolved overnight: from her being unaware that a licence was necessary, to the agency having informed them it would apply on their behalf.

Remaining Issues

Also, the law clearly states it is the owner – instead of the lettings agent – that is legally responsible for applying. It is also unclear how the couple failed to notice that almost £1000 had not left their bank account.

Broader Implications

While the misdemeanour is relatively minor when measured against multiple instances committed during previous Tory administrations, Reeves's encounter with the standards regime highlights the challenges of Starmer's position on morality.

His goal of rebuilding shattered public trust in the political classes, eroded over time after years of scandals, may be comprehensible. But the dangers of adopting superior ethical standards – as the boomerang comes back round – are clear: people are fallible.