🔗 Share this article

There exists a political theory in UK politics, often attributed to Tony Blair, that you need to be careful 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 demanded Boris Johnson to step down over his violation of regulations. "You should not be a legislator and a rule-breaker and it's time to pack his bags," he declared.

After Durham police launched an investigation whether he had violated lockdown rules himself by consuming a beer and curry at a campaign event, he made a significant political wager and vowed he would quit if found guilty. Luckily for him, he was exonerated.

Establishing an Ethical Persona

At the time, perhaps not entirely helpfully for the Labour leader whom the public already perceived was somewhat uptight, Lisa Nandy characterized him as "Mr Rules," highlighting the difference between Starmer's seemingly elevated ethical standards and Johnson's lack of concern.

Reversal of Fortune

Since taking power, 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 entire cabinet, was always going to be an unachievable challenge, especially in the imperfect realm of politics.

But few foresaw that it would be Starmer himself who would initially compromise his own position, when his inability to see that taking free spectacles, clothes and Taylor Swift tickets could shatter what little belief existed that his government would be different.

Growing Controversies

Since then, the controversies have emerged rapidly, though they have varied in degree of severity. 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 quit as a Treasury minister in January after accepting the government was being damaged by the furore over her close ties to her aunt, the removed leader of Bangladesh now facing corruption allegations.

The exit of Starmer's deputy, Angela Rayner, in September after she breached 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 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 terminated," he told his biographer 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 shared apprehension 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, acted decisively, declaring that the chancellor had admitted to "inadvertently" violating housing rules by leasing her south London home without the required £945 licence mandated by the local council.

Furthermore, the prime minister had previously conversed with Reeves, consulted his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and decided 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 been informed by her lettings agency that her home was in a specified zone which necessitated a permit. She had promptly corrected the error by submitting an application.

But Kemi Badenoch, whose Tory researchers are thought to be behind the story, was determined to get a scalp. "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, show courage and sack her," she wrote online.

Proof Surfaces

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 released a declaration 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 remaining queries 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 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 left their bank account.

Broader Implications

While the misdemeanour 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 ambition of rebuilding shattered public trust in the political classes, eroded over time after years of scandals, may be understandable. But the pitfalls of taking the moral high ground – as the political consequences return – are evident: people are fallible.