🔗 Share this article

There is a political concept in UK politics, frequently credited to Tony Blair, that caution is necessary when launching attacks in opposition, since when you reach government, it might return to hit you in the face.

The Opposition Years

As opposition leader, Keir Starmer became adept at 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 lawmaker and a lawbreaker and it's time to pack his bags," he declared.

After Durham police launched an investigation whether he had broken lockdown rules himself by consuming a curry and beer at a campaign event, he took a huge political gamble and vowed he would resign if found guilty. Luckily for him, he was exonerated.

Establishing an Ethical Persona

At the time, possibly not completely advantageous for the Labour leader whom the public already perceived 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 taking power, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister with a vengeance. Upholding such levels of probity, not just for himself but for his whole ministerial team, was always going to be an unachievable challenge, 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 failure to recognize that taking free glasses, clothes and Taylor Swift tickets could shatter 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 forced to resign as transport secretary last November after it emerged 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 accepting 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 always been clear there would be no exceptions. "People will only believe we're changing politics when I dismiss someone on the spot. If a minister – whichever minister – makes a serious breach of the rules, they will be out. It doesn't matter 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 authority, could be in hot water, it sent a collective shudder round the top of government. If the chancellor were to go, the entire Starmer project could come tumbling down.

Downing Street, having seemingly gained insight from the Rayner row, responded firmly, declaring that the chancellor had acknowledged "inadvertently" breaking housing rules by renting out 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 determined that additional inquiry into the matter was "not necessary," all within hours of the Daily Mail story breaking.

Government Response

Early on Thursday morning, administration sources were assured that Reeves, while having committed an error, had an justification: 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 submitting an application.

But Kemi Badenoch, whose Tory researchers are believed to have originated the story, was determined to get a scalp. "This entire situation smells. 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 wrote online.

Evidence Emerges

Luckily for the chancellor, she had receipts. Her husband dug out emails from the lettings agency they used to rent out their home. Just before they were released, 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 appears to be in the clear, though there are remaining queries over why her story changed overnight: from her being unaware that a licence was necessary, to the agency having told them it would submit the application for them.

Remaining Issues

Also, the law explicitly specifies it is the owner – instead of the lettings agent – that is legally accountable 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 infraction is comparatively small when measured against multiple instances committed during previous Tory administrations, Reeves's brush with the ethical framework underlines the difficulties of Starmer's position on morality.

His ambition of rebuilding broken public faith in the political classes, eroded over time after years of scandals, may be understandable. But the dangers of adopting superior ethical standards – as the political consequences return – are evident: people are fallible.