🔗 Share this article

There exists a political concept in UK politics, frequently credited to Tony Blair, that you need to be careful when launching attacks in opposition, because when you achieve power, it could come back to strike you in the face.

During Opposition

As opposition leader, Keir Starmer mastered landing blows against the Conservatives. During the Partygate scandal specifically, he demanded Boris Johnson to resign over his violation of regulations. "You should not be a lawmaker and a rule-breaker and it's time to pack his bags," he stated.

After Durham police launched an investigation whether he had broken lockdown rules himself by having a beer and curry at a political gathering, he took a huge political gamble and promised he would quit if determined to have committed an offense. Luckily for him, he was exonerated.

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 seemingly elevated ethical standards and Johnson's lack of concern.

Reversal of Fortune

Since assuming office, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister forcefully. Maintaining such high standards of integrity, not just for himself but for his entire cabinet, was inevitably would prove an unachievable challenge, especially in the imperfect realm of politics.

But rarely did anyone anticipate that it would be Starmer himself who would initially compromise his own position, when his inability to see that accepting free glasses, clothes and Taylor Swift tickets could break what little belief existed that his government would be distinct.

Mounting Scandals

Since then, the scandals have come thick and fast, though they have varied in degree of severity. Louise Haigh was compelled to step down as transport secretary last November after it was revealed she had been found guilty of fraudulent activity 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 close ties to her aunt, the ousted prime minister 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 special treatment. "People will only believe we're transforming politics when I dismiss someone on the spot. If a minister – any minister – makes a serious breach 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 emerged on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, second only to the prime minister in authority, could be in hot water, it sent a collective shudder through the highest levels of administration. If the chancellor were to depart, the entire Starmer project could collapse entirely.

Downing Street, having seemingly gained insight from the Rayner row, acted decisively, announcing that the chancellor had acknowledged "inadvertently" breaking housing rules by leasing her south London home without the specific £945 licence demanded by the local council.

Not only that, the prime minister had previously conversed with Reeves, sought advice from his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and decided that further investigation into the matter was "not necessary," all within hours of the Daily Mail story breaking.

Government Response

Early on Thursday morning, government insiders were confident that Reeves, while having committed an error, had an excuse: she had not been informed by her rental agency that her home was in a specified zone which required a licence. She had quickly rectified the error by submitting an application.

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, 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 lettings agency they used to rent out 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 failed to obtain a licence.

The chancellor seems to be exonerated, 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 submit the application for them.

Remaining Issues

Also, the law explicitly specifies it is the property holder – instead of the lettings agent – that is legally accountable for submitting the application. It is also unclear how the couple failed to notice that almost £1000 had not left their bank account.

Wider Consequences

While the infraction is comparatively small when compared with numerous ones committed during previous Tory administrations, Reeves's encounter with the standards regime highlights the difficulties of Starmer's position on ethics.

His ambition of restoring shattered public trust in the political classes, gradually worn down after years of scandals, may be comprehensible. But the pitfalls of adopting superior ethical standards – as the boomerang comes back round – are clear: people are fallible.