🔗 Share this article

There is a political concept in UK politics, often attributed to Tony Blair, that you need to be careful when launching attacks in opposition, since when you achieve power, it might return to strike you in the face.

During Opposition

As leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer mastered scoring points against the Conservatives. During the Partygate scandal in particular, he demanded Boris Johnson to step down over his rule-breaking. "You should not be a lawmaker and a rule-breaker and it's time for him to go," he declared.

After Durham police began probing whether he had broken lockdown rules himself by consuming a curry and beer at a political gathering, he took a huge political gamble 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 the public already perceived was somewhat uptight, Lisa Nandy described him as "Mr Rules," highlighting the difference between Starmer's seemingly elevated ethical standards and Johnson's carelessness.

Reversal of Fortune

Since taking power, the boomerang appears to have swung back toward the prime minister with a vengeance. Maintaining such levels of probity, not only for himself but for his whole ministerial team, was always going to be an unachievable challenge, especially 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 spectacles, clothing 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, though 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 missing work phone in 2014.

Tulip Siddiq resigned as a Treasury minister in January after accepting the government was being damaged by the uproar 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 breached the ministerial code over her underpayment of stamp duty on her £800,000 seaside flat was the most serious blow yet.

Equal Standards

Yet Starmer has consistently maintained there would be no special treatment. "People will truly trust 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 gone. It makes no difference who it is, they will be terminated," he told his biographer Tom Baldwin before the election.

Rachel Reeves Situation

When it was revealed on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, second only to the prime minister in authority, could be in hot water, 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 seemingly gained insight from the Rayner row, acted decisively, declaring that the chancellor had admitted to "inadvertently" breaking housing rules by renting out her south London home without the specific £945 licence demanded by the local council.

Not only that, the prime minister had already spoken with Reeves, consulted his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and decided that additional inquiry into the matter was "not necessary," all within hours of the Daily Mail story emerging.

Political Defense

Early on Thursday morning, administration sources 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 quickly rectified the error by applying for one.

But Kemi Badenoch, whose Tory researchers are thought to be behind the story, was intent on securing a resignation. "This whole thing stinks. The prime minister needs to cease attempting to conceal this, order a full investigation and, if Reeves has violated legislation, show courage and dismiss her," she wrote online.

Proof Surfaces

Fortunately for Reeves, she had documentation. Her husband dug out emails from the rental company they used to rent out their home. Just before they were published, the agent released a declaration 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 still questions over why her story changed 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 explicitly specifies it is the owner – rather than the lettings agent – that is legally accountable for submitting the application. It is additionally uncertain how the couple overlooked that almost £1000 had not been deducted from their bank account.

Broader Implications

While the misdemeanour is relatively minor when measured against numerous ones committed during prior Conservative governments, Reeves's brush with the standards regime highlights the difficulties of Starmer's position on ethics.

His goal of rebuilding shattered public trust in the political establishment, 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 evident: people are fallible.