🔗 Share this article

There exists a political theory in British 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 strike you in the face.

During Opposition

As opposition leader, Keir Starmer became adept at landing blows against the Conservatives. During 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 made a significant political wager and promised he would quit if determined to have committed an offense. Luckily for him, he was exonerated.

The "Mr Rules" Image

At the time, perhaps not entirely helpfully for the Labour leader whom the public already perceived was rather rigid, Lisa Nandy described 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 forcefully. Maintaining such levels of probity, not just for himself but for his entire cabinet, was inevitably would prove an impossible task, particularly 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 taking free spectacles, clothes 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, though they have differed in seriousness. Louise Haigh was forced to resign 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 acknowledging the government was being harmed by the furore over her strong connections 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 violated the ministerial code over her insufficient payment of stamp duty on her £800,000 seaside flat was the gravest setback yet.

Equal Standards

Yet Starmer has always been clear there would be no special treatment. "People will only believe 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 out. 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, ranking immediately below the prime minister in authority, could be in hot water, it sent a shared apprehension through the top of government. 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 acknowledged "inadvertently" violating housing rules by leasing her south London home without the specific £945 licence mandated by the local council.

Furthermore, the prime minister had previously conversed with Reeves, sought advice from his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and determined that further investigation into the matter was "not necessary," within mere hours of the Daily Mail story emerging.

Political Defense

Early on Thursday morning, government insiders were confident that Reeves, while having made a mistake, had an justification: she had not been informed by her lettings agency that her home was in a designated area 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 whole thing stinks. The prime minister needs to stop trying to cover this up, commission a complete inquiry and, if Reeves has broken the law, grow a backbone and dismiss her," she posted.

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 published, 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, though there are remaining queries 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 clearly states it is the owner – rather than the lettings agent – that is legally responsible for submitting the application. It is additionally uncertain 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 multiple instances committed during prior Conservative governments, Reeves's brush with the ethical framework highlights the difficulties of Starmer's position on ethics.

His goal of restoring broken public faith in the political establishment, gradually worn down after years of scandals, may be comprehensible. But the pitfalls of taking the moral high ground – as the political consequences return – are clear: people are imperfect.