🔗 Share this article

There is a political concept in UK politics, often attributed to Tony Blair, that you need to be careful when throwing a boomerang in opposition, since when you reach government, it could come back to hit you in the face.

During Opposition

As leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer became adept at scoring points against the Conservatives. During the Partygate scandal specifically, he called for Boris Johnson to resign over his rule-breaking. "You should not be a legislator and a lawbreaker and it's time to pack his bags," 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 made a significant political wager and promised he would resign 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 voters already thought was rather rigid, Lisa Nandy characterized him as "Mr Rules," emphasizing the difference between Starmer's apparently high 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 high standards of integrity, not only for himself but for his entire cabinet, was inevitably would prove an impossible task, particularly in the flawed world of politics.

But few foresaw 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, clothes and Taylor Swift tickets could shatter what minimal confidence existed that his government would be distinct.

Growing Controversies

Since then, the scandals have emerged rapidly, although 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 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 damaged 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 breached the ministerial code over her underpayment of stamp duty on her £800,000 coastal apartment was the gravest setback yet.

Equal Standards

Yet Starmer has always been clear there would be no exceptions. "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, ranking immediately below the prime minister in seniority, could be in hot water, it sent a shared apprehension through the top of government. If the chancellor were to go, the entire Starmer project could collapse entirely.

Downing Street, having apparently learned from the Rayner row, responded firmly, 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.

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," all within hours of the Daily Mail story emerging.

Political Defense

Early on Thursday morning, administration sources were confident that Reeves, while having made a mistake, had an excuse: she had not received notification by her rental 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 believed to have originated the story, was determined to get a scalp. "This whole thing stinks. The prime minister needs to stop trying to cover this up, order a full investigation and, if Reeves has violated legislation, grow a backbone and dismiss her," she wrote online.

Evidence Emerges

Fortunately for Reeves, she had receipts. 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 expressed regret 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.

Lingering Questions

Also, the law clearly states it is the owner – rather than the lettings agent – that is legally responsible for submitting the application. It is also unclear how the couple overlooked that almost £1000 had not left their bank account.

Wider Consequences

While the infraction is relatively minor when measured against numerous ones committed during previous Tory administrations, Reeves's encounter with the standards regime underlines the challenges of Starmer's position on morality.

His goal of rebuilding shattered public trust in the political classes, eroded over time after years of scandals, may be comprehensible. But the dangers of taking the moral high ground – as the political consequences return – are evident: people are imperfect.