🔗 Share this article

There exists a political theory 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 mastered landing blows against the Conservatives. Throughout the Partygate scandal in particular, he called for Boris Johnson to resign over his rule-breaking. "You cannot be a legislator and a rule-breaker and it's time for him to go," he stated.

After Durham police launched an investigation whether he had broken lockdown rules himself by having a curry and beer at a campaign event, he made a significant political wager and promised he would resign if found guilty. Fortunately for him, he was exonerated.

The "Mr Rules" Image

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 apparently high ethical standards and Johnson's carelessness.

The Boomerang Returns

Since taking power, the boomerang appears to have swung back toward the prime minister forcefully. Maintaining such high standards of integrity, not only for himself but for his entire cabinet, was always going to be an impossible task, particularly in the imperfect realm 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 accepting free glasses, clothing and Taylor Swift tickets could break what minimal confidence existed that his government would be different.

Mounting Scandals

Since then, the scandals 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 emerged she had been found guilty of fraudulent activity over a missing work phone in 2014.

Tulip Siddiq quit as a Treasury minister in January after acknowledging the government was being harmed by the uproar over her strong connections to her aunt, the removed leader of Bangladesh now accused of corruption.

The exit of Starmer's deputy, Angela Rayner, in September after she violated the ministerial code over her underpayment 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 exceptions. "People will truly trust we're transforming politics when I fire 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 told his biographer Tom Baldwin before the election.

Rachel Reeves Situation

When it emerged on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, second only to the prime minister in seniority, 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 collapse entirely.

Downing Street, having apparently learned from the Rayner dispute, responded firmly, announcing that the chancellor had acknowledged "inadvertently" violating housing rules by renting out her south London home without the required £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 additional inquiry 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 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 applying for one.

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 wrote online.

Evidence Emerges

Luckily for the chancellor, she had receipts. Her husband dug out emails from the lettings agency they used to lease 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 remaining queries over why her story changed overnight: from her being ignorant 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 property holder – instead of the lettings agent – that is legally responsible for applying. It is additionally uncertain how the couple failed to notice that almost £1000 had not been deducted from their bank account.

Wider Consequences

While the misdemeanour is comparatively small when measured against multiple instances committed during previous Tory administrations, Reeves's brush with the standards regime underlines the challenges of Starmer's position on morality.

His ambition of restoring shattered public trust in the political establishment, 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 clear: people are fallible.