🔗 Share this article

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

During Opposition

As opposition leader, Keir Starmer became adept at scoring points against the Conservatives. During the Partygate scandal in particular, he demanded Boris Johnson to resign over his violation of regulations. "You cannot be a lawmaker and a rule-breaker and it's time to pack his bags," he declared.

After Durham police launched an investigation whether he had violated lockdown rules himself by consuming a curry and beer at a campaign event, he took a huge political gamble and vowed he would resign if found guilty. Luckily for him, he was exonerated.

The "Mr Rules" Image

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," emphasizing the contrast between Starmer's apparently high ethical standards and Johnson's lack of concern.

The Boomerang Returns

Since taking power, the boomerang appears to have swung back toward the prime minister forcefully. Maintaining such levels of probity, not just for himself but for his entire cabinet, was inevitably would prove an unachievable challenge, particularly in the imperfect realm of politics.

But few foresaw that it would be Starmer himself who would initially compromise 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 distinct.

Growing Controversies

Since then, the controversies have come thick and fast, although they have differed in seriousness. Louise Haigh was forced to resign as transport secretary last November after it emerged she had been convicted of fraud over a lost official mobile in 2014.

Tulip Siddiq resigned as a Treasury minister in January after acknowledging the government was being damaged by the furore over her close ties 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 violated the ministerial code over her insufficient payment of stamp duty on her £800,000 seaside flat was the most serious blow yet.

No Special Treatment

Yet Starmer has always been clear there would be no special treatment. "People will truly trust we're transforming politics when I dismiss someone on the spot. If a minister – any minister – makes a significant violation of the rules, they will be gone. It makes no difference who it is, they will be terminated," he informed his chronicler Tom Baldwin before the election.

The Reeves Controversy

When it was revealed on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, second only to the prime minister in seniority, could be in hot water, it sent a collective shudder 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 dispute, acted decisively, announcing that the chancellor had admitted to "inadvertently" violating housing rules by renting out her south London home without the specific £945 licence mandated by the local council.

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

Government Response

Early on Thursday morning, administration sources were assured that Reeves, while having committed an error, had an justification: she had not been informed 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 entire situation smells. The prime minister needs to stop trying to cover this up, order a full investigation and, if Reeves has broken the law, grow a backbone and sack her," she wrote online.

Proof Surfaces

Luckily for the chancellor, she had documentation. Her husband located emails from the rental company they used to lease their home. Just before they were published, the agent issued a statement saying it had expressed regret to the couple for an "oversight" that meant they failed to obtain a licence.

The chancellor appears to be in the clear, although there are still questions over why her account evolved overnight: from her being unaware that a licence was necessary, to the agency having told them it would apply on their behalf.

Remaining Issues

Also, the law clearly states it is the property holder – rather than the lettings agent – that is legally accountable for applying. 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 relatively minor when compared with multiple instances committed during prior Conservative governments, Reeves's brush with the standards regime underlines the challenges of Starmer's position on ethics.

His goal of restoring broken public faith in the political establishment, eroded over time after years of scandals, may be understandable. But the dangers of adopting superior ethical standards – as the political consequences return – are evident: people are imperfect.