🔗 Share this article

There is a political concept in British politics, often attributed to Tony Blair, that you need to be careful when launching attacks in opposition, because when you reach government, it could come back to strike you in the face.

The Opposition Years

As opposition leader, Keir Starmer became adept at scoring points against the Conservatives. Throughout the Partygate scandal in particular, he called for Boris Johnson to step down over his rule-breaking. "You cannot be a legislator and a lawbreaker and it's time to pack his bags," he stated.

After Durham police began probing whether he had broken lockdown rules himself by having a curry and beer at a campaign event, he took a huge political gamble and promised he would quit if determined to have committed an offense. Fortunately for him, he was cleared.

The "Mr Rules" Image

At the time, perhaps not entirely helpfully for the Labour leader whom voters already thought was rather rigid, Lisa Nandy described him as "Mr Rules," emphasizing the contrast between Starmer's apparently high ethical standards and Johnson's carelessness.

The Boomerang Returns

Since assuming office, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister forcefully. Maintaining such levels of probity, not only for himself but for his entire cabinet, was always going to be an impossible task, particularly in the flawed world of politics.

But few foresaw that it would be Starmer himself who would initially compromise his own position, when his inability to see 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 controversies have emerged rapidly, though they have varied in degree of severity. Louise Haigh was compelled to step down 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 resigned 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 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 most serious blow yet.

No Special Treatment

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 serious breach of the rules, they will be out. It makes no difference who it is, they will be sacked," 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 trouble, it sent a shared apprehension through the top of government. If the chancellor were to depart, the whole Starmer initiative could come tumbling down.

Downing Street, having apparently learned from the Rayner row, acted decisively, declaring that the chancellor had admitted to "inadvertently" breaking 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, consulted his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and determined that further investigation into the matter was "not necessary," all within hours of the Daily Mail story breaking.

Government Response

Early on Thursday morning, government insiders were assured that Reeves, while having made a mistake, had an justification: she had not been informed by her rental agency that her home was in a designated area which necessitated a permit. She had quickly rectified 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, commission a complete inquiry and, if Reeves has broken the law, show courage and sack her," she wrote online.

Proof Surfaces

Luckily for the chancellor, she had receipts. Her husband dug out emails from the rental company they used to rent out their home. Just before they were released, the agent released a declaration saying it had apologised to the couple for an "oversight" that meant they failed to obtain a licence.

The chancellor seems to be exonerated, although there are remaining queries over why her account evolved overnight: from her being ignorant 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 – instead of the lettings agent – that is legally accountable for applying. It is additionally uncertain how the couple overlooked that almost £1000 had not been deducted from their bank account.

Wider Consequences

While the misdemeanour is relatively minor when compared with multiple instances committed during previous Tory administrations, Reeves's encounter with the ethical framework underlines the challenges of Starmer's position on morality.

His goal of restoring shattered public trust in the political establishment, eroded over time 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 fallible.