🔗 Share this article

There exists a political concept in UK politics, frequently credited to Tony Blair, that you need to be careful when launching attacks 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 landing blows against the Conservatives. During the Partygate scandal in particular, he called for Boris Johnson to resign over his violation of regulations. "You cannot be a lawmaker and a lawbreaker and it's time to pack his bags," he stated.

After Durham police launched an investigation whether he had broken lockdown rules himself by having a beer and curry at a political gathering, he made a significant political wager and vowed he would quit if determined to have committed an offense. Luckily for him, he was cleared.

Establishing an Ethical Persona

At the time, possibly not completely advantageous for the Labour leader whom voters already thought was somewhat uptight, Lisa Nandy described 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 political attacks have returned toward the prime minister forcefully. Maintaining such levels of probity, not just for himself but for his whole ministerial team, 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 initially compromise his own position, when his failure to recognize that accepting free glasses, clothing and Taylor Swift tickets could break what little belief existed that his government would be different.

Growing Controversies

Since then, the controversies have emerged rapidly, although they have varied in degree of severity. Louise Haigh was forced to resign as transport secretary last November after it emerged she had been convicted of fraud 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 furore over her close ties 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 breached the ministerial code over her insufficient payment of stamp duty on her £800,000 seaside flat was the most serious blow yet.

Equal Standards

Yet Starmer has consistently maintained there would be no special treatment. "People will only believe we're changing politics when I fire someone on the spot. If a minister – whichever minister – makes a serious breach 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.

The Reeves Controversy

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 round the top of government. If the chancellor were to go, the whole Starmer initiative could come tumbling down.

Downing Street, having apparently learned from the Rayner dispute, acted decisively, 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 already spoken with Reeves, consulted his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and decided that additional inquiry into the matter was "not necessary," within mere hours of the Daily Mail story emerging.

Government Response

Early on Thursday morning, government insiders were assured that Reeves, while having made a mistake, had an excuse: she had not received notification 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 wrote online.

Evidence Emerges

Fortunately for Reeves, she had documentation. Her husband dug out emails from the lettings agency 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 ignorant 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 property holder – rather than the lettings agent – that is legally responsible for submitting the application. It is also unclear how the couple failed to notice that almost £1000 had not been deducted from their bank account.

Broader Implications

While the infraction is comparatively small when compared with multiple instances committed during previous Tory administrations, Reeves's encounter with the ethical framework highlights the difficulties of Starmer's position on ethics.

His goal of rebuilding shattered public trust in the political establishment, gradually worn down 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.